GreenYes Archives

[GreenYes Archives] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

[GreenYes] Re: our solar soulmates don't get it!!


Direct your questions to Dave at GAIA please (see bottom of the email) ...
and Dave, we'd all love to see your responses,


-----Original Message-----
From: GreenYes@no.address [mailto:GreenYes@no.address] On Behalf
Of Stephan Pollard
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 5:13 PM
To: Eric Lombardi
Cc: Greenyes
Subject: [GreenYes] Re: our solar soulmates don't get it!!


You state that "when the full life cycle is considered, recycling is a far
less greenhouse gas and energy intensive approach than biomass
incineration." I'd be very interested in having a look at any
scientifically performed peer-reviewed LCA that considers recycling next to
biomass incineration. Could you direct me to the source of the above

Best Regards,

Eric Lombardi wrote:

(this just in from GAIA)

A recent report by the American Solar Energy Society, and recognized by the
Sierra Club as their official roadmap to confronting global warming,
presents a biomass strategy that would displace real global warming
solutions such as recycling and composting by supporting the incineration of
municipal solid waste-including paper. This could undermine efforts to
transform the pulp and paper industry, reduce paper consumption, increase
paper recycling, and protect forests.

The report can be found at:

Sierra Club's press release can be found at:

I have also pasted the text from the report that is of particular concern at
the bottom of this e-mail.

The report presents an expanded definition of "biomass" that includes
gasification incineration of municipal solid waste as a source of renewable
energy. The data used in the study considers more than half of U.S.
municipal solid waste as eligible for biomass, including materials that are
currently recycled or composted such as paper, cardboard, green waste, food
waste and construction wood waste. Further, the report makes no mention of
recycling. When the full life cycle is considered, recycling is a far less
greenhouse gas and energy intensive approach than biomass incineration.

State and federal climate policy will be pivotal in determining the fate of
recycling and composting in the U.S. Rather than support the expansion of
incinerators in U.S. communities, we must work to advance policies that
support more just and sustainable waste solutions that are better for the
climate than incineration and landfilling.

Promote recycling, not incineration:

* Write a letter to the Sierra Club to let them know that you are
concerned about the impact of biomass incineration on paper recycling. The
Sierra Club has been an ally on many issues. Please consider including the
points below:

o Biomass should not be defined to include incineration (including
gasification, pyrolysis, plasma and other incinerator technologies) of
valuable materials found in municipal solid waste such as paper, cardboard,
green waste, food waste and construction wood waste because:

* Classifying incineration as a source of renewable energy and a
solution to global warming undermines real global warming solutions such as
recycling and composting

* Recycling and composting of discarded materials contributes far
fewer greenhouse gas emissions than incineration

* Recycling and composting materials conserves 3-5 times more energy
than incineration generates

* Incinerators are the most expensive and toxic approach to dealing
with municipal solid waste

Of particular concern in the report is the following:

"Urban Residues (Municipal Solid Waste [MSW])

Values for biomass in MSW were available for California at the county level
[21], and we obtained data for the remaining states (with the exceptions of
Alaska and Montana) from a recent survey of state solid waste and recycling
officials [25]. We calculated a value for annual per capita MSW generation
of 1.38 metric tons per person per year from the data available for the 16
states. We applied this annual per capita factor to the populations of
Alaska and Montana to estimate their MSW generation. We applied values for
moisture content (30% wet basis) and biogenic fraction of MSW (56%) to the
MSW values to arrive at estimates of biogenic dry matter in MSW for each
state. This resource includes only the biomass component of MSW and not the
entire MSW stream. The biomass component consists of paper and cardboard,
green waste, food waste, and construction wood waste, and specifically
excludes plastics, tires, and other non-biomass materials. We determined
biomass in MSW diverted from landfill by subtraction of disposal from

The report includes the following incineration technologies:

. Stoker and fluid bed combustors with steam generation and steam turbines

. Gasification with applications to boiler steam generation and steam
turbines, combined cycle (gas turbine, heat recovery steam generator, and
steam turbine), or an ICE

Dave Ciplet

Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA)

Tel: 510.883.9490 ext. 102

Fax: 510.883.9493

dave@no.address <>

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GreenYes" group.
To post to this group, send email to GreenYes@no.address
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to GreenYes-unsubscribe@no.address
For more options, visit this group at

[GreenYes Archives] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]