WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE   BACK TO ARCHIVE INDEX

11 Aug 00 - peanut butter; suitcases; haulers; college move-out; hearing aids; phone books; legislation ** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ** -- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition -------- Forum archive: http://www.reuses.com/nwpcarchive -------------------- >From Samanthe Sheffer, Seattle Goodwill, Seattle, WA: I picked up a copy of Time magazine at the doctor's office yesterday (the issue with Alzheimer's on the cover?), and was shocked to find, in a Q&A that sounded made-up to me, some guy asking if there was an alternative to sticking a knife in a peanut butter jar to get the contents (is that so inconvenient???!). The astounding answer was a hearty yes! - some company is making individually-wrapped peanut butter slices! Is this a brains versus profits thing, or have we lost our minds? E-mail: sams [ A T ] seattlegoodwill [ D O T ] org -------------------- The next two postings are in response to the 8/8/00 posting from Renee Kimball about the "Suitcases for Kids" program, which was the subject of an 8/7/00 item. -------------------- >From Susan Ziolko, Clackamas County Community Environment Division, Clackamas, OR: I think Renee missed the point here. It is not about saving one plastic garbage bag, but about reusing suitcases, sports bags, and back packs and giving a child a sense of self-worth. This is no different than delivering an old suitcase to Goodwill. The program is about children having something that belongs to them to put their clothes and personal items in, instead of giving them the stigma of their things being as good as "garbage." For those of us that have worked with these children, we know how important it is for them to have personal items that go with them from place to place. Most of us don't travel with our personal items in garbage bags - why can't these kids have a backpack or suitcase that they can call their own? And, with all the new wheeled varieties of suitcases being sold out there, I bet there are a lot of old ones that are being tossed. E-mail: susanz (A T) co (D O T) clackamas (D O T) or (D O T) us --------------------- >From Michelle Portman, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Boston, MA: I just can't help but respond to Renee Kimball's virulent censure of the program for Suitcases for Kids, and here's why: 1. I think it is great that someone has started a program to find a use for unwanted suitcases. I never know where to put the ones I don't want other than out on the curb. 2. What difference does it make whether this is or isn't a foster child's biggest problem? Obviously, Aubyn could not solve any of their other problems and neither can most people/children who would participate in such a program! 3. As for resources wasted "gathering, transporting, storing and distributing (gas, infrastructure costs for storage such as heat, light, cleaning and disposal costs, etc., etc., etc.)" - that thinking is absolutely ludicrous! As far as that goes, maybe we should just sit on our hands to achieve the most in source reduction? What about resources wasted excoriating the program? Maybe that was an unnecessary waste by Ms. Kimball of electricity for computer use, lighting while sitting at her desk, etc., etc. 4. Finally, the use of such a term as "Little Aubyn's suitcase program" makes Ms. Kimball's response seem especially vilifying. It's like using the term "Little Black Sambo" or something and is inappropriate and unnecessary. It seems that, as a source reduction forum, what should be concentrated on here is not so much the conundrum of the foster child, but the opportunity made available for reuse of discarded suitcases. That this opportunity was initiated and promoted by a child who is trying to do a good deed, is only to her credit. E-mail: michelle [ DOT ] portman [ AT ] state [ DOT ] ma [ DOT ] us --------------------- The next two postings are in response to the 8/9/00 message from Barbara Frierson, seeking ideas for waste prevention requirements that a local government could include in contracts with recycling haulers. --------------------- >From Brian Foran, California Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento, CA: This might be an obvious one, but has your city considered implementing a pay-as-you-throw refuse collection fee system, and requiring the franchisee to employ an on-board scanner/scale/computer to identify, weigh, and record each toter? I've seen a presentation on programs that employ such systems, and there's no better motivation to encourage residents to reduce their garbage generation than saving money! E-mail: bforan ( A T ) CIWMB ( D O T ) ca ( D O T ) gov --------------------- >From Karen Higgins, City of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP), Los Angeles, CA: The LADWP recently sent out an RFP for rubbish collection and sorting services that we hope will recycle 65 percent of the materials in 25-45 cubic-yard rolloffs and 15 percent of materials in 2-5 cubic-yard containers for approximately 110 facilities in the Valley. We are requiring reports regarding what is sorted/recycled. The proposals need to be duplexed (printed on both sides). E-mail: khiggi (A T) dwp (D O T) ci (D O T) la (D O T) ca (D O T) us --------------------- The next two postings are in response to the recent postings about Dump & Run Inc., a new nonprofit service on the East Coast that is starting programs to collect college students' castoff items in the spring and sell them to incoming students in the fall, with the proceeds going to charity. --------------------- >From Sharon Aller, King County Solid Waste Division, Seattle, WA: Regarding Dump & Run, I have some experience in that situation when I managed the recycling program at the University of Arizona. At most colleges and universities, students in residence halls form a distinct moving-out subculture. Well, they're a distinct subculture all the time, but end of the year is something else. The end of finals, moving out, and catching either a flight or a ride home all happen within a few hours. Rooms must be completely emptied, and students can't possibly get all their stuff into suitcases or boxes and in car trunks or on planes. So they have to leave an amazing amount of stuff behind. 1. Carpet scraps are one problem. They are disgusting! No kid has a vacuum and wouldn't use it anyway. Think of a year's worth of beer, pop and snack foods. Even the charitable organizations don't want them. Some selection by dorm managers will keep a few of the cleaner carpets for the next year, but most of them are headed straight to the landfill. 2. Electronic equipment. Facilities people have found hair dryers, radios, televisions, stereos, speakers, huge items in good condition. Usually, the night after the residence hall closes, the town "gleaners" come through and select out the good stuff. 3. Clothes. Think T-shirts, sweatshirts, ripped jeans, and unwashed everything. Who wants it? Goodwill, Salvation Army and other organizations did and probably still do bring their trucks, and students can make donations. These were student-organized programs that met with some success. 4. Paper. No student throws away a piece of paper or notebook during the semester. But when classes are over and tests are taken, watch out. Recycling bins that have stood forlornly all semester are suddenly overwhelmed and usually highly contaminated with spiral notebooks, binders, lab notebooks. It's a paper recycler's nightmare. That is, what is put in the bins. Lots of places, paper still goes into the trash. 5. Furniture. There usually isn't much and what there is will be well-used or broken. Dorm rooms have built-in desks, chairs and a bed. What gets tossed are hampers, laundry baskets, lots of plastic stuff. 6. Miscellaneous. Half-used everything from shampoo, deodorant, hair spray, bathroom stuff, old shoes, cork bulletin boards, class projects on foamcore, broken coat hangers. Lots of TRASH - no way around it. One year I saw photos of a waste pile from a dorm stretched down the street from the dorm, six feet high and more than 30 feet long. Until that moment, I had been quite optimistic about organizing a system of sorting and recycling. City ordinances don't allow that kind of time. It was dealt with by a front-end loader and some big roll-off containers, and before the end of the day. All of which leads me to say that if one wants to do a program for residence halls, planning needs to include a lot of up-front time, coordination with all hall managers and staff, and enough equipment and staff to handle all of the waste in a 24-hour span of time. You can't count on student environmental leaders; they have planes to catch and summer jobs to go to also. There are no doubt a number of universities who have implemented some good plans (and I would love to hear about them), but in a big school with big residence halls, the sheer volume of material that comes at one time is usually dealt with by the waste haulers. Now, having said all that, I thought maybe things had really gotten organized since I left my position there, so I e-mailed Bill Savary, who replaced me as recycling coordinator at the University of Arizona. His reply is below. E-mail: sharon [ DOT ] aller [ AT ] metrokc [ DOT ] gov ---------------------- Excerpted from message from Bill Savary, University of Arizona recycling program, Tucson, AZ (forwarded by Sharon Aller): Things here are hectic. The telephone book recycling is just starting, and so is dormitory move-in. At the ends of the semesters we still brace ourselves for the traditional tsunami, and at the beginning of the year we face the cardboard avalanche. I actually have one full-time cardboard guy who hauls and bails cardboard 40 hours a week, and I'll be hiring a temporary person to help him through the next two weeks. The end-of-year tsunami probably hasn't changed greatly from what you remember, but at least we're getting the patterns down better. We still rely on various community organizations to come in and take specific aspects of the recovery program: Community Food Bank sets up bins at dorm sites to catch food left-overs. Another group whose name I forget sets up bins for materials that can be directed to school children (paper, pens, notebooks, etc.). Sometimes we can get someone interested in carpets or construction materials, sometimes not. ----------------------- >From Bill Sheehan, Athens, GA, GrassRoots Recycling Network: Advertisement for a new Songbird Hearing Aid: "So technologically advanced, it's disposable." E-mail: bill_sheehan [ AT ] mindspring [ DOT ] com ----------------------- >From Margaret Kitchell, Seattle area resident: Well, it's that time of year again. The GTE Superpages phone book weighing 4 pounds is on my sidewalk. Last year I got excited because I called their 800 number and asked to be removed and the person said I would be. But this year I called the number and they told me it was a blanket distribution. I consider this like e-mail "spam," except that it weighs 4 pounds so some trees died and I feel so powerless against it. Could I get more help in fighting this? Thanks so much. E-mail: kitchell (AT) Seanet (DOT) com Note from Tom: Margaret also sent a message out on the Forum in August, 1999, asking for help with this problem, and we ran several responses. This appears to be a common waste prevention problem - unwanted "Yellow Pages" phone books. ---------------------- Excerpted from an 8/10/00 press release from the Reusable Pallet and Container Coalition (forwarded by Rick Hlavka and Gary Liss): The Reusable Pallet and Container Coalition (RPCC), a trade association of companies in the reusable packaging industry, has announced its strong support for the environmental tax incentive bill to promote business conversion from disposable pallets and cardboard boxes to reusable pallets and plastic containers, introduced by Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Rep. Bob Matsui (D-CA) on July 20. The bill, HR 4916, the Landfill Reduction Act of 2000, allows farmers, retailers, manufacturers and poolers of reusable plastic or wooden pallets and plastic containers to write-off the cost of capital investments to convert to these environmentally-superior products. Solid waste going to landfills and incinerators is expected to grow by 10 percent in the U.S. over this decade, and packaging represents a significant fraction of the solid waste stream. America spends about $1 billion annually getting rid of 17 million tons of cardboard boxes and expendable pallets, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Furthermore, a recent EPA report indicates that cardboard boxes are dramatically expanding as a category of solid waste, most likely driven by e-commerce. Over its seven-year life, this new bill is expected to save $300 million for businesses and local governments in terms of reduced solid waste disposal costs and is expected to cost the U.S. Treasury as little as $100 million over this period. The paper industry, notably cardboard manufacturers, opposes the tax incentive legislation supported by the RPCC, even though the paper industry has been aggressively pursuing its own Congressional tax breaks that have been opposed by the environmental community. For more information, contact Jeanie Johnson of the Reusable Pallet and Container Coalition. Phone: (202) 625-4899. E-mail: headquarters [AT] rpccreusable [DOT] org - end -