Today's Topics:
Financial Incentives to Haulers
Forums are Catalysts for New Recycling Ventures
garbage statistics and data
GreenYes Digest V97 #278 (4 msgs)
Introduction...
Newsprint Recycling (4 msgs)
Recycling Economic Impact Study Press Release
Regarding Sad Recycling :(
sad recycling
SIERRA CLUB INFILTRATED FOR BOTTLE BILL
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <greenyes@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <greenyes-Digest-Request@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to postmaster@ucsd.edu.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:46:44 -0600
From: Joshua Reiser <Joshua_Reiser@co.st-louis.mo.us>
Subject: Financial Incentives to Haulers
Does anyone out there have information about government-sponsored
waste industry incentive programs where haulers are paid based on
tonnages of recyclables received and/or other variables?
Also, what about rebate systems? Are payments based on some type
of formula in these programs, or is it a flat rate payment?
Finally, how, if at all, are these programs applied to the collection of bulky
items and white goods?
I'm researching whether these incentives work and how successful
they are. I'd appreciate any help.
Thanks,
Joshua Reiser
St. Louis County Dept. of Health
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 06:30:11 -0800 (PST)
From: "David A. Kirkpatrick" <david@kirkworks.com>
Subject: Forums are Catalysts for New Recycling Ventures
PRESS RELEASE Monday, November 17, 1997
FORUMS ARE CATALYSTS FOR NEW RECYCLING VENTURES
DURHAM, N. C., Nov. 17 -- A national network of recycling developers chose
to follow up on America Recycles Day on November 15 by announcing a series
of Recycling Investment Forums slated for early 1998. "These forums provide
entrepreneurs with the contacts, confidence and capital to build successful
recycling companies -- what better way to expand America's recycling?" said
Ted Campbell of the SC Recycling Market Development Council, the Southeast
forum host.
"Fifty-two companies have successfully presented and displayed at the first
four 1995-1997 recycling investment forums in the Southeast and Northeast.
Now, a national network is developing so that more recycling entrepreneurs
can meet key investors and economic developers in their regions," noted Mary
Ann Remolador of the Northeast Recycling Council, the Northeast forum
organizer. Upcoming 1998 forums are planned for the Southeast in
Charleston, SC on February 23, the Midwest in Omaha on March 23, the
Northeast in Philadelphia in May, and in the Rocky Mountain and West Coast
regions in the fall of 1998.
"We give the Northeast Recycling Investment Forum the credit for the $1.7
million private equity investment in our company," stated Jeffrey Lee, CEO
of United Recycling (Minneapolis, MN), which presented at the first
Northeast Forum. "We have now developed the carpet recycling technology to
effectively manufacture a new product, nearlon=D4, which is being used in
automotive applications." Several other Northeast presenters used the
forums, investment networks, business contacts and persistence to expand
their ventures. Erickson Materials (Woburn, MA) raised $1.16 million from
private investors and banks to start a factory producing 80 mesh fine rubber
powder from scrap rubber. Big City Forest (Bronx, NY) is negotiating
$750,000 in private investment to expand sales of its hardwood flooring and
furniture produced from recovered pallets. Cellutech (Ashland, MA) used
$130,000 in loans and a $111,000 grant to quadruple annual sales of it
industrial absorbents made from paper mill waste. Imagex (Framingham, MA)
is negotiating a $250,000 investment to commercialize its proprietary
"decopying" technology. =20
"The Southeast Recycling Investment Forum got me on track to becoming a
dominant commercial recycling and document destruction company in my
region," said Chris Fisher of Fisher Recycling (Charleston, SC) who obtained
$90,000 in debt financing for new equipment. Waste Reduction Products
Corporation (Charlotte, NC) has raised $3 million to start a sheetrock
recycling factory next month that will have pre-sold $800,000 in
agricultural and absorbent products on its first day of operation.
MacLumber (Bamberg, SC) has used $400,000 in financing to open a composite
plastic lumber factory. Waste Tire Management (Lawrenceville, GA) went on
from the forum to merge with Republic Industries and, as United Rubber
Recycling, is rolling out its product Perma-Mulch=D4 in retail stores across
the Southeast next week. Another forum presenter, Resource Recycling
(Reidsville, NC), added its $10 million plastics recycling business to the
nation's largest private material recovery facility operator in a merger
with FCR, Inc. (Charlotte, NC.) Environmental Processing Systems (Berkeley
County, SC) put together $32 million in private financing to form the Santee
River Rubber Company that will recycle 3 million tires per year.
"The recycling investment forums are an important way for entrepreneurs to
refine their business plans and presentations, meet investors and
developers, and catalyze growth. Now, we are looking for the next
generation of successful companies for the 1998 forums. Business plans and
applications are due by December 1 for the Southeast, December 15 for the
Midwest and February 16 for the Northeast Recycling Investment Forums,"
stated David Kirkpatrick of KirkWorks (Durham, NC), a recycling economic
development firm that helps organize the forums.
# # #
SOURCE: KirkWorks 11/17/97
CONTACTS: David Kirkpatrick, Principal, KirkWorks, 919-220-8065
Website: http://www.kirkworks.com
Email: david@kirkworks.com
SOUTHEAST RECYCLING INVESTMENT FORUM 2/23/98
Ted Campbell, SC Recycling Market Development Advisory Council, 803-737-0477
Website: http:// http://www.state.sc.us/commerce/recycle/Srifmenu.htm
Email: TCAMPBEL@commerce.state.sc.us
MIDWEST RECYCLING INVESTMENT FORUM 3/23/98
Pat Langan, Nebraska Department of Economic Development, 402-471-3766
Website: http://reda.ded.state.ne.us
Email: langan@ded1.ded.state.ne.us
NORTHEAST RECYCLING INVESTMENT FORUM 5/98
Mary Ann Remolador, Northeast Recycling Council, 802-254-3636
Website: http://www.nerc.org
Email: mremolad@sover.net
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Please distribute to recycling businesses seeking new equity capital for
expansion in the NE, SE, and MW regions and to recycling economic developers
and service providers. Businesses involved in recycling, reuse, composting
or scrap-based manufacturing are encouraged to apply. See application forms
on the websites listed above for further selection criteria by region.
Business application and plan submission deadlines: SE 12/1/97, MW 12/15/97,
NE 2/16/98. Apologies for any cross-postings.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:29:00 +0000
From: "Caroline Brimblecombe" <caroline.brimblecombe.pt@norfolk.gov.uk>
Subject: garbage statistics and data
Hello
Most of the UK's waste is sent to landfill, and is not pre-treated.
There are few if any collection programmes for household hazardous
waste - it is co-disposed with non-hazardous waste.
Unfortunately, the government is challenging the European Union on
its recent landfill directives, which would require more
pre-treatment of waste and source separation, and a reduction in the
amount of green waste going to landfill.
Newly revised estimates of household waste arisings for
1993-94 (the most recent available) are about 26.4 - 26.9 million
metric tonnes per annum - this does not include commercial,
industrial and institutional waste (ENDS Report 267, April 1997,
p. 12). This is one third more than previously believed. The
household recycling rate is estimated at 4.7% overall - this includes
780,000 tonnes recycled and 420,000 tonnes of home composting (I
stress that these are estimates). The government has set a 25%
household waste recycling target by the year 2000. Recycling and
home composting would have to increase to 6.7 million tonnes to
achieve this.
The
Department of Environment should be able to supply you with more
information:
http://www.open.gov.uk/doe/envir/epsim/ems7000.htm
or their main page at
Hope this is useful.
> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 10:02:41 +0200
> From: navarra@aipm.co.il (Dario Navarra (Amnir+972-6-349590))
> To: greenyes@ucsd.edu
> Subject: garbage statistics and data
> Good morning collegues,
> may be some of you can supply me the following data?:
> % of garbage incinerated E
> % ofg garbage sorted for recycling
> % of garbage sent to landfill
> in the following countries : Germany, Switzerlan,UK and Japan.
> The US figures I have from Biocycle, State of Garbage, apr `97.
> Thank you for your kind help. regards dario navarra AMNIR, Israel
>
Caroline Truth Brimblecombe
Norfolk County Council
Norwich, United Kingdom
+44 1603 222243
+44 1603 223219 fax
+44 1603 613806 home
ctbrim@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:04:30 -0600
From: RecycleWorlds <anderson@msn.fullfeed.com>
Subject: GreenYes Digest V97 #278
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCF350.FA0B2960
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 11/16/97, Bill McGowen wrote about newspaper recycling:
"Below is an excerpt from a statement sent out on the GreenYes listserv=20
the day before America Recycles Day that illustrates the problem of=20
hoping that political will can overcome market economics:
"... =20
"This is, then, an example of the environmental/recycling movement=20
ignoring the realities of market economics at their own hazard. While =
it=20
is nice to say that we must up-end market economics that do not achieve=20
the ends we desire, it is also wholly unrealistic to expect such an =
event=20
to occur any time soon. The essential element in the failure of copy=20
paper made with newsprint is that is does not meet the quality or cost=20
point most Americans expect--until it does, we can expect to see similar =
failure in the future. What may be worse, because of the notible=20
failure, investors may be more reluctant the next time an opportunity=20
comes along to expand recycled content capacity. =20
"While some may call me an anti-recycler for these comments, =20
recognize that I make them in order to strengthen the case for recycled=20
materials in the future based on a healthy recognition of our economic=20
history."
I don't believe the facts here, as elsewhere, are favorable for those =
who assume, it seems as an article of faith, that every occurence in the =
US market is automatically the outcome of economic forces.
Here, for example, economic analyses have shown that most deinking mills =
can make money and compete when the price of the ONP they buy is between =
$80 and $120/ton.
Why then the market's actions. I think a bit of industrial/organization =
analysis is relevant. Look at the vertically integrated mills and ask =
whether they can simply dump their investments in forest plantations?
Don't get me wrong, tho. I too believe that economic forces are very =
strong. I just don't knee jerk assume that every market reaction is =
automatically explained solely by economics. Life is far more =
complicated than that and a religious fervor as to markets, just because =
it is in fashion, is simply not supported by the facts.
Peter Anderson
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCF350.FA0B2960
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
eJ8+IiUSAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG
ADABAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAE0AAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd
AQ9UAgAAAABHcmVlblllc0BtbGlzdC51Y3NkLmVkdQBTTVRQAEdyZWVuWWVzQG1saXN0LnVjc2Qu
ZWR1AAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAYAAAAR3JlZW5ZZXNAbWxpc3QudWNz
ZC5lZHUAAwAVDAEAAAADAP4PBgAAAB4AATABAAAAGgAAACdHcmVlblllc0BtbGlzdC51Y3NkLmVk
dScAAAACAQswAQAAAB0AAABTTVRQOkdSRUVOWUVTQE1MSVNULlVDU0QuRURVAAAAAAMAADkAAAAA
CwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAAD3DkBCIAHABgAAABJUE0uTWljcm9zb2Z0IE1haWwuTm90
ZQAxCAEEgAEAHQAAAFJFOiBHcmVlblllcyBEaWdlc3QgVjk3ICMyNzgAXQgBBYADAA4AAADNBwsA
EQAMAAQAHgABAB8BASCAAwAOAAAAzQcLABEACwAwABIAAQA+AQEJgAEAIQAAAENDNkY5ODc0Mjk1
RkQxMTFBREM2NDQ0NTUzNTQwMDAwAPsGAQOQBgAMCAAAEgAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkA
AQAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5ACC1S0CD87wBHgBwAAEAAAAdAAAAUkU6IEdyZWVuWWVzIERpZ2VzdCBW
OTcgIzI3OAAAAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABvPODQEt0mG/NXykR0a3GREVTVAAAAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUA
AABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAAGgAAAGFuZGVyc29uQG1zbi5mdWxsZmVlZC5jb20AAAADAAYQ1p3c
5gMABxCuBgAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAAT04xMS8xNi85NyxCSUxMTUNHT1dFTldST1RFQUJPVVRORVdT
UEFQRVJSRUNZQ0xJTkc6IkJFTE9XSVNBTkVYQ0VSUFRGUk9NQVNUQVRFTUVOVFNFTlRPVVRPTlRI
RUdSRUVOWQAAAAACAQkQAQAAAIQGAACABgAA+QoAAExaRnV4+/O6/wAKAQ8CFQKoBesCgwBQAvIJ
AgBjaArAc2V0MjcGAAbDAoMyA8UCAHByQnER4nN0ZW0CgzO3AuQHEwKDNBLMFMV9CoCLCM8J2TsX
nzI1NQKABwqBDbELYG5nMTAzLxRQCwoVYgwBYwBBaSACTwOgMTEvMTYvYDk3LCBCAxAPsWPIR293
CfAgdwNgE9CuIAGgCGAFQG4H0HMKsApwBJAgF6BjeWNsOQuAZzoKhQqLH/AzNvcN8BtvHHEiC0YU
UQvyE1DlHmFjBUBCZRcwB+AEAOMekAOgZXhjBJAFMQNS9R6QIBPAYRPRCfAFQBGwRybBHsICICB0
aB6ARz0J0lkHkR/wE8ARsHJ2gyCmJ7JkYXkgYg3AWwWwHoBBB4AFEGMmMFL7H7MHkUQp0SewJnAk
8B2Q+nUTwHImcQQgJ7IkIQJgixPgJzBmIKZob3AgAeUrtHAG8Gl0KrEDIAPw5x2RKsADoG92BJAF
oAeAciAAwHJrEcAlUAWgbrsDcCqwcyA2Id8i4y4zkD8jPyRENSIxzyJ/NB8gVN5oJQEEAB1QJ7Fu
HVAlM3xhbQtQHoAtkSeyCfB22mkDYG4mogdALx+nMKDnMCEmowqFaWcxUAUQLnP/HoAXoAdALyEH
kS2RML4ekG8FQCexOvAnMHcDoBGAevULES41IFc4wDohLyA8x+8EIAMAJYAnoG8mQCuWHgBDPtAs
QSB1cC0J8GT7Pt8rtGRC4DFQBUAA0DjA/mUwMCkKREEEIEORDbAAkE8XoB1QQbElAmxzQuB35y4w
HZAp4HVuPhMTwCqwz0LCJWAfYCRxc3URcCUjxzAwPKhC0W9jYwhwJSH3K6EHcSZAbwIgQSE4oTqh
/wQQJrEHMSVQLVEmsguAJ6O+ZgtwCkAqQS2RBaBwKeD/CoUfRADADbAvgSewHvQ9gf9IkyvEBCBF
4AeRRhIHgDDx+SeycXU+MingBbEFoEPh/VDGb1KSBGBD4Sp1BjFKlPwtLUmgLzADIEGxU4IdUP9D
kS/iSpVC0gngJkAHcAMQ/yCIT8ZPVh7QUAFBIyvhAMD/KeIeMAWwEbAdUCoAKsAsQPs6N0YRaS1B
Wp1IYTrQB5D/QtARoFzWBGAqQRegCkAkcHcAcFREHwB4QAFNMi/ycP8u8AAgSaBU4gqFMGJIwgIg
/y6BSnMAcERgH6QJgFBhAjD3JrIqwAqwY1ThTbIgpjV//zaPN59BRUkAMIMp4C9RAyDzYuRh8Wkt
ZdVa8QWxJ7G/XhEwYSaiOREgph+hbz1Q7Gl6QrEr0klEcTDgJ6J/JhBPUQWwBIFCwyxgCfBn/zlC
J6MqwF4RbeJl1wqFAMD/E9AHIjjhW6op8HMRRGAngf8mMCfAB0AnsCngb6UvMCeB/y2RCGExFy23
KJEFsGdQaJ/PaaMgTHCQReBuJwVAKgD/H/BGkk+EJHAEICfASEJzEL9OwRGwSTB95CpBT8B2BbD/
AaA6IW3kVWBRwS4wfiFLAPcHgEhjWeFtJRElEwrALzH/OiRPwSewOSIr4UaRecBMdPcJ8EKhT1VV
BfAwtSUCHtD/A3EvM0lxJ7IewTBjLZF4d9MqISWAcy4gTEh9423i/znVHVB4dwBwB0ATsAeREYD9
RqFzLjBAkSvDVnMNsAuA/ms8Ax2BBCAv4nCzBGAfAP8p4GWSMGEfYB5xfqEnlFJxY0KhOlVPTlAn
oinhdTcp4CUBKgB0HgAeESQ40jCPEyQxAdAvQtBNoN8gTEFQhrMnlDC0JyURJHB/d8GIoDUgcJAn
sI1hJiFit0GxLZELgGQsQgcxLwWw/mcAcHAAhkF2cotzONNhgvdGkGHxQSFMTYCXEVREMDH7hlZS
kWUJwCZxRGGN42WS/3MQlxB+oSexKWNsMgOgWiH/C1Ap4JfgOgBAFWA0brNPQl8qIkPhC1E7UZYz
PyBMRH18Y2cw8TCBHkEaoDkib/9BIJaxTYB8qYOCh9x/A4PDtyxRZPGWg2pD0nxUax8A/R6AagSQ
lxGA44NaMLU+Ef+WI4W/SoILYmYxSQArQElx/mKsQTE2moIGkEGRBCBPwP9RcSoyj2If8CrAnJIr
wYyF/50zYYI9QHfALEAl0CjRBbH/fjFC0TC0ORGn413GSISgov9zEDjAAiBIYQQgnsVGEksAf2NT
ZjGtcX03iL0MgrhOULuPoQXAQURQBJBJAG5oLRcjtCCmFsEAvIADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAH
MOA57fyA87wBQAAIMOA57fyA87wBHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAAwtQ==
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCF350.FA0B2960--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:00:11 -0500
From: "Blair Pollock" <bpollock@town.ci.chapel-hill.nc.us>
Subject: GreenYes Digest V97 #278
A reply to Bill McGowan:
Bill - why is it exactly that recycled newsprint pulp can't compete? Is
there a rigorous analysis of the newsprint market that demonstrates if there
are direct of indirect government subsidies for newsprint pulp from trees?
If there are subsidies of timber through federally subsidized logging that
trickle down to newsprint pulp, then would elimination of those subsidies
cause recycled pulp to be more competitive? I don't think elimination of
these subsidies constitutes turning the market upside down.
>>You wrote: Impressive goals were set for newspaper recycling.
Citizens pitched >> in and mountains of paper were collected. Corporations
and financiers were convinced to build large mills, investing hundreds of
millions of dollars.
>> But in the end, newsprint purchasers (newspaper publishers) have been
>> extremely resistant to paying any additional money for a more recycled
>> stock, and the large investments in mills have often gone to waste. And so
>> the market for collected material has been poor, and has to seek alternate
>> uses. And so we continue to needlessly cut down trees and pollute the
>> environment for our daily news.
The essential element in the failure of copy
>paper made with newsprint is that is does not meet the quality or cost
>point most Americans expect--until it does, we can expect to see similar
>failure in the future.
Re: Your remark on the failure of newsprint based copier paper. How much of
that failure is based on imbedded specifications for brightness and amount
of "flecks" or old ink allowable in the paper? We need to change our
cultural thinking on the need for paper to be bright white all the time and
free of flecks. ONe way to induce this change could be to reexamine
purchasing standards. A few years ago there was some discussion that the
bright white papers (brightness of 80+) caused more eye fatigue due to the
bounce of the bright office lights to the reader's eye and that a lower
brightness paper was actually easier to read. Anyone know more about these
studies?
>>
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 20:33:20 -0800 (PST)
From: "William P. McGowan" <6500kai@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu>
Subject: GreenYes Digest V97 #278
Peter--
Your comments that paper mills can make a profit when they buy ONP
betweenm $80 and $120 a ton (the current market in L.A, is $72,
delivered, loose) left out one other very important number--at what price
are they SELLING their product?
As to your comment about tree planatations, why would they cut the
majority of their wood down to make such a low-profit item like news when
they could use it for NBSK and other high end uses?
Bill McGowan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 20:45:59 -0800 (PST)
From: "William P. McGowan" <6500kai@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu>
Subject: GreenYes Digest V97 #278
A reply to Blair Pollock:
>
> Bill - why is it exactly that recycled newsprint pulp can't compete? Is
> there a rigorous analysis of the newsprint market that demonstrates if there
> are direct of indirect government subsidies for newsprint pulp from trees?
> If there are subsidies of timber through federally subsidized logging that
> trickle down to newsprint pulp, then would elimination of those subsidies
> cause recycled pulp to be more competitive? I don't think elimination of
> these subsidies constitutes turning the market upside down.
Blair, there are a couple of things going on here. 1) There a fewer
newspapers than there were in the past, 2) people are subscribing less,
so those that survived did not necessarily gain readers lost to those
newspaper that died, and 3) there is a ton of new, virgin capacity that
came one line in cmpetition with the recycled mills. Since it is
cheaper to run a paper machine at a loss than it is to not run it at all
(the old rule about fixed costs), new manufacturers would sell well
below the market to gain market share--its a kind of insididious death
spriral that the paper industry has done for the last 100 years.
As to subsidies, I would say that you are right. I would also mention
that for the first time in over forty years, this year's Congress came
damn close to ending timber subsidies as we know them. Since Ag
subsidies have essentially been plowed under in the last Congress, I
think it is fair to say that the writing is on the wall for the timber
industry, and they know it! Hell, a Senator from Oregon supported ending
subsidies--what times are these!
> Re: Your remark on the failure of newsprint based copier paper. How much of
> that failure is based on imbedded specifications for brightness and amount
> of "flecks" or old ink allowable in the paper? We need to change our
> cultural thinking on the need for paper to be bright white all the time and
> free of flecks. ONe way to induce this change could be to reexamine
> purchasing standards.
THis solution implies a bunch of bureacrats who would have to check the
pourchasing standrds. I would make the change much more simple--provide
tax disincentives for not using, say, 65% recycled content for newspaper
and then leave it to the industry top devise a way of proving it. Since
those who can prove it would have a tax advatage over their
competitoirs, you couldcreate a de facto stanbdrad without messing with
bureacrats. Of course, this means an even more complicated tax
system. Under a flat tax proposal, you could just treat virgin under
the highest rate, and let the industry figure it out.
We as environmentalists have to use the power of the market to reward the
activities we cherih, and punish those we abhore.
Bill McGowan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:49:47 +0000
From: Huw Rhys Williams <huw@edgbaston.u-net.com>
Subject: Introduction...
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------28DD21E025C3F59F0FA285B4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello Greenyes!
I thought I'd send everyone a brief outline of my activities within the
environmental
design filed, here goes....
I am a Ph.D. researcher at the Birmingham Institute of Art and Design in
the United
Kingdom. I am interested in the impact of evolving environmental
efficiency on products,
focusing specifically on materials and their qualities. Within this, I
am interested in:
issues relating to the 'here and now' integration of recycled
materials
the role of recycled materials as a metaphor in the broader debate
concerning the
connection between existing material qualities (aesthetic and
structural) and
environmental degradation.
At the 'deep end', my work examines 'product longevity' - and how
existing material
qualities need to be reappraised to facilitate greater environmental
efficiency.
For more detailed information concerning my research, see:-
http://www.edgbaston.u-net.com
I'd like to hear from anyone on the list , especially those who share an
interest in areas related to the above.
Regards,
Huw Rhys Williams
--------------28DD21E025C3F59F0FA285B4
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for huw@edgbaston.u-net.com Williams
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
begin: vcard
fn: huw@edgbaston.u-net.com Williams
n: Williams;huw@edgbaston.u-net.com
org: Design Research
adr: Birmingham Institute of Art and Design,;;Corporation
Street,;Birmingham,;West Midlands,;B4 7DX;United Kingdom
email;internet: huw@edgbaston.u-net.com
tel;work: 0121 331 5820
tel;fax: 0121 331 5821
tel;home: 01656 657354
x-mozilla-cpt: 194.119.131.65;2
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
version: 2.1
end: vcard
--------------28DD21E025C3F59F0FA285B4--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 09:26:14 -0800
From: dassmann@sirius.com (David Assmann)
Subject: Newsprint Recycling
Bill McGowan is partially right - but he's also mixing apples and oranges
in his comments on newsprint recycling. There were a number of factors in
the shutdown of the IP facility, which made copy paper from newsprint, one
of which was the quality of the paper. You can't get a high brightness
sheet in paper made from newsprint. However there is a plentiful supply of
high grade paper, which is what should be used to produce recycled high
grade paper.
Newsprint is best used to make new newsprint, or recycled paperboard. And,
we have made substantial gains in this area. Close to 3 million tons of
newsprint was made back into newsprint in 1995 (more recent figures aren't
available yet), and another 1.5 milllion tons were made back into
paperboard. The newsprint use has largely been driven by state recycled
content requirements.
Unfortunately, our collection of newsprint exceeds the domestic demand.
One of the reasons for this is that we don't produce all our own newsprint
(less than two thirds of newsprint used in the United States comes from
domestic mills). So if we collect a significant percentage of our old
newspapers, we exceed the capacity of our domestic mills.
Collection has, of course, grown dramatically, from 1.8 million tons in
1960 to more than 7 million tons today. What we need to focus on is getting
higher recycled content in newspapers in order to help create more demand
for newsprint. But because more than one third of our newsprint is
manufactured outside the country, this will never create enough markets for
all collected newsprint. We were already collecting more old newsprint
than was produced by all our domestic newsprint producers in 1995.
David Assmann
Public Outreach Coordinator
San Francisco Recycling Program
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:43:18 -0500
From: "Diamond, Craig" <DiamondC@mail.ci.tlh.fl.us>
Subject: Newsprint Recycling
Hate to argue for tariffs and the like in these heady days of free-er
trade, but it wouldn't be an unreasonable means of establishing equity
between environmentally subsidized but cash cheaper virgin newsprint from
abroad and the more costly homegrown recycled goods
(for now) it's obvious that the old saw about recycling really being
cost-effective hinges primarily on avoided tipping fees and not cheaper
production costs. I believe we still have outdated (rail) freight schedules
that charge higher rates for recycled vs virgin stock. If true, this would
be another key place to focus action to balance the cost issue.
Craig Diamond
Environmental Planning,
City of Tallahassee, FL
----------
From: dassmann@sirius.com[SMTP:dassmann@sirius.com]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 1997 12:26 PM
To: greenyes@UCSD.Edu
Subject: Newsprint Recycling
Bill McGowan is partially right - but he's also mixing apples and oranges
in his comments on newsprint recycling. There were a number of factors in
the shutdown of the IP facility, which made copy paper from newsprint, one
of which was the quality of the paper. You can't get a high brightness
sheet in paper made from newsprint. However there is a plentiful supply
of
high grade paper, which is what should be used to produce recycled high
grade paper.
Newsprint is best used to make new newsprint, or recycled paperboard.
And,
we have made substantial gains in this area. Close to 3 million tons of
newsprint was made back into newsprint in 1995 (more recent figures aren't
available yet), and another 1.5 milllion tons were made back into
paperboard. The newsprint use has largely been driven by state recycled
content requirements.
Unfortunately, our collection of newsprint exceeds the domestic demand.
One of the reasons for this is that we don't produce all our own newsprint
(less than two thirds of newsprint used in the United States comes from
domestic mills). So if we collect a significant percentage of our old
newspapers, we exceed the capacity of our domestic mills.
Collection has, of course, grown dramatically, from 1.8 million tons in
1960 to more than 7 million tons today. What we need to focus on is
getting
higher recycled content in newspapers in order to help create more demand
for newsprint. But because more than one third of our newsprint is
manufactured outside the country, this will never create enough markets
for
all collected newsprint. We were already collecting more old newsprint
than was produced by all our domestic newsprint producers in 1995.
David Assmann
Public Outreach Coordinator
San Francisco Recycling Program
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:53:58 -0600
From: "Cloutier, Chris" <chris.cloutier@moea.state.mn.us>
Subject: Newsprint Recycling
Why the assumption that material collected in the US can not then be
exported back into the producing country? This assumption is proven
wrong here in MN where Canadian made ONP is shipped into the state, made
into a newspaper, collected and shipped back to Canada. It is
disingenuous to state that domestic capacity is an issue here b/c there
is a well-established, lively and growing business of shipping US ONP
back into Canada.
The Canadians are also quite adept at making newsprint that meets US
recycled content laws. The Star Tribune here in the Twin Cities is all
Canadian-made and they manage to use a significant portion of recycled
content. I am lost as to why it is suggested that Canadian producers of
newsprint would not be affected by domestic content requirements.
In KC several years ago the newspaper industry squared off in a debate
with the recyclers as to the efficacy of content requirements. It
appeared to me to be a draw. But, in watching my neighbors to the east
(Wisconsin) fine several newspapers for not meeting their content
requirements I have to question the bare assertion that content
requirement alone drive use of recycled ONP. Clearly they are a driver
but if they are the only driver WI doesn't end up fining the papers they
did.
Several things are being ignored here. The first is that sales of
newspapers are flat or declining all over the country. The Internet
provides too many opportunities for non-print based information sources.
Secondly, in 1995 newspapers across the country instituted a number of
source-reduction measures b/c the price of recycled pulp was so high.
There are fewer inserts, fewer pages, and larger margins all adding up
to less newsprint. Given the cost savings realized through these
measures the papers have not gone back to the old way of doing business.
When papers all across the country are retreating from publicly-stated
content goals - in some cases mandatory ones - is calling for new
requirements an appropriate answer?
>----------
>From: dassmann@sirius.com[SMTP:dassmann@sirius.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 17, 1997 11:26AM
>To: greenyes@UCSD.Edu
>Subject: Newsprint Recycling
>
>Bill McGowan is partially right - but he's also mixing apples and oranges
>in his comments on newsprint recycling. There were a number of factors in
>the shutdown of the IP facility, which made copy paper from newsprint, one
>of which was the quality of the paper. You can't get a high brightness
>sheet in paper made from newsprint. However there is a plentiful supply of
>high grade paper, which is what should be used to produce recycled high
>grade paper.
>
>Newsprint is best used to make new newsprint, or recycled paperboard. And,
>we have made substantial gains in this area. Close to 3 million tons of
>newsprint was made back into newsprint in 1995 (more recent figures aren't
>available yet), and another 1.5 milllion tons were made back into
>paperboard. The newsprint use has largely been driven by state recycled
>content requirements.
>
>Unfortunately, our collection of newsprint exceeds the domestic demand.
>One of the reasons for this is that we don't produce all our own newsprint
>(less than two thirds of newsprint used in the United States comes from
>domestic mills). So if we collect a significant percentage of our old
>newspapers, we exceed the capacity of our domestic mills.
>
>Collection has, of course, grown dramatically, from 1.8 million tons in
>1960 to more than 7 million tons today. What we need to focus on is getting
>higher recycled content in newspapers in order to help create more demand
>for newsprint. But because more than one third of our newsprint is
>manufactured outside the country, this will never create enough markets for
>all collected newsprint. We were already collecting more old newsprint
>than was produced by all our domestic newsprint producers in 1995.
>
>
>David Assmann
>Public Outreach Coordinator
>San Francisco Recycling Program
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 14:38:32 -0600
From: George Dreckmann <GDRECKMANN@ci.madison.wi.us>
Subject: Newsprint Recycling
Let me add another factor into the newspaper minimum content debate.
If your community is like mine, USA Today is the largest (in size) of the
dailies or at least not much smaller than the local daily.
In Wisconsin, our minimum content law does not appy to USA Today as it
is published and printed out of state yet they are dumping a fairly large
amount of virgin newsprint into our recycling stream. This is an issue
that our state recycling association must address in coming months as
the current situation is unfair and needs to be addressed.
I of course favor applying the standards to USA Today.
Any thoughts on the matter? Anyone have recycled content numbers
for USA Today?
George Dreckmann
Recycling Coordinator
Madison, Wi
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 14:06:59 -0600
From: "Cloutier, Chris" <chris.cloutier@moea.state.mn.us>
Subject: Recycling Economic Impact Study Press Release
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCF362.126254F0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
A fancily-formatted version of the following is also attached. Please
call Wayne for copies or e-mail him at wayne.gjerde@moea.state.mn.us.
Chris
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Wayne Gjerde
>November 4, 1997 612-215-0270
>
>Governor Carlson announces recycling manufacturing leads to economic and
>environmental success in Minnesota
>
>ST. PAUL, Minn. - Adding an estimated $1.5 billion in sales to the state
>economy, Minnesota's recycling manufacturing industry makes money, creates
>jobs and expands the economy. In a report that features businesses who use
>recycled materials as feedstock in manufacturing processes, the Minnesota
>Office of Environmental Assistance presents new information confirming that
>these industries add substantial value to the economy.
>
>In addition to $1.5 billion in direct sales, the study estimates the
>companies employ 8,700 Minnesotans. Economic analysis also shows that total
>direct, indirect and induced employment associated with recycling
>manufacturing involves 18,000 to 26,000 jobs, and associated economic
>activity adds $1.3 to $1.9 billion of value to the state economy. The
>companies annually contribute $40 to $66 million in state taxes.
>
>"Recycling manufacturing creates jobs, reduces manufacturing costs, increases
>capital investment, contributes tax dollars, develops new products for the
>marketplace and conserves resources," said Governor Arne Carlson. "As
>knowledge improves, the recycling manufacturing industry will continue to
>stabilize and grow as a fruitful and valuable activity that offers long-term
>benefits to Minnesotans."
>
>Minnesota's Value-Added Recycling Manufacturing Industries: An Economic and
>Environmental Profile analyzes information from a survey of 90 recycling
>manufacturing companies, data acquired from the 1996-97 Business Directory,
>and results obtained through economic modeling of statewide economic
>activity.
>
>The profile outlines several contributions to the economy and the
>environment:
>
>* Recycling provides manufacturing industries with raw materials that are
>often less expensive than virgin sources. This offers a long-term economic
>advantage that can positively affect the industrial competitiveness of
>Minnesota companies.
>
>* Recycled materials are an essential feedstock for Minnesota manufacturers.
>Survey information indicates that more than 3,000 jobs and $6 million in tax
>revenues could be lost if certain companies were unable to obtain recycled
>feedstock for production processes.
>
>* The 60% of known manufacturers that responded to the survey reported using
>about 2 million tons of recycled feedstock in 1996; 44 percent indicated they
>had additional capacity available, with the total exceeding another 325,000
>tons.
>
>* Companies responding to the survey made capital investments surpassing $177
>million from 1994 to 1996.
>
>* Companies responding to the survey reported receiving $1 million in loans
>and about $1.8 million in grants as direct financial assistance from public
>agencies since 1991. This direct assistance does not include $14 million in
>block grants for recycling activities that are made directly to Minnesota
>counties through the SCORE program.
>
>* The use of recycled materials in manufacturing has the potential to
>conserve materials, lower energy consumption, decrease pollution emissions,
>and avoid the use of land for extraction of virgin materials or landfilling.
>
>"This is the first study of its kind in Minnesota. It verifies that waste
>means lost resources, opportunities, and profits," said Director Art Dunn.
>"The benefits and profits gained through recycling manufacturing indicate the
>state's support of recycling is appropriate."
>
>
>Factors critical to the vitality of recycling manufacturing businesses
>include public support, efficient collection, processing and transportation
>systems for recyclable materials, a regional demand and a strong consumer
>market for recycled products.
>
>"When residents and business owners read or hear viewpoints that question the
>value of recycling, they should consider the fact that the marketplace is not
>risk-free. As with all commodities, prices and demand for materials fluctuate
>over time. The recycling manufacturing industry will naturally experience
>similar highs and lows as other businesses."
>
>Numerous opportunities are available to recycling manufacturers, who market
>internationally as well as locally and nationally. Building and landscaping
>materials, playground equipment, packaging materials, office supplies,
>solvents, fluids and other items are some of the recycled products made in
>the state.
>
>The report is based primarily on a survey conducted by the Office of
>Environmental Assistance in the Fall of 1996, and economic modeling using the
>Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI) model.
>
>
>
>
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCF362.126254F0
Content-Type: application/msword; name="WAYNE.DOC"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
0M8R4KGxGuEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOwADAP7/CQAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAA
EAAAAgAAAAEAAAD+////AAAAAAAAAAB2AAAAAAEAAP//////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////9
/////wAAAP7///8BAQAABQAAAAYAAAAHAAAACAAAAAkAAAAKAAAACwAAAAwAAAANAAAADgAAAA8A
AAAQAAAAEQAAABIAAAATAAAAFAAAABUAAAAWAAAAFwAAABgAAAAZAAAAGgAAABsAAAAcAAAAHQAA
AB4AAAAfAAAAIAAAACEAAAAiAAAAIwAAACQAAAAlAAAAJgAAACcAAAAoAAAAKQAAACoAAAArAAAA
LAAAAC0AAAAuAAAALwAAADAAAAAxAAAAMgAAADMAAAA0AAAANQAAADYAAAA3AAAAOAAAADkAAAA6
AAAAOwAAADwAAAA9AAAAPgAAAD8AAABAAAAAQQAAAEIAAABDAAAARAAAAEUAAABGAAAARwAAAEgA
AABJAAAASgAAAEsAAABMAAAATQAAAE4AAABPAAAAUAAAAFEAAABSAAAAUwAAAFQAAABVAAAAVgAA
AFcAAABYAAAAWQAAAFoAAABbAAAAXAAAAF0AAABeAAAAXwAAAGAAAABhAAAAYgAAAGMAAABkAAAA
ZQAAAGYAAABnAAAAaAAAAGkAAABqAAAAawAAAGwAAABtAAAAbgAAAG8AAABwAAAAcQAAAHIAAABz
AAAAdAAAAHUAAAB3AAAA/f///3gAAAB5AAAAegAAAHsAAAB8AAAAfQAAAH4AAAB/AAAAgAAAAFIA
bwBvAHQAIABFAG4AdAByAHkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAWAAUA//////////8DAAAAAAkCAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIY0CbVI87wB
AwAAAEADAAAAAAAAAQBDAG8AbQBwAE8AYgBqAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABIAAgH///////////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYgAAAAAAAABXAG8AcgBkAEQAbwBjAHUAbQBlAG4AdAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgACAf////8EAAAA/////wAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAADDAAIAAAAAAE8AYgBqAGUAYwB0AFAAbwBv
AGwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWAAEBAQAAAAIA
AAD/////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACGB9izSPO8AYYH2LNI87wBAAAAANQNNBRABNQNAQAA
AP7///8DAAAABAAAAAUAAAAGAAAABwAAAAgAAAAJAAAACgAAAAsAAAAMAAAA/v//////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////8BAP7/
AwoAAP////8ACQIAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGHAAAAE1pY3Jvc29mdCBXb3JkIDYuMCBEb2N1bWVudAAK
AAAATVNXb3JkRG9jABAAAABXb3JkLkRvY3VtZW50LjYAAAAAADsAAwD+/wkABgAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AQAAAAEAAAAAAP7/AAADCgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAADghZ/y+U9oEKuRCAArJ7PZMAAA
AJACAAAOAAAABwAAAJgAAAACAAAAvAAAAAQAAADgAAAACAAAAAQBAAAMAAAAKAEAAAsAAABMAQAA
DQAAAHABAAAPAAAAlAEAABAAAAC4AQAACgAAANwBAAASAAAAAAIAAA4AAAAkAgAACQAAAEgCAAAT
AAAAbAIAAP//////////////////////////////////////////HgAAABcAAABTOlxNU09GRklD
RVxOT1JNQUwuRE9UAAAAAAAAHgAAAAIAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHgAA
AAsAAABEYXZpZCBDZXJhAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHgAAAAsAAABEYXZpZCBDZXJhAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAIbriaVI87wBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAANylZQA9
wAkEAAAIAGUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADAABAFQAAwwACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAfEgAAAAAAACAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA+gEArgAAAAD6AQCuAAAArvoBAAAAAACu+gEAAAAA
AK76AQAAAAAArvoBAAAAAACu+gEAFAAAAOj6AQBMAQAA6PoBAAAAAAA0/AEAAAAAADT8AQAAAAAA
NPwBAAwAAABA/AEACgAAAEr8AQAQAAAA6PoBAAAAAAAVAAIAMQAAAFr8AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAABa
/AEAAAAAAFr8AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAABa/AEAAAAAAFr8AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAAA3/gEAAgAAADn+
AQAAAAAAOf4BAAAAAAA5/gEALgAAAGf+AQDIAAAAL/8BAMgAAAD3/wEAHgAAAEYAAgBUAAAAmgAC
ACkAAAAVAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACu+gEAAAAAAFr8AQAAAAAAAAD6APsAAQACAFr8
AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAABa/AEAAAAAABUAAgAAAAAAWvwB
AAAAAACu+gEAAAAAAK76AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAABa/AEA
AAAAAFr8AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAABa/AEAAAAAAK76AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAACu+gEAAAAAAFr8AQAA
AAAAN/4BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwvoBAA4AAADQ+gEAGAAAAK76AQAAAAAArvoBAAAA
AACu+gEAAAAAAK76AQAAAAAAWvwBAAAAAAA3/gEAAAAAAFr8AQDdAQAAWvwBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAENRk9SIElNTUVESUFURSBSRUxFQVNFCQkJCQlDb250YWN0
OiBXYXluZSBHamVyZGUNTm92ZW1iZXIgNCwgMTk5NwkJCQkJCQkJICAgIDYxMi0yMTUtMDI3MA0N
R292ZXJub3IgQ2FybHNvbiBhbm5vdW5jZXMgcmVjeWNsaW5nIG1hbnVmYWN0dXJpbmcgbGVhZHMg
dG8gZWNvbm9taWMgYW5kIGVudmlyb25tZW50YWwgc3VjY2VzcyBpbiBNaW5uZXNvdGENDVNULiBQ
QVVMLCBNaW5uLiCWIEFkZGluZyBhbiBlc3RpbWF0ZWQgJDEuNSBiaWxsaW9uIGluIHNhbGVzIHRv
IHRoZSBzdGF0ZSBlY29ub215LCBNaW5uZXNvdGGScyByZWN5Y2xpbmcgbWFudWZhY3R1cmluZyBp
bmR1c3RyeSBtYWtlcyBtb25leSwgY3JlYXRlcyBqb2JzIGFuZCBleHBhbmRzIHRoZSBlY29ub215
LiAgSW4gYSByZXBvcnQgdGhhdCBmZWF0dXJlcyBidXNpbmVzc2VzIHdobyB1c2UgcmVjeWNsZWQg
bWF0ZXJpYWxzIGFzIGZlZWRzdG9jayBpbiBtYW51ZmFjdHVyaW5nIHByb2Nlc3NlcywgdGhlIE1p
bm5lc290YSBPZmZpY2Ugb2YgRW52aXJvbm1lbnRhbCBBc3Npc3RhbmNlIHByZXNlbnRzIG5ldyBp
bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb25maXJtaW5nIHRoYXQgdGhlc2UgaW5kdXN0cmllcyBhZGQgc3Vic3RhbnRp
YWwgdmFsdWUgdG8gdGhlIGVjb25vbXkuDQ1JbiBhZGRpdGlvbiB0byAkMS41IGJpbGxpb24gaW4g
ZGlyZWN0IHNhbGVzLCB0aGUgc3R1ZHkgZXN0aW1hdGVzIHRoZSBjb21wYW5pZXMgZW1wbG95IDgs
NzAwIE1pbm5lc290YW5zLiBFY29ub21pYyBhbmFseXNpcyBhbHNvIHNob3dzIHRoYXQgdG90YWwg
ZGlyZWN0LCBpbmRpcmVjdCBhbmQgaW5kdWNlZCBlbXBsb3ltZW50IGFzc29jaWF0ZWQgd2l0aCBy
ZWN5Y2xpbmcgbWFudWZhY3R1cmluZyBpbnZvbHZlcyAxOCwwMDAgdG8gMjYsMDAwIGpvYnMsIGFu
ZCBhc3NvY2lhdGVkIGVjb25vbWljIGFjdGl2aXR5IGFkZHMgJDEuMyB0byAkMS45IGJpbGxpb24g
b2YgdmFsdWUgdG8gdGhlIHN0YXRlIGVjb25vbXkuIFRoZSBjb21wYW5pZXMgYW5udWFsbHkgY29u
dHJpYnV0ZSAkNDAgdG8gJDY2IG1pbGxpb24gaW4gc3RhdGUgdGF4ZXMuIA0Nk1JlY3ljbGluZyBt
YW51ZmFjdHVyaW5nIGNyZWF0ZXMgam9icywgcmVkdWNlcyBtYW51ZmFjdHVyaW5nIGNvc3RzLCBp
bmNyZWFzZXMgY2FwaXRhbCBpbnZlc3RtZW50LCBjb250cmlidXRlcyB0YXggZG9sbGFycywgZGV2
ZWxvcHMgbmV3IHByb2R1Y3RzIGZvciB0aGUgbWFya2V0cGxhY2UgYW5kIGNvbnNlcnZlcyByZXNv
dXJjZXMslCBzYWlkIEdvdmVybm9yIEFybmUgQ2FybHNvbi4gk0FzIGtub3dsZWRnZSBpbXByb3Zl
cywgdGhlIHJlY3ljbGluZyBtYW51ZmFjdHVyaW5nIGluZHVzdHJ5IHdpbGwgY29udGludWUgdG8g
c3RhYmlsaXplIGFuZCBncm93IGFzIGEgZnJ1aXRmdWwgYW5kIHZhbHVhYmxlIGFjdGl2aXR5IHRo
YXQgb2ZmZXJzIGxvbmctdGVybSBiZW5lZml0cyB0byBNaW5uZXNvdGFucy6UDQ1NaW5uZXNvdGGS
cyBWYWx1ZS1BZGRlZCBSZWN5Y2xpbmcgTWFudWZhY3R1cmluZyBJbmR1c3RyaWVzOiBBbiBFY29u
b21pYyBhbmQgRW52aXJvbm1lbnRhbCBQcm9maWxlIGFuYWx5emVzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20g
YSBzdXJ2ZXkgb2YgOTAgcmVjeWNsaW5nIG1hbnVmYWN0dXJpbmcgY29tcGFuaWVzLCBkYXRhIGFj
cXVpcmVkIGZyb20gdGhlIDE5OTYtOTcgQnVzaW5lc3MgRGlyZWN0b3J5LCBhbmQgcmVzdWx0cyBv
YnRhaW5lZCB0aHJvdWdoIGVjb25vbWljIG1vZGVsaW5nIG9mIHN0YXRld2lkZSBlY29ub21pYyBh
Y3Rpdml0eS4NDVRoZSBwcm9maWxlIG91dGxpbmVzIHNldmVyYWwgY29udHJpYnV0aW9ucyB0byB0
aGUgZWNvbm9teSBhbmQgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50Og0NUmVjeWNsaW5nIHByb3ZpZGVzIG1hbnVm
YWN0dXJpbmcgaW5kdXN0cmllcyB3aXRoIHJhdyBtYXRlcmlhbHMgdGhhdCBhcmUgb2Z0ZW4gbGVz