WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE   BACK TO ARCHIVE INDEX

03 Jan 07 - signs; mail; buildings; consumption; food; jobs; e-waste; Connecticut ** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ** -- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition -------- Forum archive: http://www.nwpcarchive.org --------------------- From Jan Dolph, Solid Waste Services Department, City of Austin, Texas: Does anyone know of any cities or states that have required that political signs be recycled or reused? Also, do you know if any agency has written an ordinance requiring that campaign signs be constructed of recyclable or reusable materials? We get lots of calls every year around elections. People want to know if the City is going to recycle the signs. Thanks! E-mail: Jan [DOT] Dolph [AT] ci [DOT] austin [DOT] tx [DOT] us --------------------- The next three postings are in response to the 12/1/06 posting defending the Direct Marketing Association's policies (including charging one dollar to sign up for its Mail Preference Service) and opposing the establishment of a federally-operated "Do Not Mail" list similar to the existing "Do Not Call" list. --------------------- From Susan Kinsella, Conservatree, San Francisco, CA: Remember that it's "us" that need protection, not the direct mail companies. Back in the old days, the government was supposed to represent the interests of the general public. One might see companies constantly stuffing our mailboxes with unwanted ads and solicitations and contests and manipulative mailings - and all that wasted paper and resources - as free enterprise. But I see it as waste and damage to my environment, harassment and an attempt to define me as nothing more than a "consumer." And then to charge me for not sending me what I don't want in the first place? Please! I don't consider that a "service." Our independence, freedom and right to be left alone by those who just want to use us as "wallets" is not something to negotiate. It is the right and responsibility of individuals to set limits that protect privacy and freedom, and government is the vehicle for doing that on a societal level. A Do Not Mail list would be the imperfect beginning to insisting on those limits. Even better would be an "opt-in" list that would let the rest of us stay off the mailing lists in the first place. We should not have to pay for the right to be free of harassment. As for companies moving overseas to stay alive - too many of them are looking for places where it's "cheaper" because they don't have to bother with people insisting on their rights - to a clean and healthy environment, to decent working conditions, to good pay and hours, to respect and fairness. When they find those places, it harms ALL of us. Saying NO to being treated as simply a cog in the consumer machine redefines the place of business in our world. If we in the most over-consumptive society in the world won't do that, who will? And what will happen to our world if we don't? E-mail: seek [ A T ] susankinsella [ D O T ] com --------------------- From David Assmann, San Francisco Department of the Environment, San Francisco, CA: I think it's pretty clear the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) is deliberately doing all they can to minimize participation in the Mail Preference Service. This is not the first time they've changed the address - by my count, it's at least the fifth time they've done so. Also, since the majority of requests going to the DMA for the Mail Preference Service come by mail, not via the Internet, the $1 fee is an increase, not a decrease. Also, it's kind of mind-boggling to call this a service, since what you are trying to do is avoid being bombarded with items you didn't ask for, don't want, and have to pay for in your garbage charges and taxes. Direct mail is inherently wasteful, since 98 percent of it is never responded to, and just ends up either being recycled or landfilled. Over the years, we have tried to negotiate changes (we have had meetings with the U.S. Postal Service, among others), without much success, in reducing the flood of unwanted mail. E-mail: David [D O T] Assmann [A T] sfgov [D O T] org ---------------------- From Woody Raine, Texas Department of Transportation, recycling program, Austin, TX: A "Do Not Mail" registry is not the "big stick" that the writer of the 12/1/06 posting would abhor. DMA established their Mail Preference Service not as a public service, as their web page suggests, but really as a service to their member bulk mailers. Their members save postage, printing, and paper when they pay DMA to scrub their mailing lists. Our registering on their site gives DMA a product to sell. To maximize the quality of that product, DMA charges a dollar per address to keep do-gooders and pranksters from entering every address they could find. So, DMA wouldn't want a competing national registry - unless they were hired to maintain it. Although bulk mailers could be concerned about national requirements to scrub their mailing lists, their greater interest would be guarding against fraud and abuse on a free registry. The goal should be to set up a free and easy-to-use "Do not mail" registry that has financial benefits for the bulk mailers. Surely that's possible. E-mail: WRAINE [AT] dot [DOT] state [DOT] tx [DOT] us ---------------------- The next four postings also relate to the recent postings about junk mail reduction or the idea of a "Do Not Mail" list. ---------------------- Excerpted from a message from Gina Temple-Rhodes, Western Lake Superior Sanitary District, Duluth, MN: Regarding the Direct Marketing Association sign-up fee for getting off mailing lists: I wanted to point out that on the DMA website, they do provide a toll-free number, operated by the three major credit reporting agencies, for limiting credit card applications and other financial-related offers (the number is 1-888-5OPT-OUT). I called this number a while back after seeing it on one of those annoying credit card solicitations, and it's helped IMMENSELY. Most of my junk mail was financial. E-mail: Gina [D O T] Temple-Rhodes [A T] WLSSD [D O T] Duluth [D O T] MN [D O T] US ---------------------- From Paul Devine, Olympic Environmental Resources, Seattle, WA: Who says the "Do Not Call" list is successful? I signed up as soon I could, and I get just as many "junk" calls now as I ever did before. E-mail: pauldevine [ A T ] msn [ D O T ] com --------------------- Link to a 12/4/06 update from the Center for a New American Dream on its junk mail reduction efforts (forwarded by Sarah Grimm): http://www.newdream.org/emails/al21.html --------------------- Link to a 1/3/07 article about junk mail by Phuong Cat Le on the front page of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/298177_junkmail03.html This article mentions the National Waste Prevention Coalition and includes a list of resources for reducing junk mail -------------------- Excerpted from a message by Eric Friedman, Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Massachusetts State Sustainability Program, Boston, MA: I am pleased to announce the release of a new report and state directive in Massachusetts that will establish minimum green building standards for all new construction and major renovation projects at state facilities. The report, entitled: "Leading by Example: An Action Plan for Green Buildings in Massachusetts State Construction Projects," is the culmination of two years work by the Sustainable Design Roundtable, a public-private effort that brought architects, designers, engineers and developers together with state agencies responsible for managing construction at state facilities. The final report of the Roundtable, released December 1, 2006, outlines the need and environmental and fiscal rationale for greening state construction practices, and lays out a minimum standard that builds on the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standard established by the U.S. Green Building Council. The state directive, contained in Executive Office of Administration and Finance (A&F) Bulletin #12, was released earlier this year and was based on the work of the roundtable and recommendations in the final report. The report and A&F Bulletin #12 are at: http://www.mass.gov/envir/Sustainable E-mail: Eric (D O T) Friedman (A T) state (D O T) ma (D O T) us --------------------- Link to "Consume This - Buying That Matters," a new 40-page booklet about sustainable consumption, aimed at 14- to 18-year-olds, from the Canadian Centre for Pollution Prevention (link first seen in the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center bulletin): http://www.c2p2online.com/youth --------------------- Link to the website for "Rock and Wrap It Up," a New York City-based national non-profit organization that recovers leftover food from backstage at rock concerts, and from college cafeterias, sports stadiums and other locations: http://www.rockandwrapitup.org --------------------- Link to an article by Dan Oko in the November/December 2006 Mother Jones magazine about packaging waste from take-out food and fast-food (forwarded by Jim Schrock): http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2006/11/doggie_bag_dilemma ..html --------------------- Link to a job posting for two Program Administrator positions for the City of Bellevue, WA, to work on their commercial conservation programs (recycling and pollution prevention) and to oversee their schools and in-house programs (this posting first seen in the Washington State Recycling Association bulletin): http://www.bellevuewa.gov/HRER/viewjobdetail.asp?iJobNum=602 They will hire both positions from the single pool of applicants. The application deadline is Friday, Jan. 5. The monthly salary range is $4,446 - $6,135. Bellevue is a city of about 120,000 residents located just east of Seattle. --------------------- Excerpted from a 12/31/06 article by Barry Rehfeld in the New York Times: GREEN COMPUTERS BECOMING EASIER TO FIND The Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool, or Epeat, is an electronics rating system available free online at http://www.epeat.net This system, now five months old, is funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and is meant primarily for bulk buyers. But it is useful for individuals, too. Electronics - only computers now, with more products to follow - can achieve ratings of gold, silver or bronze. Ratings are done largely on the honor system, subject to reviews by the Green Electronics Council, a nonprofit group in Portland, Oregon, that maintains the list. Manufacturers score their products against a set of environmental standards, including levels of hazardous substances, energy efficiency and ease of recycling. There are 23 requirements just to win a bronze. More than 300 types of desktops, laptops and monitors have received at least a bronze, and most also have a silver rating, which means that they also meet at least half of 28 optional standards. None of the computers have made it to gold, which means that they would meet all the required standards as well as three-quarters of the optional ones. An NEC monitor made from a corn-based plastic has the top score: 42, just two points shy of the gold standard. Dell, Apple Computer, Hewlett-Packard and Lenovo all have at least one desktop and laptop that qualify for silver. Epeat-rated computers are likely to save buyers money on their electric bills. The EPA estimates that 600,000 megawatts of energy, as well as 13 million pounds of hazardous waste, will be saved over the next five years by the purchase of Epeat-rated computers. Consumers seeking new environmentally-sound computers may also want to consider keeping their existing ones just a while longer, said Diganta Das, a research scientist at the Center for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering at the University of Maryland. There will be a much broader selection of greener computers and other electronics by 2008 because all manufacturers are under pressure to make their products meet hazardous-substance standards that are as high or higher than those of Epeat, he said. The push is coming from new technology and government initiatives. The most important political change came last July, when the European Union issued its Restrictions on Hazardous Substances. This RoHS directive essentially will require all manufacturers and retailers selling their products in the European Union to greatly reduce the presence of six hazards. There is nothing like those standards in the United States, but the directive is nonetheless having an impact here. Wal-Mart Stores, for example, said last spring that it would sell the first laptop compliant with the European standards in the United States: a $700 Toshiba model. Other computer makers are quickly following suit. ---------------------- Link to the new online "Electronics Reuse & Recycling Center," part of the Consumer Reports environmental website, Greener Choices: http://www.greenerchoices.org/electronicsrecycling/el_home.cfm ----------------------- Link to information on new amendments to the State of Connecticut's Solid Waste Management Plan, which emphasize waste prevention (this link first seen in the Waste Business Journal Weekly News Bulletin): http://dep.state.ct.us/wst/solidw/swplan The executive summary of the amended plan notes that Connecticut's long-range vision for solid waste management will now include "shifting from a throwaway society towards a system that reduces the generation and toxicity of trash, and treats wastes as valuable raw materials and energy resources." - end -