GreenYes Archives

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

[GreenYes] Re: This is how you convert all recycles efficiently

I whole-heartedly agree with Eric and Alan. Zero Waste and Incineration are mutually exclusive.

Most of us on this list strive to reach zero waste by eliminating packaging, single use containers, and other forms of waste such as unnecessary shipping. We promote composting, local commerce and the three ?R?s.? We fight to minimize the amount of material that goes into landfills.

Over 90% of stuff that is currently being ?wasted? can be composted or recycled. In a country where we landfill 50% of our single-use aluminum cans (or 760,000 tons per year) necessitating the mining of new aluminum ore, I find the promotion of new technology to manage waste unconscionable. Where landfills enable waste, incineration encourages it because it depends upon a static volume of ?waste? to keep the fires burning and help pay for the equipment.

To put it simply, managing waste encourages continued waste generation while zero waste seeks to eliminate waste altogether.


Eric Lombardi <eric@no.address> wrote:
Hi Leonard,

The GreenYes List is a service of GRRN, and GRRN is the nations leading voice for a Zero Waste future. GRRN created the definition in the 1990?s of what ZW is as a social movement, and what it is not, and speaking as the GRRN Board President I can tell you that ?burning? discarded resources is not an acceptable practice, and cannot be included in any discussion as an element of a Zero Waste plan. The same goes for landfilling. Both of these approaches have been overtaken by a superior paradigm for the 21st Century which states that there is no such thing as waste, only misplaced resources (end of pipe) and abused resources (industrial designers desk).

I realize that technology is ever-changing, and everyone on this list is interested in discussing how technology can help create a ZW world. However, your focus on burning or thermal conversion or whatever it is you are talking about has reached a point where you may ask yourself if you are talking with the right community?

You are more than welcome to stay on-board, but I would ask you at this point to gear down the number of emails you have been sending related to burning society?s discards ? that is not of interest to GRRN or most of this list membership.


Eric Lombardi
GRRN Board President
Executive Director
Eco-Cycle Inc
Boulder, CO. USA

Leonard, I wish you would stop spamming the list with this stuff. I looked at the attachment. It is for a med waste cooker with a capacity of 4.8 tons/24 hour day. Electrical consumption looks like 6912 KWh for that 24 hours. Assuming cheap wholesale electricity ($0.05 KWh) this is $72/ton for electricity alone.

There are no data on air emissions but the process sketch shows a circulating scrubber system with discharge to sewer. It is just an expensive-to-operate electrically-fired incinerator.


At 11:04 AM 9/12/2006 -0400, LWheeler45@no.address wrote:
At the point of initial collection in your home or business.
Nothing curbside ZERO NADA.

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]