WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE   BACK TO ARCHIVE INDEX

10 Sep 01 - measurement; corporate environmentalism; waste generation; repair ** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ** -- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition -------- Forum archive: http://www.reuses.com/nwpcarchive -------------------- From Rory Bakke, Alameda County Source Reduction and Recycling Board, San Leandro, CA: Alameda County has a 75 percent diversion mandate by the Year 2010. Twenty percent of the reduction must come from source reduction/waste prevention. I am currently examining options for measuring various types of source reduction activities in terms of their diversion potential. I am interested in receiving contact names and information for others who are engaged in this type of endeavor at this time. I want to share information, measurement protocols being developed and ideas for protocols as well as strategies for gaining acceptance for such protocols. Rather than be more specific at this point, I would just like to ask only those of you who are actually involved in such endeavors to let me know by sending an email to: rbakke ( A T ) stopwaste ( D O T ) org Thank you! ------------------ Link to a long article by Claudia Deutsch in the 9/9/01 New York Times, "Together at Last: Cutting Pollution and Making Money," about how a number of corporations have discovered that environmental initiatives have actually saved them money (forwarded by Steve Long): http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/09/business/09ENVI.html?ex=1001052089&ei= (Note from Tom: You may need to register with the New York Times website to get access to this article. You can do that at: http://www.nytimes.com Even if you register, I believe that you only get free access to an article for the first seven days after an article is published. After that, you need to pay a fee.) ------------------ Excerpted from an article by Michelle Cole in the 8/28/01 Portland Oregonian: Figures just released by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) indicate that Oregonians generated an average of 2,645 pounds of waste per person in 2000, down from 2,675 pounds in 1999. At the same time, the recycling rate went up, from 36.8 percent to 38.9 percent. This is the first time (in the nine years that the DEQ has kept track) that Oregonians generated less garbage at the same time that they recycled more. State officials said a slowing economy may have been a factor in the lower amount of garbage created. But they also said that less garbage suggests people are making lifestyle changes, such as buying bulk rather than packaged goods. The waste generation totals were higher in the Portland area than for the state overall. Portland area residents generated an average of 3,001 pounds of waste per person in 2000. That was also a decrease, from 3,153 pounds per person generated in 1999. The figures came from the DEQ's annual survey of garbage haulers and recycling companies. ------------------- From Tom Watson, King County Solid Waste Division, Seattle, WA, and the National Waste Prevention Coalition: The cover story in the October, 2001, issue of Consumer Reports, "Fix it or Nix It?", gives people tips on whether it is cheaper to repair major household products or replace them. The article, which the magazine describes as a repair guide, also describes which types of products are most likely to need repair, and which brands are repair-prone. In addition, it gives tips on preventive maintenance, to make products last longer. (The article is not available on the Internet, except by subscription.) - end -