Title: [GreenYes] Re: are government subsidies going to save recycling?
A very good point, and something that GAIA is now working hard to stop.
I am actually on my way back from the climate change negotiations in
Poznan, Poland, where GAIA had a small but significant presence, asking
for incinerators and landfills to be ineligible for carbon credits, and
pointing out that ZW has potential to make major reductions in
emissions. But it is going to be a long road to convince governments. If
anyone is interested in keeping up with these efforts or collaborating
on them, do let me know.
Doug Koplow wrote:
> The other element often overlooked is that recycling's main competitors, WTE and landfilling, are getting increasingly subsidized via assorted support for "making" energy by burning their waste for heat or electricity; or converting it via some other process into a liquid biofuel. Landfills may also be able to generate carbon credits on the Chicago Climate Exchange by installing methane capture even if they are no required to do so by law. The energy savings and reduced GHG from reuse and recycling is getting neither the support or the attention that it should.
> Doug Koplow
> Doug Koplow
> Earth Track, Inc.
> 2067 Massachusetts Avenue - 4th Floor
> Cambridge, MA 02140
> Tel: 617/661-4700
> Fax: 617/354-0463
> This message, and all attachments thereto, is for the designated recipient
> only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private
> information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you
> is prohibited.
>>>> Amy Perlmutter <email@example.com> 12/13/08 11:10 AM >>>
> I was surprised to see this message on a clean tech blog. It clearly
> reflects to me the lack of understanding of recycling and
> environmental issues even among the clean tech community. My response
> is below it. The link to the blog is http://cleantech.com/news/3960/are-government-subsidies-going-save-recycling
> Not sure if you need to be registered to use it. But do add your
> voice if you can!
> Blog Post:
> Are government subsidies going to save recycling?
> December 9, 2008 - Casual musings by Emma Ritch, Cleantech Group
> The value of materials recovered in the recycling process is
> plummeting alongside oil and other commodities.
> Since favorable economics are credited with driving the recycling push
> of recent years (as opposed to eco-conscious consumers), the future of
> recycling is now in question.
> The New York Times reports that the price of tin is down from $327 a
> ton earlier this year to about $5. Mixed paper is down from $100 a ton
> to $20 to $25. Glass is an exception, with prices remaining steady.
> Prices are dropping because there's no longer a demand for recycled
> materials as the largest customer, China, has pulled back. Some
> collectors are stockpiling the recyclables until prices go back up,
> while others are refusing to accept more plastic and paper. Some are
> even beginning to charge to accept materials that they previously paid
> to obtain.
> A new report last week showed that recycling paper and plastic
> consumes more energy and resources than it saves (see Report calls
> recycling a waste of energy). Metals were considered an exception to
> the findings, which suggested trash was better served as a fuel source
> for waste-to-energy plants.
> So what does this mean for the businesses that have popped up to
> capitalize on the value of recyclables? It's unclear.
> Philadelphia-based RecycleBank, for example, gets paid by
> municipalities to divert trash from a landfill to a recycling center.
> If there's no value left in recyclables, will the industry have to
> resort to government subsidies to survive?
> My response:
> We forget that throwing garbage away is a 100% subsidy, we don't ask
> for garbage systems to pay for themselves, yet some people seem to
> think that recycling has to stand on its own two feet, whatever that
> There are many reports showing that materials reuse is benefits the
> environment. Stop Trashing the Climate is only one of them: http://www.stoptrashingtheclimate.org/
> Recyclables are probably the only commodity that can still be used
> even with a negative price, meaning paying someone to take them is
> still cheaper than throwing them in the dump. So these commodities can
> still move in a slow market, as long as there is a use for them.
> But despite all the clear environmental and economic reasons to
> recycle, let's ask these questions: who among us wants to live near a
> landfill, garbage incineration plant, strip mine or other extraction
> industry? If the externalities of virgin materials extraction and
> waste disposal were internalized- health impacts of air and water
> pollution, long term monitoring and clean up of landfills, etc-
> recycling would make even more sense economically. We've seen this
> over and over with many more environmental solutions: if the costs of
> pollution were internalized, you bet clean tech would be farther along.
> The drop in primary, as well as secondary, commodity prices means that
> we aren't buying as much stuff. Hopefully it means we won't be mining
> or throwing away as much stuff, either.
> Amy Perlmutter
> Perlmutter Associates
> 23 Avon Street
> Cambridge, MA 02138
> Strategic planning, partnership building, communications, and program
> design for a sustainable future
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 GreenYesfirstname.lastname@example.org
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/GreenYes?hl=en