Today's Topics:
August SD Earth Times now online
FSC and recycled wood fiber
Fwd: The Economist on dioxin in Japan
Opinion Editorial "Activism Coming and Going
talcum powder
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loop-Detect: GreenYes:98/158
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 14:10:54 -0700
From: Carolyn Chase <cdchase@znet.com>
Subject: August SD Earth Times now online
www.sdearthtimes.com
Local Ecology
Against the odds
It's down to the wire for the fate of the
coastal mesa with the last piece of
undisturbed southern maritime chaparral.
Back County Coalition files suit against State Route 94 passing lanes
Slick maneuvering by Caltrans to avoid
environmental impact assessments draws fire.
20 simple steps to reduce global warming
You can make a difference right at home.
National Issues
25 percent of auto, petroleum, pulp and metal industries are
violating Clean Air Act
And the estimates may be low not all states and
all plants report.
Groundwater injection process filtersout contaminants
A new process promises to effectively remove
chromium and other toxins from watersheds.
Global Ecology
Hidden forces mask crisis in world fisheries
As fish stocks decline and fishing fleets work
lower on the food chain, the livelihood of 200
million people is being threatened.
Diet & Health
Zinc supplementation reduces infectiousdisease morbidity
Sunscreen can protect againstmelanoma, says specialist
Sunscreen is especially important for the
occasional sunbather.
In Your Garden
For great citrus and avocados, feed'emin the summer
Feed twice this summer and forget em 'till winter.
Be kind to yourself and your yard
I know you just *love* caring for your lawn but
how about something a little different?
Observations from the Edge
Bob, The Sequel Clone Sweet Clone
Could the world survive a copy of our resident
eco-radical?
Car poor
Our car-based society is a sign of affluence. Or
maybe not
Energy
Green Mountain Energy resources announces new California
solar rooftop systems
The dream of solar energy comes closer.
Carolyn Chase, Editor, San Diego Earth Times, http://www.sdearthtimes.com
Please visit ;-)
Tel: (619)272-7423 (SDET)
FAX: (619)272-2933
email: cdchase@znet.com
P.O. Box 9827 / San Diego CA 92169
'You've got to conserve what you can't replace'
---------------------------------------------------------->
"Every citizen is involved in politics; it's just that some people do
politics, some have it done to them."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 18:44:20 EDT
From: DavidOrr@aol.com
Subject: FSC and recycled wood fiber
www.fscus.org
I wonder what recycling advocates think of this, from the Forest Stewardship
Council:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FSC Policy on Percentage-based claims
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION 1 -- POLICY FOR RECYCLED CONTENT
1.1 Pulp, paper and assembled products (including particle board and fiber
board) which contain up to 75% recycled or non-wood fiber may carry the FSC
Trademarks on-product.
1.2 The remaining percentage must meet the requirements for on-product
labeling, described in Section 2 of this paper.
1.3 Labels must state the minimum percentage content of certified virgin raw
materials, in a form such as: "At least X% of the fiber in this product is
recycled/non wood fiber. At least Y% of the virgin wood fiber comes from well-
managed forests independently certified in accordance with the rules of the
Forest Stewardship Council," AND include the code number of the FSC-endorsed
chain of custody certificate.
1.4 An FSC accredited certification body is responsible for verifying the
proportion of certified raw materials, and for monitoring and controlling the
use of the FSC Trademarks, as part of the chain of custody evaluation
requirements.
1.5 Recommended: on product labels provide a more detailed list of
'ingredients' and their proportions.
1.6 Recommended: the standard 'recycled' label should be used together with
the FSC label.
1.7 The use of recycled/re-used WOOD - e.g. from old pallets, telegraph poles,
old construction, etc. will be considered by the technical working group,
which will make recommendations to the Board Committee. The Committee may
determine that such materials are included in the definition of 'recycled',
and therefore can contribute up to 75% of pulp and paper, and of assembled
products.
SECTION 2 -- POLICY FOR FSC TRADEMARK USE ON-PRODUCT
2.1 SOLID WOOD PRODUCTS
FSC Trademarks (name, initials or logo) may be attached to a solid wood
product ONLY if 100% of the product is certified by an FSC accredited
certification body as coming from FSC endorsed certified forests.
2.2 ASSEMBLED PRODUCTS (such as furniture, musical instruments, etc., and
including plywood), and PULP AND PAPER PRODUCTS (including particle boards,
etc). The FSC Trademarks (name, initials or logo) may be used on products and
labels if:
2.2.1 At least 70% by volume (for assembled products) or 70% by weight (for
pulp and paper products) of the wood and/or virgin wood fiber contained in the
product is certified by an FSC accredited certification body as coming from
FSC endorsed certified forests.
2.2.2 An FSC accredited certification body is responsible for verifying the
proportion of certified material, and for monitoring and controlling the use
of the FSC Trademarks, as part of the chain of custody evaluation
requirements.
2.2.3 In the case of assembled products, the minimum percentage claimed must
be applicable to the unit product itself, and NOT simply to the product line.
In the case of pulp and paper products the minimum percentage must be
applicable to a production unit (e.g. volume, batch, or time) to be specified
by the technical working group.
2.2.4 Labels must state the minimum percentage content of certified raw
materials, in a form such as: "At least 70 % of the wood in this product comes
from well-managed forests independently certified in accordance with the rules
of the Forest Stewardship Council", and include the code number of the FSC-
endorsed chain of custody certificate.
2.2.5 Requirement for continual improvement. The initial minimum level is set
at 70%. This level will be reviewed within three years. As the result of
review the level may be increased or decreased.
2.2.6 Recommended: on product labels provide a more detailed list of
'ingredients' and their proportions (see Note 3).
2.2.7 Products which contain a percentage of recycled or non-wood fiber may
carry the FSC Trademarks on-product if they meet the requirements of Section
1, AND if the virgin raw materials in the product meet the requirements of
this Section.
SECTION 3 -- POLICY FOR FSC TRADEMARK USE OFF-PRODUCT
3.1 Any organization with all or part of its forests covered by a valid FSC-
endorsed forest management certificate, or with products covered by a valid
chain-of-custody certificate, may be authorized to use FSC's name and logo in
off-product claims about certified forest management and about the use of
products from certified forests. Claims may be made in official reports, press
releases, advertisements, brochures and leaflets and other market mechanisms
and media. Claims must be approved prior to publication by the FSC accredited
certification body that issued the certificate, as described in the FSC Logo
Guide.
3.2 In all cases, claims must include full information and descriptions. Such
information must describe the contribution of certified and uncertified
forests and raw materials, in appropriate detail. In some cases, information
will be presented as a list of ingredients. Examples of appropriate methods of
presenting information will be developed by FSC in cooperation with accredited
certification bodies.
3.3 Forest management enterprises, processors and manufacturers that do NOT
have a valid FSC- endorsed certificate may NOT make use of the FSC Logo in
public reports, press releases, advertisements, brochures and leaflets and
other market mechanisms and media. Such claims that make use of the FSC name
and/or initials that are brought to the attention of FSC will be studied to
determine whether the claimant is 'passing off' their products or services.
FSC will take legal advice as to what action is justified on a case by case
basis.
3.4 Forest managers, retailers, wholesalers and others in possession of a
valid FSC ID Code issued by an FSC nominated agent, may use the FSC Trademarks
for the purposes of promoting FSC labeled product lines, promoting their
association with or support of FSC, and disseminating information within their
organizations about FSC, in accordance with the FSC Logo Guide. In all such
cases use must be approved in writing prior to publication. Procedures for
requesting approval, and technical guidelines for use of the Trademarks are
provided in the FSC Logo Guide.
3.5 Dealers and manufacturers may use the FSC name and initials in company
reports such as Annual Reports and company policy documents and in dealings
between trading partners and commercial clients. FSC will study any such
claims that are brought to FSC's attention to determine whether the claimant
is 'passing off' their products or services, and will take legal advice as to
what action is justified on a case by case basis.
4 -- TECHNICAL NOTES
1. Technical definitions for acceptable recycled or non-wood fibers will be
drafted by an FSC technical working group. Definitions will be based on
standard definitions previously developed by such organizations as the UK
Dept. of Environment, European Community, or other national/international
organizations wherever possible. The FSC Board Committee recommends that
sawdust and wood off-cuts will not be classified as recycled.
2. The FSC Board Committee recommends that percentages for pulp and paper
products will be measured by weight and follow industry norms for such
measurement, to be elaborated by the technical working group. The technical
working group will include recommendations for the treatment of fillers such
as china clay. Percentages for assembled products will be measured by volume.
The technical working group will provide technical details on how the
calculations are to be made for different product types, and on how the
proportions are to be combined for mixed products.
3. Example ingredients list (pulp and paper product)
This product contains:
Post consumer recycled fiber: minimum 50%
FSC endorsed fiber: minimum 40%
This product contains:
Post consumer recycled fiber: maximum 75%
Fiber from well managed forests: minimum 25%*
*100% of the virgin wood fiber used in this product comes from well managed
forests independently certified in accordance with the rules of the Forest
Stewardship Council
Example ingredients list (assembled product)
This door contains the following:
Plywood base* (70% by volume)
American mahogany veneer* (15% by volume)
Pins and moldings (15% by volume)
* Wood from well-managed forests independently certified in accordance with
the rules of the Forest Stewardship Council: The technical working group may
provide further advice as to whether lists of ingredients should specify
country of origin (if known), species botanical or trade name, if known),
etc..
4. i.e. not including fillers, etc..
5. The Technical Working Group will define the terms 'unit product', 'product
line' and 'production unit', and other terms as needed.
6. A paper product may therefore carry the FSC Logo on-product while it
contains up to 75% recycled or non-wood fiber, and the remainder is at least
70% FSC endorsed virgin wood fiber. The following products could carry the FSC
Logo on-product:
75% recycled + 25% FSC endorsed virgin wood fiber.
75% recycled + 17.5% FSC endorsed virgin wood fiber + 7.5% non-certified
virgin wood fiber
50% recycled + 50% FSC endorsed virgin wood fiber
50% recycled + 35% FSC endorsed virgin wood fiber + 15% non-certified virgin
wood fiber
7. In all cases, claims must include full information, data and descriptions.
Such information must describe the contribution of certified and uncertified
forests and raw materials, in appropriate detail. Examples of appropriate
methods of presenting information will be developed by FSC in cooperation with
accredited certification bodies. For forests this may include information
about the total land area owned by the claimant, how much is certified, and
what is the timetable for further evaluations.
8. This policy may be implemented immediately. Labeling requirements which are
fully covered by this policy may be set up immediately. For further
clarification, please contact FSC's Oaxaca office.
Forest Stewardship Council U.S.
PO Box 10
Waterbury, Vermont 05676
802-244-6257 - Fax: 802-244-6258
info@fscus.org
www.fscus.org
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 18:39:44 +0900
From: Karen Perry <kperry@psr.org> (by way of oldxeye@crisscross.com (Hop))
Subject: Fwd: The Economist on dioxin in Japan
> The Economist
> July 25, 1998
>Pg. 60
>HEADLINE: Toxic waste in Japan. The burning issue
> TOKYO
> A PENCHANT for wrapping everything in plastic and then
>burning the rubbish indiscriminately has turned Japan into the
>dioxin centre of the world. Dioxins, a highly toxic group of
>chemicals that are known to cause birth defects, skin disease
>and cancer, are produced when polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and
>other plastic waste is burned at temperatures below 700 degrees
>celsius. So toxic is dioxin that a dose no bigger than a single
>grain of salt can kill a man.
>
> A recent study by Nicholas Smith, from the Tokyo office of
>Jardine Fleming, a stockbroking firm, found that more than 100
>of the 1,500 or so incinerators in Japan failed to meet the
>country's (already lax) dioxin emissions criteria. Japanese law
>allows 80 billionths of a gram of dioxin per cubic metre of air-
>-800 times greater than typical standards in Western Europe and
>North America. Only eight incinerators in Japan actually meet
>the international norm. And one, in Hyogo, continues to spew out
>dioxin at 10,000 times the concentration allowed elsewhere.
>
>All that poison floating around in the air may pass
>unnoticed. But when it falls to earth and contaminates the soil
>and groundwater, it becomes harder to ignore. A wake-up call for
>Japanese industry--on the scale of the Love Canal incident in
>America in 1980--came in April when the soil surrounding an
>incinerator in Nosecho, a residential suburb north of Osaka, was
>found to contain a staggering 8,500 picograms of dioxin per gram
>of soil. This has given Nosecho the unpleasant distinction of
>having the highest recorded dioxin concentration in the world.
>
> The outcry over the toxic waste that contaminated the soil at
>Love Canal in New York state prodded the American Congress into
>establishing a trust fund (the "Superfund")--financed by a levy
>on the oil and chemical industries--to clean up such sites. In
>the same way, Nosecho has focused public anger on industrial
>polluters in Japan. Rather than being hauled over the coals,
>sensible firms have started to publish ugly details about the
>frightening condition of some of their sites.
>
> First to come clean was Toshiba. In early June, the
>electrical group reported illegally high levels of a carcinogen,
>trichlorethy-lene--an industrial cleaning agent that is believed
>to cause kidney and liver damage as well as cancer--in the
>groundwater beneath four of its domestic factories. The company
>carried out on-site inspections of all its 25 plants in Japan
>after detecting trichlorethylene levels at 15,600 times the
>permitted level at a factory in Nagoya last October. Having
>found similar levels of the toxic waste outside the plant, the
>local government is checking the health of residents in the
>neighbourhood.
>
> Next a consumer-electronics giant, Matsushita, reported
>harmful carcinogen levels in the groundwater beneath four of its
>factories in the Osaka area. The level of the cancer agent
>tetrachlorethylene--used for cleaning semiconductors--at one of
>the plants was 9,400 times the permissible limit. At another
>plant, in Hokkaido, the groundwater contamination was 5,200
>times the maximum. The company suspects that the groundwater
>beneath 80 of its 112 plants in Japan may be contaminated with
>harmful compounds.
>
> Such findings have come to light more than a year after
>Japan's amended Water Pollution Prevention Act came into
>effect. But the recent rush to reveal all has been prompted as
>much by the "Nosecho effect" as by the retroactive nature of the
>legislation, which forces the original polluter to clean up an
>affected site.
>
> Other forces are at work, too. Japanese manufacturers have
>been adopting the international ISO 14000 standard of
>environmental good housekeeping faster than those of any other
>country. By February, some 730 industrial sites in Japan had
>become fully compliant, compared with 525 in Britain and a mere
>110 in America.
>
> Half of the Japanese plants that have complied with the new
>ISO standard are in the electronics sector. Being top exporters,
>Japanese electronics firms have been understandably nervous
>about having their goods barred from countries that are
>signatories to the ISO 14000 agreement. To be awarded the ISO
>seal of approval means making fundamental changes in the way a
>plant is managed, with strict planning, implementing, checking
>and reporting systems put in place. It is these, as much as
>anything, that are encouraging Japanese firms to clean up their
>act.
>
> All of which is creating a handy new line of business for
>Japan's environmental -protection industry. Soil remediation in
>particular is seen as having huge potential. Kurita Water
>Industries, one of Japan's leading environmental -engineering
>firms, started building its soil remediation skills over a
>decade ago. It has carried out more than 400 surveys and soil
>purification schemes to date. As for Japan's filthy
>incinerators, the remedial business could be even more
>promising. Jardine Fleming's Mr Smith reckons that rebuilding
>all the faulty incinerators in Japan could cost a whopping YEN
>9.2 trillion ($ 66 billion).
>
> Many suspect that the opportunities currently being exploited
>by the clean-up industry in Japan are merely the tip of an
>iceberg. Now that two of the country's most respected industrial
>names, Toshiba and Matsushita, have voluntarily surveyed their
>sites for toxic problems--and gone public with their findings--
>many more Japanese companies are expected to follow suit. The
>pressure for them to do so is increasing as they shut old
>smokestack factories and redevelop the land for other uses.
>But the remedial work is not just required at big
>manufacturers. The Environment Agency of Japan points to the
>plethora of small plating shops as the country's worst offender
>in terms of toxic waste, followed (surprisingly) by dry-
>cleaners, hairdressers and public bath-houses. Big industries
>such as chemicals and electronics follow close behind. So far, only a
>fraction of the small backstreet offenders have had their land
>surveyed. There is still a lot of nasty stuff out there in the
>Japanese soil. And an awful lot of work will be needed to clean
>it up.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 16:37:14 EDT
From: RicAnthony@aol.com
Subject: Opinion Editorial "Activism Coming and Going
Activism Coming and Going
Richard V. Anthony
The post WW II recycling industry has grown a lot since Earth Day1970. A new
wave of drop off recycling centers was created in the suburban neighborhoods
to feed new materials to a forgotten recycling industry. Grassroots ecology
action committees used the funds to raise community environmental issues.
Air, Water, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Laws were passed
throughout the nation to protect life.
At the first National Recycling Congress in Fresno 1980 which was organized by
the Institute for Local Self Reliance and the California Resource Recovery
Association, the grassroots joined with industry to form the National
Recycling Coalition. By the mid eighties, a national recycling policy was
developed and ratified by consensus of all the members of the Coalition. By
the end of the decade, the grassroots recyclers and the industry had formed
recycling associations in more than half the states in the Country.
In California 1990, these types of coalitions wrote law requiring cities to
prepare Integrated Waste Management Plans, and requiring public agencies to
buy recycle. This happened across the nation. Today, in California and
other states, cities and county unincorporated areas have surpassed recycling
goals of 50%.
As recyclables are diverted from the landfills, some agencies have decided to
divest the government from waste management and have contracted or sold their
solid waste programs to the private sector. Waste management has become a big
business.
Such a big business that recycling cynics like Lynn Scarlet (It still cheaper
to bury many things in the landfill), N.Y. Times Tierney (Recycling is
Garbage) and the new sophists write nonsense daily using the anti-recycling
theme to make money for themselves.
Recently the National Recycling Coalition 98/99 Board of Directors slate
nominations committee determined that the time for "(sic) activistic fashion"
type of leadership at the NRC Board level has "come and gone". The committee
rejected a grassroots recycling activist candidate nominated for the Board
because that leadership style that was not what the committee felt was needed
to lead the NRC into the new millenium.
In San Diego, The Union Tribune will print opinion editorials against
recycling written by Lynn Scarlet, a retired General and a mortgage banker,
and refuse to print any anti anti-recyclers opinions.
So its back to the grassroots for the new millenium. How to motivate 100
hundred million recyclers to act and vote with a purpose? A new agenda for a
world facing 10 billion people, zero waste, jobs from discards, end welfare
for wasting.
The recovery goal is to have zero waste. Certain Federal and StaAAAAr>
subsidies and tax benefits are obstructions to planning for zero waste. A
report will be released this fall that will point to needed changes in the tax
law to reduce the wasting of our natural resources.
A few years ago every State Recycling Association voted on and agreed that,
elimination of depletion allowances for virgin materials and requiring minimum
content of recycled material in new containers and products had to happen.
The remedy lies in public and corporate responsibility for supply and demand
for products. The grassroots recycling network which began in the 1970 with
the ecology action committees and now reaches 100 million Americans who
recycle daily, could insist that consumer goods and packages must be
manufactured in a way that at the point of disposal the materials would be
recovered for reuse, repair and recycling.
A good example of a lack of corporate responsibility is demonstrated by the
Coca-Cola Company. Coke promised voluntary leadership in the use of recycled
plastic (PETE) containers. In December 1990 Coke promised that they would
begin using recycled plastic in their bottles but have not followed through.
The technology for cost effective production of 100 percent recycled content
has been available in the United States since the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration gave its approval in 1994 for food contact applications.
The recycled PETE market in this country is depressed. Most the of the
plastic food containers and soft drink containers are made from PETE. Coke
would greatly enhance the recycled PETE market if their containers were made
of a percentage of recycled PETE resin. Nevertheless, Coke has not responded
to grassroots recyclers requests for plastic containers used for bottling Coke
in the United States to have some minimum content of recycled post consumer
PETE.
Have you tried to change the actions of Coke by writing letters? Did Coke
refuse to acknowledge you and this issue? Are you doubtful that legislation
to require a minimum content of post consumer material in plastic containers
will happen in a Capital surrounded by money spreading lobbyists?
You could do what the San Luis Obispo Integrated Waste Management Authority,
The Tulane University Recycling Committee, and Greenpeace on the Island of
Fiji did: Mail your PETE Coke containers back to Coke and request that they
make them out of recycled PETE Plastic next time.
Imagine what Coke would to if they got 100 million plastic coke bottles in the
mail.
I have the opportunity to work with several waste authorities in diverse parts
of the Country. Each group is looking at the potential of jobs from discards.
They see that planning for zero waste will reduce their Sub-title D liability
and provide jobs and resources for the future.
As for my peers and the new opportunists, I fear for government and its
transition from service provider to regulator. The cost of services will
continue to rise and the ability to impact the service provider will continue
to decrease.
I remain loyal to my recycling associations. I think all producers of
products should take the responsibility to repair or take back and de-
manufacture their products. All producers of packages should take back and
reuse their packages or recycle the material into new materials.
The path to zero waste is paved with public participation. In this war on
waste there are two types of people, recyclers and wasters. Where do you
stand?
Rick Anthony
San Diego CA
August 1998
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 16:46:41 -0500
From: Mary Tkach <Mtkach@aveda.com>
Subject: talcum powder
I'm looking for information on the environmental damage done by mining
and/or manufacturing talcum powder. It's main ingredients are magnesium
and silicates. Does anyone know where I might find more info. I've
tried a variety of searches, but have not been terribly successful.
Thank you.
Mary Tkach
Minneapolis, MN
------------------------------
End of GreenYes Digest V98 #158
******************************