Carol said: "glass bottles are only one small part of our
waste stream which is only one small part of the ecology
problem." TRUE, but the only way we're going to solve the
"ecology problem" (I SEE IT AS "ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE
LIVING") is BY TAKING ONE SMALL STEP AT A TIME.
Carol said: "Your issue of encouraging wasteful habits is
tackled at the household level, as I mentioned, in some
California communities, by charging for excess waste
(e.g. $35/container, $15/item in Los Gatos in 1994)
-- a major disincentive to a throwaway lifestyle." TRUE in
part, but much of what we throw away is discarded AWAY
FROM HOME (office, university, school, church, hospital, etc
etc, etc). FURTHERMORE, there are those consumers (and they
are many) who simply don't care how high there trash bill is,
so making them pay more would have little or no impact on
their consumption habits.
Carol said: "Modern life is very complex and people really
are overloaded with information--and the responsibility is
continually pushed downstream onto the consumer rather
than being placed on the producer whose specialty it is."
LIFE IS COMPLEX -- YES. BUT WHY SHOULDN'T THE CONSUMER WHO
WANTS THE CONVENIENCE OF THROWAWAY THIS AND THAT HAVE TO PAY
A PRICE. WITH CURBSIDE RECYCLING YOU HAVE "ALL" TAXPAYERS
PAYING FOR THE MOST CONSUMPTION ORIENTED TAXPAYERS.
At 01:48 AM 5/22/99 -0400, Carol Slechta wrote:
>Hi Helen--
>
>First off, inefficiency IS waste.
>
>I can't speak for Canada as I know nada about life there.
>However, moralizing about the lazy consumer, in my view,
>is why the ecology movement is stalled where it is.
>Modern life is very complex and people really are
>overloaded with information--and the responsibility is
>continually pushed downstream onto the consumer rather
>than being placed on the producer whose specialty it is.
>You may even be right where glass bottles are concerned
>but they are only one small part of our waste stream
>which is only one small part of the ecology problem.
>This approach is all wrong or why is it we are
>further behind than we were twenty years ago? IT IS
>NOT WORKING. If you want people to be good you have
>to make it easier for them.
>
>The home is a single point of contact for the logistical aspect
>of the waste problem, and the municipal waste collection
>system is *already in place*--a distinct advantage.
>Your issue of encouraging wasteful habits is tackled at
>the household level, as I mentioned, in some California
>communities, by charging for excess waste (e.g. $35/container,
>$15/item in Los Gatos in 1994) -- a major disincentive to
>a throwaway lifestyle.
>
>Refillables could be collected more easily from central waste facilities
>-- which may even **encourage** manufacturers to issue
>refillables. You must introduce economies of scale into
>the reuse equation or businesses will not accept responsibility
>for their waste. They will fight the legislation and it will simply
>not happen overall. It has to be win-win to be solved in the
>time we now have available.
>
>Homes and businesses should be linked to a single waste
>handling system that recycles every single recyclable thing
>in the stream. Consider that a single waste stream could be sampled
>and the responsible industries taxed directly for whatever
>percentage of their product (pasteboard, plastic A, plastic B,
>or single-use glass) was found. If they want to sell it they
>have to pay for its reuse or clean dispoal. Everything a business buys is
>on record and with computers this can be done.
>
>IMO every producer should be required to come up with
>a plan for recycling every single thing he dumps into the national
>space. But remember that your "cheap throwaway" can be some poor
>kid's ruler (or calculator) for school. If the recycling process is not
>efficient, you are passing unnecessary cost onto the consumer.
>
>--Carol
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Helen Spiegelman <helens@axionet.com>
>To: Carol Slechta <slechta@manthasoft.com>; bcarter0@flash.net
><bcarter0@flash.net>; Martin.Lawrence@epamail.epa.gov
><Martin.Lawrence@epamail.epa.gov>; cri@igc.org <cri@igc.org>
>Cc: greenyes@earthsystems.org <greenyes@earthsystems.org>;
>WCARTER@tnrcc.state.tx.us <WCARTER@tnrcc.state.tx.us>
>Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 7:38 PM
>Subject: Re: Refillable Bottles
>
>
>>>Redemption worked when housewives and footloose little kids>returned heavy
>>glass bottles to the stores. Those days are>over. The value to the consumer
>>is just not high enough.
>>
>>Carol, that would be news to Canadian cosumers who return 97% of the
>>refillable beer bottles for recycling (probably only a slight hyperbole by
>>the beer industry). Similarly, consumers in Canadian provinces like BC and
>>Alberta return upwards of 85% of refundable single-use containers for
>>recycling.
>>
>>You said:
>>
>>Every single thing that a consumer>discards should be collected by the
>>municipality and from there>distributed to various organizations--free, if
>>necessary to stimulate>an use for it.
>>
>>I see municipal taxes spent on collection of consumer discards (for
>>disposal OR for recycling) as a public subsidy to the producers of those
>>cheap throw-aways. Far from "stimulating" a use for discards, this
>>convenient service "stimulates" producers to dump more and more throw-away
>>junk on the consumer, confident that the hapless taxpayer will dig deeper
>>to pay to get rid of it.
>>
>>Then you said:
>>Serious recycling at this point requires hours of a
>>>consumer's week. Only retirees can make this type of effort.
>>
>>Do you think one of the problems of our society might be consumers who are
>>to busy to clean up after themselves, and expect the community to provide
>>convenient clean-up services for them...
>>
>>H.
>>
>>
>>*****************************************************
>> To post to the greenyes list, send a letter to:
>>greenyes@earthsystems.org
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to:
>>greenyes-request@earthsystems.org with the subject
>>unsubscribe. If you have any problems, please
>>write to www@earthsystems.org.
>> GreenYes is archived on the GrassRoots Recycling
>>Network web site: http://www.grrn.org
>>******************************************************
>>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Helen Spiegelman <helens@axionet.com>
>To: Carol Slechta <slechta@manthasoft.com>; bcarter0@flash.net
><bcarter0@flash.net>; Martin.Lawrence@epamail.epa.gov
><Martin.Lawrence@epamail.epa.gov>; cri@igc.org <cri@igc.org>
>Cc: greenyes@earthsystems.org <greenyes@earthsystems.org>;
>WCARTER@tnrcc.state.tx.us <WCARTER@tnrcc.state.tx.us>
>Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 7:38 PM
>Subject: Re: Refillable Bottles
>
>
>>Hi Carol:
>>
>>At 05:44 PM 5/21/99 -0400, Carol Slechta wrote:
>>
>>>Redemption worked when housewives and footloose little kids>returned heavy
>>glass bottles to the stores. Those days are>over. The value to the consumer
>>is just not high enough.
>>
>>Carol, that would be news to Canadian cosumers who return 97% of the
>>refillable beer bottles for recycling (probably only a slight hyperbole by
>>the beer industry). Similarly, consumers in Canadian provinces like BC and
>>Alberta return upwards of 85% of refundable single-use containers for
>>recycling.
>>
>>You said:
>>
>>Every single thing that a consumer>discards should be collected by the
>>municipality and from there>distributed to various organizations--free, if
>>necessary to stimulate>an use for it.
>>
>>I see municipal taxes spent on collection of consumer discards (for
>>disposal OR for recycling) as a public subsidy to the producers of those
>>cheap throw-aways. Far from "stimulating" a use for discards, this
>>convenient service "stimulates" producers to dump more and more throw-away
>>junk on the consumer, confident that the hapless taxpayer will dig deeper
>>to pay to get rid of it.
>>
>>Then you said:
>>Serious recycling at this point requires hours of a
>>>consumer's week. Only retirees can make this type of effort.
>>
>>Do you think one of the problems of our society might be consumers who are
>>to busy to clean up after themselves, and expect the community to provide
>>convenient clean-up services for them...
>>
>>H.
>>
>>
>>*****************************************************
>> To post to the greenyes list, send a letter to:
>>greenyes@earthsystems.org
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to:
>>greenyes-request@earthsystems.org with the subject
>>unsubscribe. If you have any problems, please
>>write to www@earthsystems.org.
>> GreenYes is archived on the GrassRoots Recycling
>>Network web site: http://www.grrn.org
>>******************************************************
>>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Helen Spiegelman <helens@axionet.com>
>To: Carol Slechta <slechta@manthasoft.com>; bcarter0@flash.net
><bcarter0@flash.net>; Martin.Lawrence@epamail.epa.gov
><Martin.Lawrence@epamail.epa.gov>; cri@igc.org <cri@igc.org>
>Cc: greenyes@earthsystems.org <greenyes@earthsystems.org>;
>WCARTER@tnrcc.state.tx.us <WCARTER@tnrcc.state.tx.us>
>Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 7:38 PM
>Subject: Re: Refillable Bottles
>
>
>>Hi Carol:
>>
>>At 05:44 PM 5/21/99 -0400, Carol Slechta wrote:
>>
>>>Redemption worked when housewives and footloose little kids>returned heavy
>>glass bottles to the stores. Those days are>over. The value to the consumer
>>is just not high enough.
>>
>>Carol, that would be news to Canadian cosumers who return 97% of the
>>refillable beer bottles for recycling (probably only a slight hyperbole by
>>the beer industry). Similarly, consumers in Canadian provinces like BC and
>>Alberta return upwards of 85% of refundable single-use containers for
>>recycling.
>>
>>You said:
>>
>>Every single thing that a consumer>discards should be collected by the
>>municipality and from there>distributed to various organizations--free, if
>>necessary to stimulate>an use for it.
>>
>>I see municipal taxes spent on collection of consumer discards (for
>>disposal OR for recycling) as a public subsidy to the producers of those
>>cheap throw-aways. Far from "stimulating" a use for discards, this
>>convenient service "stimulates" producers to dump more and more throw-away
>>junk on the consumer, confident that the hapless taxpayer will dig deeper
>>to pay to get rid of it.
>>
>>Then you said:
>>Serious recycling at this point requires hours of a
>>>consumer's week. Only retirees can make this type of effort.
>>
>>Do you think one of the problems of our society might be consumers who are
>>to busy to clean up after themselves, and expect the community to provide
>>convenient clean-up services for them...
>>
>>H.
>>
>>
>>*****************************************************
>> To post to the greenyes list, send a letter to:
>>greenyes@earthsystems.org
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to:
>>greenyes-request@earthsystems.org with the subject
>>unsubscribe. If you have any problems, please
>>write to www@earthsystems.org.
>> GreenYes is archived on the GrassRoots Recycling
>>Network web site: http://www.grrn.org
>>******************************************************
>>
>
>
Pat Franklin, Executive Director
Container Recycling Institute
1911 Ft. Myer Drive Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22209
703/276-9800 fax 276-9587
email: cri@container-recycling.org
web: www.container-recycling.org