WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE   BACK TO ARCHIVE INDEX

01 Jul 99 - pay-as-you-throw; hospitals; videos; CDs; sweepstakes; video disks ** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ** -- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition -------- Forum archive: http://www.reuses.com/nwpcarchive ------------------- The first two items are in response to the 6/21/99 posting about a recent Consumer Reports article that praised "pay-as-you-throw" (PAYT) programs, in which households are charged based on the amount of garbage they throw out, rather than paying a flat fee: ------------------- >From Bruce Nordman, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA: I have to object to this. It is clear to me how PAYT encourages recycling, and it is clear how it encourages source reduction in the form of on-site composting of yard debris. It also may encourage giving to thrift shops of bulky items, if people have to pay extra for them. However, it is not clear to me that it accomplishes any other source reduction in any meaningful amount. If I'm buying Jell-O, a computer, or shoes, am I really going to buy a different product due to the size of my trash can? I can believe that people include environmental considerations in making purchases, but for the people I know, they do that regardless of any effect on their trash bill. I also can't recall a single instance in which someone told me something like: "Yup - In 10 years when I throw it out, I'll save 7 cents on my trash bill by having bought this suitcase rather than another one." I believe there is good evidence for PAYT increasing recycling and composting, so I heartily endorse it for those purposes. However, I think that promoting it for source reduction generally shows a real misunderstanding of how people acquire and use materials and products, and/or an embarrassment at how little is being done on source reduction, so then we see this grasping at things that have any connection. If anyone can point me to convincing evidence to undermine my argument, please send it my way. Thanks. E-mail: BNordman [ AT ] LBL [ DOT ] gov -------------------- >From Barbara Frierson, City of Alameda (CA) Public Works: Regarding the pay-as-you-throw residential garbage rates, I think the City of Alameda has a great program in that regard. (We are also at about 58% diversion, compared to base year 1990.) Our monthly garbage rates are for weekly back-yard collection, and do not include recycling service because we have different providers: - First 32-gal can is $13.15 - Each ADDITIONAL 32-gal can is $15.05 - 20-gal mini can is $5.77 - 10-gal micro can is $4.25 - Pre-paid garbage bag service (set out as needed) is $3.25/bag When we started expanded recycling service in 1997, many residents could more than pay for recycling and yard trim collection with savings from reducing from 2 cans to 1, or from a 32- to a 20-gallon can. The micro can and pre-paid bag service levels were added in early 1999 because of customer demand for even less garbage capacity. YESSSSSsssss!! E-mail: BFRIERSO [ A T ] ci [ D O T ] alameda [ D O T ] ca [ D O T ] us ------------------- Excerpted from the June 24, 1999, edition of "AHA News Now," the American Hospital Association's on-line daily report for health care executives (forwarded by Stephanie Davis): Restricting the reprocessing of medical devices is unnecessary, the AHA said yesterday. In a letter, the AHA asked Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran (R-MS) to block an amendment, being prepared by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), that would restrict reprocessing of medical devices. The AHA said hospitals have been using reprocessed medical devices safely under JCAHO oversight and after careful consideration by physicians, nurses, and infection control specialists. "In our view, the real issue is not whether reuse is appropriate, but whether the single-use label is a complete and accurate representation of the device," the AHA said. The Federal Drug Administration shares some of the AHA's concerns about the Durbin amendment, the letter said, adding that hospitals would produce more waste if the bill were adopted. ---------------------- >From George Bereschik, Marin County, CA (forwarded by Catherine Dickerson): Hope you can help me with this situation. I've been searching the web and haven't found any sites that seem to help. In my job, I receive numerous VHS video cassettes. They are for training purposes and are usually 10 minute tapes. (If they were longer, I could record over them.) I hate to just toss them. So, my question is: Is there a company that could re-use/recycle them? If you have such information, I'd appreciate knowing. Or if you could steer me in the right direction. Thanks. E-mail: Bereschik [D O T] George [D O T] L [A T] tci [D O T] com ---------------------- The next three items are in response to the 6/21/99 query from Maggie Clarke asking what can be done with the free CDs (compact disks) distributed by America Online, CompuServe and many other companies. ------------------ >From Mary McReynolds, Saint Louis County Solid Waste Department, Virginia, MN: Concerning the reuse of CDs: I used to cut the ends off of metal cans to hang around my berry plants as a shiny wind-activated bird deterrent. Now I hang CDs! E-mail: mcreynoldsm (A T) co (D O T) st-louis (D O T) mn (D O T) us ------------------ >From Sami Izzo, Greater Upper Valley Solid Waste District Program, Norwich, VT: Regarding the free CD proliferation, I have found them useful for: 1)coasters; 2) tied to a venetian blind pull to make it easy to find and pull up the shade; and 3) in the garden as a replacement for the pie-pan bird distraction. It probably would work as a mulch collar around the plant (if put down early enough) which would reflect light and help plants in colder climates to grow. Still working on other ideas... E-mail: GUVSWMD [GUV ( AT ) Valley ( DOT ) Net] ------------------ >From Renee Kimball, Recycling Advocates, Portland, OR: If you have a boatload of CDs you don't want - I'm making costumes and a banner for our band, the New Garbage Gurus, and I need dozens, so I'll take them. There's also the suggestion of a new song I just wrote called "Return to Vendor" to the tune of...you guessed it - an old Elvis classic. By the way, you should have seen my stunning ensemble when we played on the Association of Oregon Recyclers float in the Portland Starlight Parade: A delightly gathered skirt number made from Good Mews cat litter bags, beautifully set off with soy milk container pop tops and plastic name-stakes from potted plants. Eat your heart out Christian Dior. E-mail: rrrRenee ( A T ) aracnet ( D O T ) com Mailing address: 2224 SE Umatilla St., Portland, OR 97202-7417 Phone: (503) 238-6973 ------------------ >From Jeffrey Smedberg, County of Santa Cruz Public Works, Santa Cruz, CA: I read a good article in the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) Bulletin about sweepstakes. It says there are several bills in Congress now to put restrictions on the deceptive advertising used by magazine publishers. Their focus is protecting the public from petty fraud, but there also is a big waste reduction angle here. I will keep the list posted as I find out more. E-mail: dpw179 [ A T ] scruza [ D O T ] cahwnet [ D O T ] gov -------------------- >From Ann Schneider, University of California at Santa Cruz - Business Environmental Assistance Center, Santa Clara, CA, responding to the 6/21/99 posting about the news article describing how Circuit City and its partner have decided to abandon the single-use Divx digital video disk concept: Glad to hear of the death of Divx, but Circuit City is still advertising the product in Sunday's paper (6/20/99). And I had heard that they were expanding their test marketing regions (original locations Virginia, Richmond and Silicon Valley). Hmmm. E-mail: aschneid [A T] cats [D O T] UCSC [D O T] edu - end -