School children know it by heart – Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. Three ‘Rs’. Gee, what a coincidence – there are three sides to the recycling symbol! One of those arrows indicates that we buy a product. Another means recycle that product when you are through with it, rather than throw it away. What about that third arrow? Well, it means buy another product made of recycled material. That is known as ‘closing the loop.’ It doesn’t do the Earth much good to recycle products that are going to be turned into products that nobody buys. So we need to buy them to complete the recycling process.
How do you know if a product is made from recycled material? Sometimes you don’t, but oftentimes manufacturers are proud enough to tell you that the product has recycled content in it. For example, next time you are in the grocery store, look at the cereal boxes. Just about all of them say that the box itself is made from 100% recycled paper or cardboard. Paper companies almost always say that their paper contains at least some recycled paper. And then there is the case of Sun Chips. Sun Chips was the first company to tout that they packaged their chips in compostable bags…mostly compostable in large facilities, such as the City’s. Then they came out with bags that are compostable at home, in smaller piles. However, that packaging proved to be too crackly and when people complained about the noise, they were forced to take it off the market. We can’t have crackly potato chip bags, now can we?
I read some time ago that items made with recycled material are stamped with a recycling symbol darkened in the middle. Frankly, I have not seen a lot of that, but it is something to look for. As a matter of fact, we have to start looking at a lot of things more carefully.
As a constant dieter, I am now used to looking at nutritional labels for dietary information such as fat grams, sodium content, and fiber. It doesn’t take a lot for me to look at the rest of the product too…to check for some indication that it is made from recycled material. Try it.
Of course, we should always look for products packaged in material that is recyclable…#1 and #2 plastics, cardboard and paperboard, aluminum and steel. Many products are labeled with the recycling symbol to remind you to recycle it. These companies are anxious to use more recycled products…new technologies make it more affordable…and it certainly saves digging, polluting, and other actions necessary to find new virgin materials.
So Mother Earth says, “Try looking at a package; help ‘close the loop’ by purchasing products in recycled and recyclable packaging”.
Subject: DAWN DETERGENT
Take a look under the sink where you keep your cleaning products. See a bottle of Original blue Dawn dish washing liquid? Say ‘Hello’ to a very versatile and surprisingly multi-purpose household product.
ICE PACK. Partially fill a strong zip-type sandwich bag with Dawn dish washing liquid, close and freeze. Just to be safe, double bag it.
Freeze: The liquid soap stays cold much longer and it can be re-frozen many times. It will conform to the place you need an ice pack.
BUBBLE PARTY. Combine ten parts distilled water and one part Dawn dish washing liquid to make your own bubble solution. And add 1/4 part white corn syrup (like Karo) if you want to make more sturdy bubbles. Gather up things like clean soup cans that have both ends cut off or Hula-Hoops with makeshift handles attached. If you want to, you can pour the solution into a plastic kiddy pool and make huge bubbles. Turn it into a scientific experiment and go on a hunt for bubble-making items in your kitchen. This is a super cheap idea that’s lots of fun.
HAND DEGREASER. Forget those pricey automotive hand cleaners. Full strength blue Dawn dish washing liquid cuts through grease and gets hands and nails clean with no harsh chemicals.
CLEAN AUTOMOTIVE TOOLS. Soak them in a solution of Dawn dish washing liquid before you put them away to remove all the oil and grime. As a bonus Dawn will help prevent rust from forming on the tools.
MANICURE SECRET. Soak fingers in full-strength blue Dawn. It makes the cuticles soft and easy to work with. And it removes the natural oil from the fingernails, which allows the polish to adhere very well.
REPEL ANTS. Spray counter tops, cupboards and any other area where you see ants with a solution of Dawn and water. Wipe dry. The slight residue of Dawn that remains will not be a problem at all for kids or pets, but ants hate it. Should you see a trail of ants, go ahead and hit them with the Dawn spray. It will kill them.
BATHROOM CLEANER. Original blue Dawn dish washing liquid has some kind of miraculous quality about it that makes it ‘melt’ through stubborn soap scum and hideous build-up on showers and tubs, no matter whether porcelain, acrylic or fiberglass. Use it straight up and you’ll bless the day you read this column.
HAIR PRODUCT BUILDUP. Once a month use original Dawn as you would shampoo. It will remove excess oil from your hair and scalp and strip away any build-up of styling products without any damage. Perform this once a month and you won’t have to buy expensive salon products that do the same thing
STAIN SPOTTER. Original blue Dawn Dish washing Liquid used full-strength gets just about any kind of spot out of washables. Keep a small squeeze bottle in the laundry room so it’s always handy.
BONUS: Dawn Dish washing Liquid is biodegradable, while other chemical solvents may not be.
DOUBLE BONUS: Ever had a C D so scratched up it could no longer be used? Try some Dawn Dish washing Liquid on it, gently working it into the grooves with your fingers, and then rinse completely with clear water. Dry gently with a soft cloth. Voila! Repaired and useable CD!!
Reprinted from AP on Yahoo News.
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent Charles J. Hanley, Ap Special Correspondent – Fri Dec 3, 5:30 am ET
CANCUN, Mexico – Clambering over garbage heaps, rummaging through trash cans, 13-year-old Supriya Bhadakwad didn’t set out to save the planet, just her family. But two decades later, in the global arena of climate negotiations, the little sari-clad Indian and other scavengers are making their voices heard, tilting with big corporate players in a tug-of-war over the world’s dumpsites.
The Goliaths they’re taking on are companies building incinerators worldwide to burn waste from landfills, material generations of “waste pickers” have survived on. Many of the projects are supported by private funds raised under the U.N. climate treaty.
Bhadakwad had come 11,000 miles (18,000 kilometers) to the annual U.N. climate conference in Cancun on behalf of 6,000 organized landfill recyclers in her native Pune, India, to demand access to the waste now trucked instead to a new incinerator. Without their dump, they’re trying to survive by going door to door for trash in a community 12 miles (20 kilometers) away.
“We have a right to the waste that can be recycled,” Bhadakwad told a reporter. “We want to continue making a living without interference from such big private companies.”
Their environmentalist allies say some 50 million people worldwide depend on scavenging for a meager livelihood. And these advocates and poor recyclers have an environmental argument to make:
Incinerators not only produce toxic pollution, but “by burning waste they increase carbon dioxide emissions,” the biggest global warming gas, said Mariel Vilella, a campaigner with the international group GAIA, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives.
By collecting and recycling plastic bags and bottles, glass, aluminum and other material, those 50 million scavengers “represent a huge opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” Vilella told reporters, since what’s destroyed must be replaced by items newly manufactured and transported in a process using up natural resources and producing more greenhouse gases.
“For decades we’ve been part of the solution for solid waste management on this planet,” said Exequiel Estay, head of a Chilean scavenger association. “We demand that our jobs become sustainable.”
They’re also demanding that organized waste pickers and civic groups around the world have access to a global fund within the U.N. climate treaty structure to support local recycling programs. Such a fund is one item under discussion at the Cancun conference.
Under the U.N.’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), international support already flows to some incinerator projects that burn waste to produce energy — instead of burning fossil fuels that produce even more carbon dioxide — and to projects that capture methane gas emitted by landfills.
Because they reduce greenhouse gas emissions, those projects are awarded CDM credits that can be sold on the booming global carbon market, to help coal-fired power plants elsewhere, for example, meet their emissions reduction quotas.
The GAIA group proposes alternative approaches: Don’t burn anything, but deliver decomposing organic waste to facilities that will capture and use methane gas for electricity production, and leave solid waste to the landfills for waste-picker collection.
“In San Francisco, 77 percent of organic waste is diverted in this way,” said GAIA’s Christie Keith.
Her organization and other supporters flew representatives of scavenger associations from eight nations to Cancun to, among other things, raise their concerns with the CDM board of directors at an open discussion Tuesday, when they urged the board to reconsider its approval of such incinerator and landfill projects.
On Wednesday, a dozen garbage recyclers from Latin America, India and South Africa unfurled banners on the steps of a conference meeting hall, with slogans reading “Respect for Waste Pickers” and “Zero Waste for Climate Justice.”
“We Are Climate Fighters,” they declared.
The appearance on the world stage of people from the dumps of poorer nations, seeking the subsidies of the rich, points up how global warming is changing not just the climate but is upending entire sectors of traditional economies, as more and more billions of dollars are mobilized in the new realm of carbon finance.
For Bhadakwad, making her way through the conference crowds in a brilliant saffron-and-violet sari, the air-conditioned U.N. stage was a long way from the refuse heaps of Pune, where she and her husband divided the jobs of collecting and separating recyclables to support their three sons.
“I started at age 13 because of the economic condition of my family,” she said. “My father was an alcoholic, that’s why.”
Could she have imagined she was helping the planet?
“I wasn’t aware of these issues,” she said, smiling at the question. “I didn’t know we were helping the climate. But now I’ve come to know about it, about all the consequences of waste management.”
___
(Overheard in a conversation between God and St. Francis)
God:
“Francis, you know all about gardens and nature; what in the world is going on down there in the U.S.? What happened to the dandelions, violets, thistles and the stuff I started eons ago? I had a perfect no-maintenance garden plan. Those plants grow in any type of soil, withstand drought, and multiply with abandon. The nectar from the long-lasting blossoms attracts butterflies, honeybees, and flocks of songbirds. I expected to see a vast garden of color by now. All I see are patches of green.”
St. Francis:
“It’s the tribes that settled there, Lord. They are called the Suburbanites. They started calling your flowers ‘weeds’ and went to great lengths to kill them and replace them with grass.”
God:
“Grass? But it is so boring, it’s not colorful. It doesn’t attract butterflies, bees or birds, only grubs and sod worms. It’s temperamental with temperatures. Do these suburbanites really want grass growing?”
St. Francis:
“Apparently not, Lord. As soon as it has grown a little, they cut it, sometimes two times a week.”
God:
“They cut it? Do they bale it like hay?”
St Francis:
“Not exactly, Lord. Most of them rake it up and put it in bags.”
God:
“They bag it? Why? Is it a cash crop? Do they sell it?”
St. Francis:
“No sir, just the opposite. They pay to throw it away.”
GOD:
“Now let me get this straight. They fertilize it to make it grow and when it does grow, they cut it off and pay to throw it away?”
St. Francis:
“Yes, sir.”
God:
“These suburbanites must be relieved in the summer when we cut back on the rain and turn up the heat. That surely slows the growth and saves them a lot of work.”
St. Francis:
“You aren’t going to believe this Lord, but when the grass stops growing so fast, they drag out hoses and pay more money to water it so they can continue to mow it and pay to get rid of it.”
God:
“What nonsense! At least they kept some of the trees. That was a sheer stroke of genius, if I do say so myself. The trees grow leaves in the spring to provide beauty and shade in the summer. In the autumn they fall to the ground and form a natural blanket to keep the moisture in the soil and protect the trees and bushes. Plus, as they rot, the leaves become compost to enhance the soil. It’s a natural circle of life.”
St. Francis:
“You’d better sit down, Lord. As soon as the leaves fall, the suburbanites rake them into great piles and pay to have them hauled away.”
God:
“No way! What do they do to protect the shrubs and tree roots in the winter to keep the soil moist and loose?”
St Francis:
“After throwing the leaves away, they go out and buy something called mulch. They haul it home and spread it around in place of the leaves.”
God:
“And where do they get this mulch?”
St. Francis:
“They cut down the trees and grind them up to make mulch.”
God:
“Enough! I don’t want to think about this anymore. Saint Catherine, you’re in charge of the arts. What movie have you scheduled for us tonight?”
St. Catherine:
“‘Dumb and Dumber,’ Lord. It ’s a really stupid movie about -”
God:
“Never mind. I think I just heard the whole story from Saint Francis.”
Reprinted from a story in the Madison Courier.
3/11/2009 3:00:00 PM
Southeastern Indiana Solid Waste District employee Rick Hubbard pushes a large box full of empty milk jugs to the edge of the truck where co-worker Jerry Canfield waits with a forklift at the SISWD separation center at Jefferson Proving Ground. (Staff photo by Ken Ritchie)
Hubbard, right, and co-worker Kevin Reed load boxes onto a pallet at the SISWD separation center. The boxes are taken to the collection sites in the seven counties covered by the SISWD and set up to be filled again with everything from soda cans and bottles to newspapers and even computers. (Staff photo by Ken Ritchie
Your Story
‘We’ll take it’
Brandi Baldwin
Madison Courier Staff Writer
Helping unload a truck with large bins of everything from televisions and light bulbs to paper and cardboard, Southeastern Indiana Solid Waste District employee Rick Hubbard works with large recyclable products such as televisions and refrigerators as well as basic materials from school systems.
“Basically, if you can’t throw it in the garbage, we’ll take it,” Hubbard said. “That’s the whole purpose of the solid waste district, to cut down on waste.”
For nine years, Hubbard has helped pick up the materials from the seven counties the SISWD serves and, when they get to the SISWD site at Jefferson Proving Ground, he helps sort through the materials, mostly by hand.
“A lot of it’s hand sorting, the most of it,” Hubbard said.
Though the site doesn’t take basic recyclables such as plastics and paper from the public, it does take them from school systems. The schools have their students work to separate the recyclables from each other, with paper in one area, cardboard in another. However, because they are children, occasionally something gets where it isn’t supposed to be, which is where Hubbard comes in.
“You can get away with some, but if you get too much, it gets contaminated,” Hubbard said.
While separating, Hubbard has to also remove soda bottle lids as well to keep the different kinds of plastic from mixing.
After sorting, the materials are bailed into large blocks that will eventually be picked up by different companies that will reuse the materials to make new products.
The bailed bundles can weigh up to 1,500 pounds for cardboard and 600 pounds for aluminum.
Since he started working, he’s joined the large number of people who recycle to cut down on waste going into the landfills.
“I didn’t used to keep anything, now I bring it to work,” Hubbard said. “I realize how much waste there used to be. It’s a good program.”
The SISWD has drop-off centers in each of its seven counties and reuse-it centers where people can take things that are still usable for other people to take.
“If a person has a TV that works that they want to get rid of, they bring it there,” Hubbard said.
Since Hubbard began working for the SISWD, things have changed. More materials including cardboard are now recycled, and he’s no longer responsible for sorting white paper from colored. Also, the SISWD no longer has curbside pickup now that Madison has its own recycling program.
“You’re constantly trying different things to see what works,” Hubbard said.
The SISWD accepts everything from electronics, hazardous waste products, paint, motor oil, car batteries and other items. Visit www.siswd.com for a list of acceptable items and where they can be dropped off. Sites are located in Jefferson, Franklin, Jennings, Ohio, Scott, Switzerland and Ripley counties.
How much of your food and money are you literally throwing away? In
2008, American businesses and households generated 32 million tons of
food waste. Of that, 31 million tons (97%) was thrown away into
landfills or incinerators!
Much of this “waste” was not waste at all, but actually safe, wholesome
food that could potentially feed millions of Americans or discards that
could be recycled (composted) into a nutrient rich soil amendment. And
since food is such an incredibly valuable resource that can be used to
protect our soil and water or grow our next generation of crops, there
are just so many better uses for it to consider before putting in a
landfill or incinerator.
Which is why the US EPA Food Recovery Initiative and the WasteWise
Program have joined forces to challenge business, industry, and
institutions to reduce, donate, and recycle as much of their food waste
as possible – saving money and helping protect the environment. And
through the Food Recovery Challenge, participating organizations have
the opportunity to receive national recognition for their outstanding
Challenge achievements.
Take the Food Recovery Challenge and together – let’s take a bite out of
food waste!
To join us and to learn more – go to www.epa.gov/foodrecoverychallenge
To learn more about food waste and all the free information, tools and
resources available to help you reduce, donate, and recycle/compost,
please visit the EPA Food Waste site (www.epa.gov/foodrecovery).
To learn more about the WasteWise Program, visit the WasteWise web site
at www.epa.gov/wastewise.
September is also Feeding America’s “Hunger Action Month” To learn
more, go to www.hungeractionmonth.org.
Last year, I was struggling with high blood pressure. I tried one drug after another with little success and then finally one worked! But then, I had all the other bottles of pills that I hadn’t finished…what was I supposed to do with them? Mother Earth had told me not to throw them away or put them down the drain or the toilet. So, I was stuck. Finally, I just took them back to the drug store where I got them.
You can check with your pharmacy to see if that is okay for you to do that, but now there are some other options if the drug store is not in a position to accept them.
There are two types of medicines that you may have…what are called ‘controlled’ and ‘non-controlled.’ Non-controlled meds are items such as leftover aspirin, Nyquil, and other things you can purchase off the shelf at the store, as well as non-narcotic prescriptions…like my old blood pressure medicine.
Controlled meds are those for which you have a prescription and may have some street value for the drug trade…such as painkillers, anti-anxiety drugs, and so on. Narcotic drugs.
All these things can be harmful to curious children and pets. Keeping unused narcotics around is a little too inviting to those who want to make an illegal buck…and you never know who those folks are.
So. If you live in Jefferson County, take those unused controlled drugs to the Madison Police Department. Chief Wallace has had a program in place for some time for the collection of these medicines. These drugs are incinerated and accounted for under the supervision of a law officer. That is the law.
The other medicines and used syringes can be taken to the Solid Waste District’s processing center from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. during the week. The sharps need to be in some kind of hard container to avoid accidentally sticking someone. If you are in doubt about a certain drug, check with your health care provider or pharmacist.
Studies have shown that there are already trace amounts of these medicines in our waterways. Our waste water plants are just not engineered to deal with medicines, so we can really curtail that amount by not throwing medicines away or flushing them. Even if this stuff in the water isn’t bothering humans right now, we don’t know what it is doing to our wildlife…in other words, the food chain.
Please, don’t throw your medicines down the drain. Get rid of them the right way. When you think about it, it just makes sense. Mother Earth thanks you.
Is Burning Trash Bad?
From Earth911
There are currently 90 waste-to-energy facilities operating in the country that torch 14 percent of our trash and convert the heat into electricity. Photo: Flickr/james.thompson
The growing popularity of modern waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities in Europe and Asia has many in America asking: is burning trash bad?
We’re not big burners here in the U.S., but we’ve been known to light up some litter from time to time. The majority of our waste is buried in landfills, while 31 percent is recycled, but there are currently 90 waste-to-energy facilities operating in the country that torch 14 percent of our trash and convert the heat into electricity.
John Norton, engineering consultant and owner of Norton Engineering LLC, ran a now-defunct WTE plant in Dayton, Ohio for over a decade, and he is familiar with the internal goings-on of waste-to-energy and the misconceptions that often surround the facilities.
“Sometimes people would ask me if the plant was running,” Norton remembers. “When I asked them why, they said ‘because there’s no smoke!’”
“If you see smoke, you can bet that those operating the plant are running around like rats trying to fix something,” he says. “If there is visible smoke of any sort, we have a big problem. The EPA monitors all of the stack emissions all of the time. There’s just no cheating possible.”
Engineers like Norton advocate the cleanliness and safety of WTE facilities and are puzzled why an energy source as renewable as trash has not been explored further here in the states, but many environmental activists are pleased with American skepticism about waste-to-energy.
“There are incinerators in Japan and Europe that are newer than the ones in the U.S. because communities are so successful in questioning the approach of burning all of those resources,” says Monica Wilson, director of the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA).
In this hot-button debate, activists like Wilson remain unconvinced that waste-to-energy facilities are free of the hazardous fly ash, human health concerns and environmental impact of their predecessors.
So, how do these plants work, and are they really safe? Could garbage really be the renewable energy solution of the future, or is big-business pulling the wool over our eyes with a fancy new name and a “greener” business model?
The experts weigh in
The EPA points out that “combusting municipal solid waste has a negative public perception in some communities,” and while many are quick to point out the draw-backs of waste-to-energy disposal, there are plenty of voices speaking out on both sides of the issue.
“We all picture a burning 55 gallon barrel in somebody’s back yard, but that’s not what we’re talking about,” says Norton. “We’re talking about very clean combustion under very controlled conditions.”
But emissions are not the only concern for environmental activists like Monica Wilson. Financial burdens and the possible impediment to recycling expansion are also big problems.
“There are so many economic reasons for local governments to look into expanding their recycling programs,” says Wilson. “Recycling programs create local jobs and feed materials back into local, regional and national industry [...] That’s a really important thing to be thinking about instead of spending millions and potentially up to a billion dollars on a new facility.”
“It is important to talk about zero-waste in local government and to adopt zero-waste as a goal,” Wilson says. “It doesn’t mean we’re going to be at zero-waste tomorrow, but the only way to reach that goal is to set it.”
“There is a lot that communities can do in the short-term that will have a huge impact,” she adds. “I think we can achieve a lot and a lot faster than the waste industry would say, because their profits come from wasting as much as possible.”
Others argue that with waste constantly streaming in, WTE facilities should be explored as a cleaner alternative to landfills.
“If I had a primary goal, I would not call it zero-waste,” says Norton. “I’d call it zero-landfill.”
The environmental bottom-line
The strict standards of the Clean Air Act significantly reduce the environmental impact of waste-to-energy facilities by controlling the emissions of hazardous organics including dioxins and furans, hazardous metals and acid gases.
A variety of processes are put in place to ensure the clean operation of a WTE plant, including “dry scrubbers,” which use the old gardener’s trick of spraying lime to neutralize acids and electrostatic precipitators, a fancy term for electrically charged plates that capture small particles and fly ash in the same way your TV screen attracts dust.
Federal standards are also imposed on landfills, which must be designed “to protect the environment from contaminants which may be present in the solid waste stream,” says a spokesperson for the EPA.
To comply with these standards, landfills must be methodically constructed to avoid groundwater and environmental contamination. Although both WTE plants and landfills are subject to stringent EPA standards, neither are free of potential environmental and public health problems.
“Emissions of hazardous air pollutants from waste-to-energy combustors and fossil fuel boilers can be controlled to trace levels,” explains the EPA. “However, environmentalists express concerns about these residual emissions.”
Activists such as Monica Wilson point out that residual emission from both landfills and WTE facilities pose a potential threat to public health and may still contain gases harmful to the environment.
“Landfills generate methane, which is a very potent greenhouse gas,” says Wilson. “When you throw waste into an incinerator, no matter how clean it claims to be, greenhouse gases are still produced and so are other potentially harmful emissions.”
The concerns of environmental activists like Wilson are warranted. Both landfills and WTE facilities do emit greenhouse gases.
However, when you compare the two, there is a difference.
According to a report by P. Ozge Kaplan, Joseph DeCarolis and Susan Thornloe, “Burning one ton of waste in a waste-to-energy unit saves between 0.5 and one ton of greenhouse gas emissions compared to landfilling the same amount of waste.”
How recycling fits into the equation
When a WTE facility is constructed contracts are formed between the company operating the facility and the municipality, which mandate the flow of trash into the facility.
From a business standpoint, this means that the operating company and the municipality are shelling out millions to construct the plant. So, they want to make sure enough electricity will be produced to make it worth their while.
The average American tosses 1,600 pounds of trash per year, which is enough to take up two cubic yards of landfill space. Photo: Flickr/Alarzy
The EPA admits that “WTE facilities may be an impediment to further waste reduction, reuse and recycling given that the economic viability of the WTE facility is based on a given supply of wastes.”
For this reason many environmental activists like Wilson express concern that WTE plants may prove to be a disincentive to recycling, composting and reuse.
“If a community has a facility that must receive a certain amount of tons per day, they can’t build a recycling program that’s bigger than that,” says Wilson. “Often times the amount of waste that is required to go into the incinerator cancels out a community’s recycling goals. It’s simply not possible to recycle what the community wants to recycle and still feed the incinerator enough waste per day.”
But according to Norton, most waste-to-energy plants don’t need your recyclables to meet their bottom-line.
“When you take all bottles, cans and paper out of a load of waste and study what’s left, the combustion characteristics haven’t changed at all,” Norton says. “Recycling programs are no threat to a waste-to-energy plant. When one of these plants is proposed you often find that the plant itself becomes the agency that encourages recycling.”
A 2009 study conducted by Eileen Brettler Berenyi examined the recycling rates of more than 500 communities with waste-to-energy facilities and seems to prove Norton’s theory. The findings of this study were that communities with waste-to-energy facilities had a higher recycling rate than the national average.
Recycling also takes place within the plants themselves. After residual ash cools, magnets and other devices remove metal scrap. These scraps of metal, usually iron and steel, can be as small as paper clips and staples, but add up to thousands of tons over time.
Why burn trash in the first place?
The average American tosses 1,600 pounds of trash per year, which is enough to take up two cubic yards of landfill space.
At that rate, our purple mountain majesties could turn into an Appalachian Trail of trash. So, it’s no wonder that facilities that can decrease the volume of waste and provide renewable energy are so attractive to the U.S. government.
After being burned in an incinerator, residual ash is only about 15 percent of the original load of waste. Translation: after incineration your 1,600 pounds of trash becomes 240 pounds of ash, which is much more manageable for waste management workers.
Some incineration facilities, called solid waste incinerators, only exist to serve this purpose. They don’t produce electricity. They only burn your trash to make it smaller, easier to dispose of and less space-consuming in landfills.
On the other hand, waste-to-energy facilities shrink trash and use the heat to produce steam and electricity. These facilities have the added benefit of producing energy from material that would otherwise be landfilled.
U.S. WTE plants dispose of the waste of 40 million people and generate enough electricity for nearly 3 million households.
What about that ash?
The amount of residual ash varies depending on the waste being used. It usually represents between 15 and 20 percent of the original load of waste, which sounds great. Less landfills the size of Mount Everest, right?
Right, but there’s a catch. Disposing of ash can be problematic, and the issue of residual fly ash is huge with environmental activists.
Ash can contain high concentrations of various metals once present in the original waste. For example, printer inks and textile dyes can release iron and cadmium into the residual ash.
Sorting trash before incineration significantly reduces this problem. The major culprits of metal residue are batteries and paints. Removing these materials before loading the boilers reduces metal concentration in the ash.
Don’t worry, the EPA isn’t simply taking a plant-owner’s word for it. They test the ash from WTE plants to make sure it is safe. Tests are generally looking for chemicals and metals that may contaminate groundwater if placed in a landfill, and once ash is pronounced safe, it is landfilled or used for a number of applications.
About one-third of all the ash produced by WTE facilities is reused in landfills as a daily or final cover-layer or to build roads and make cement.
The final verdict
According to the EPA, “The decision to build a waste-to-energy facility depends on many factors, including geography and population density, the willingness of citizens to accept the technology, the willingness of investors to support it, and on state and local officials who determine how solid waste is handled in a particular area of the country.”
While environmental activists and the waste management industry disagree about whether the U.S. should burn or bury its trash, all agree that recycling is still the No. 1 disposal option.
The EPA promotes a waste reduction hierarchy that encourages reducing waste at its source, then recycling. Recycling is preferable to waste-to-energy and landfilling for materials.
The waste-to-energy debate will likely rage on, America, but at least we’re all on the same page in our knowledge that the chasing arrows are still our best disposal bet.
Published in
Hazardous
Rating
Tagged as
batteries, composting, energy, fuel, gas, oil, paint, recycle, reduce, steel, tin
Join the discussion
5 comments
Share this article
Facebook MySpace Twitter
Those of us who walk this Earth often see nothing but endless seas, fields of golden grain, and clear lakes. And yes, America does have those things, even if most of the rest of the world does not. It is hard for us to imagine ever running out of water, wood, or air, and all the rest of the abundant resources we have. But you know, all good things must come to an end, they say.
We have one planet with limited – not endless- resources. Sustainable is the new catch word. Sustainabilty means to not use resources faster than they can regenerate. Ooops. How many millions of years did it take to create our coal and oil fields, our diamond mines, and our incredible forests? Do our children, grandchildren and subsequent generations have that much time to wait for these things to replenish themselves? The answer is no.
So, the first reason that we reduce, reuse, recycle is to delay the certain demise of our resources.
How does recycling help? By reducing the amount of energy needed to manufacture the stuff we need. Products made from recycled material require far less energy expense…in transport, in processing, and in harvesting.
So, the Second reason to recycle: we will use less of our precious energy (which costs us a fortune)
When we throw things away, they are often out of our conscious thought. But they go somewhere. It used to be that we could burn things, but now our trash is not organic; it’s full of plastic and other commodities made from stuff that will pollute the air if burned. Now we take it to landfills. Out of sight, out of mind. But, how long is that going to last? Landfills do fill up, and often the land over them is no longer suitable for everyday use. So, rather than throw it on the ground, burn it, or send to a landfill, we can recycle or compost about 84% of our trash.
But the reason that affects you directly, is that recycling saves you money in the long run. Yes, it is true. Because manufacturers don’t have to dig up ore and other materials, but can receive them in ready to process form, the cost of the product goes down. Also, it costs a lot of money to get rid of trash. An 84% reduction in trash has got to make a difference in your removal expense and your local taxes.
So. Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. Not only is the right thing to do, but also it is the smart thing to do.
“De-Stuff” Yourself!
Accompanying July is this crazy heat. I for one want nothing to do with heat and humidity in the blazing summer unless there is a pool involved.
In order to beat the heat, I’m working inside more than ever and have begun the arduous task of what I am calling, “The Great De-Stuff of 2010.” I have decided that I have too much stuff. Not necessarily clutter, but stuff that I don’t need to live a sustainable lifestyle.
I have decided that throughout the month I am going to go room by room and gather all of my belongings that I don’t need or use and either donate, sell or re-gift. I have begun in the kitchen and already donated many drinking glasses to a local charity. I even re-gifted a set of never been used martini glasses to my mother. She just happened to be helping me on the kitchen day and received these as my gift for helping me in my “De-Stuffing.”
Take a moment and think about all of the extra “stuff” you live with. Wouldn’t it be easier to live without all the “stuff?”
Long ago I read something that will always stick with me. If you purchase one thing you must go home and get rid of three. It sounds crazy but I think the same holds true for living sustainably. What are you giving up for that new thing in your life? Is it worth it or can you live with less? What footprints are you making in the name of stuff and who could benefit from what you have to discard?