WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE
|
|
|
|
WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE |
|
01 Feb 07 - bank; Target; water; blog; food; job; design; California; bags; catalogs
** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ** -- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition -------- Forum archive: http://www.nwpcarchive.org --------------------- From Julie Haas-Wajdowicz, City of Antioch, environmental resources, Antioch, CA, responding to the 1/24/07 news item about some banks installing new automated teller machines (ATMs) that do not require an envelope for deposits: I recently used one of the envelope-free Wells Fargo ATMs. It was wonderful. You have the option of printing out a receipt that shows a mini version of the scanned checks. There is very little material paper used at all to print the receipt. Not to mention that you have to choose the receipt; it is not automatic. Oh, the little steps forward that put a smile on my face! E-mail: jhaaswajdowicz [ AT ] ci [ DOT ] antioch [ DOT ] ca [ DOT ] us --------------------- From Maggie Clarke, environmental consultant, New York City: I was appalled to find at the local Target store, in the Kingsbridge section of the Bronx, that when I wanted to buy the floor model (the last one in the store) of two different pieces of furniture - nice solid wood, glass, dovetail joints, reasonable price - that the store manager was adamant that Target has a policy 1) not to sell such furniture, and 2) to destroy this furniture before disposing of it. Something to do with liability? Can we start a campaign to get them to change this? The manager said something illogical like, what would happen if the customer brought the piece back? We have Materials for the Arts, Furnish a Future, and numerous thrift stores that would probably love to have all this furniture. Who knows what, besides furniture, that this crazy policy applies to? Multiply this by all the Target stores in the country and you see how much is being wasted. E-mail: mclarke [ AT ] hunter [ DOT ] cuny [ DOT ] edu -------------------- The next three postings are in response to the 1/24/07 query from Massachusetts, about people's experiences with tankless water heaters. -------------------- From Rick Hlavka, Green Solutions, South Prairie, WA: We installed a Bosch 250 SX in a new house that we moved into a few months ago (a propane-fired tankless unit) and have had a LOT of problems with it. Recently Bosch informed my wife that they will no longer honor the warranty on it. It sounds like the person asking about these is where I was a few years ago, struggling with the question about whether it was worth it to buy a tankless water heater. I finally decided to bite the bullet and pay the extra money for a tankless unit, not realizing at the time that the initial purchase price was only the start of the extra expenses. If you go tankless, you will also need a special stainless steel venting system that will cost $300 or more (at least for the Bosch, not sure about other brands). And if you have someone else install it, be prepared to pay a lot for that, somewhere between $700 and $1,000 (or more, depending on what your local companies charge). If you install it yourself, be prepared for a headache there - the Bosch unit has a whole page of rules and measurements about where the exhaust vent can go. And if you ever need service work on it, be prepared to lose another arm and a leg. We called a local plumbing company at one point to come and look at ours to try to resolve the problems it was having, and their initial response was that it would cost $38 to have someone come out and give us a quote to fix it. Later they called back to say that they had made a mistake and because it was a tankless unit, it would cost $180 to have someone come out and run a "diagnostic" on it to determine what was wrong (not to actually fix it, mind you, just to run some tests). If I could do it over, I would stick with a regular unit. There's no way the tankless unit will ever pay for it itself in terms of energy savings. I think the regular units have improved their energy performance lately, and it's easy to believe they can compete with the tankless units (our unit blows out a lot of really hot air when it's running; it's easy to imagine a regular unit doing a better job of heat recovery). And a regular unit will still provide hot water (for however many gallons are in the tank) during power outages, which have been all too frequent here lately. E-mail: rick [A T] green-solutions [D O T] biz --------------------- From Jim Neely, King County Solid Waste Division, Seattle, WA: Tankless water heaters are used mainly in warmer climates where the supply water is not as cold. It takes a lot of energy to heat water. E-mail: james (DOT) neely (AT) metrokc (DOT) gov --------------------- From Renee Kimball, waste reduction advocate, Portland, OR: Rheem (http://waterheating.rheem.com) makes an excellent tankless water heater. Not cheap, and parts must be shipped in, but it is very reliable and long-lasting. The Vipassana Meditation Center in Onalaska, Washington, has heavily used one for several years now. E-mail: Renee ( AT ) EnufWaste ( DOT ) com --------------------- From Tom Watson, King County Solid Waste Division, Seattle, WA, and the National Waste Prevention Coalition: As part of our King County EcoConsumer project, we have a new EcoConsumer blog (web log, or journal), at http://www.KCecoconsumer.com We have launched this blog in hopes of reaching more people. I usually post to it several times a week. If you get a chance to take a look at it, please let me know if you have any comments or suggestions. Feel free to link to any material on the blog, or put it up on your own website (with attribution). Some of you might be interested in the EcoConsumer Bill of Rights, which is under the Eco Lists category. Thanks! E-mail: tom ( DOT ) watson ( AT ) metrokc ( DOT ) gov --------------------- Excerpted from a message from Bonnie Lane Webber, Sierra Club National Sustainable Consumption Committee: In response to the mention in the Forum last October about "Six Arguments for A Greener Diet," I would like to put a plug in for "The True Cost of Food," a 15-minute animated video produced by the Sierra Club National Sustainable Consumption Committee, telling of the environmental problems resulting from the way agribusiness is raising our food. It encourages people to buy local or organic food and to eat less meat, with the meat they eat being grass-fed and pasture-raised. It is an educational tool that can be used to introduce discussions of food issues. You can download a discussion guide for the video on the project's website at: http://www.truecostoffood.org The video is available in DVD or VHS by writing to: truecostoffood [ A T ] aol [ D O T ] com E-mail: BLANEWEBER [A T] aol [D O T] com --------------------- Link to a job posting for a Green Building Program Manager in the City of Portland's Office of Sustainable Development, Portland, OR (from the Association of Oregon Recyclers listserv): http://www.ci.portland.or.us/jobs/07-036/07-036.htm Salary range is $4,763 - $6,359 per month. Deadline for applications is Feb. 20, 2007. --------------------- Link to information on the Lifecycle Building Challenge (forwarded by Julie Rhodes): http://www.lifecyclebuilding.org This is a national green building design competition for students and professionals. Sponsoring partners are the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the American Institute of Architects, the Building Materials Reuse Association, and the West Coast Green Conference. The deadlines are 4/15/07 for registration and 5/15/07 for submitting a design. All design entries must by submitted in electronic format, via e-mail. There is no registration fee. --------------------- From Rachelle Tarver, California Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento, CA: REUSE GRANTS OFFERED FOR CALIFORNIA AGENCIES The California Integrated Waste Management Board has allocated $250,000 for the fiscal year 2007/08 cycle of its Reuse Assistance Grants, to provide incentives for local public agencies to establish new or expanded reuse opportunities. All California cities, counties, and regional agencies mandated to have waste reduction programs are eligible to apply individually, and may partner with businesses or non-profits. Applications are due March 23, 2007. For more information, or to download the application, visit: www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Reuse/Grants E-mail: RTarver [ A T ] CIWMB [ D O T ] ca [ D O T ] gov --------------------- Excerpted from an article by Heather Knight in the 1/30/07 San Francisco Chronicle: SAN FRANCISCO GROCERS CLAIM REDUCTION IN PLASTIC BAG USE Thirty-two supermarkets in San Francisco used 7.6 million fewer plastic grocery bags in 2006 than they did the year before, according to figures released Jan. 29 by the California Grocers Association. City Hall and the supermarkets agreed in 2005 to attempt to reduce the number of plastic bags used by 10 million in 2006. The bags are blamed for killing marine life, gumming up recycling machines and taking up too much space in landfills. Earlier this month, the agreement appeared to have fallen apart because the supermarkets had failed to release bag usage numbers by Dec. 31, which was required in the agreement. Peter Larkin, president of the grocers association, said Monday that it simply took longer than anticipated to comply - and that the 7.6 million reduction proves the effort is succeeding. "These numbers underscore how successful it was," Larkin said. "We think the companies that participated should be applauded for what they have done." Not everybody at City Hall was enthusiastic, though. Jared Blumenfeld, director of San Francisco's Department of the Environment, said that the city has hired an independent consulting firm to verify the numbers and that the grocers association jumped the gun by releasing the figures on its own. "It just seems a little disingenuous," Blumenfeld said. "I have no idea if that 7.6 million number is real. It could be 3 million or 11 million." While the association reported that 7.6 million fewer plastic bags were handed out to customers at the 32 supermarkets, it did not disclose the total number of bags being used at those stores because the markets consider that information to be a trade secret. The reported reduction of 7.6 million bags fell 2.4 million short of the goal set by the supermarkets and the city. Larkin said that the goal was set when it was hoped that all 57 supermarkets in the city would participate. Some have closed down and others failed to sign the voluntary agreement, so only 32 stores actually wound up participating, Larkin said. The grocers association successfully pushed last year for a state law prohibiting cities from passing ordinances to require the counting of grocery bags or from taxing their usage, which has also been considered in San Francisco. When the agreement appeared to break down last week, supervisors and members of Mayor Gavin Newsom's administration said they would seek a law requiring that all grocery bags used within city limits be compostable. Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who called last week for a City Hall hearing on the matter, said the bag numbers released Monday wouldn't necessarily stop them from pursuing that idea. "We're talking about a long-term sustainable practice, not a year-to-year agreement that we have to rely on lobbyists and corporations to fulfill based on the honor system," Mirkarimi said. Larkin said the city should come up with a system to recycle grocery bags and should require other merchants - including drugstores, dry cleaners and take-out restaurants - to reduce the number of plastic bags they use, too. --------------------- Excerpted from an article by Suzanne Barlyn (in the "Cranky Consumer" column) in the 2/1/07 Wall Street Journal (forwarded by Susan Kinsella): WANT TO STOP THE BARRAGE OF CATALOGS IN THE MAIL? CALLING IS BEST As the 2006 holiday catalog blitz winded down, we decided to end the ridiculous cycle of receiving and recycling. Six weeks ago, we contacted five major catalog merchants to request they stop our catalogs. We think we're finally home-free, but it's hard to tell. It has required patience. Last summer, we wrote to the Mail Preference Service, sponsored by the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) in New York, which assists consumers with stemming junk mail. Although the bulk of it eventually stopped, we continued to receive catalogs through the holiday season from retailers we had ordered from in the past. The Mail Preference Service doesn't restrict companies from contacting existing customers, a DMA representative says. Retailers generally continue mailing catalogs to consumers who have ordered during the previous 12 to 18 months, and they may sometimes extend the period to include holiday mailings. Direct marketing remains an important strategy for retailers, despite the growth of online sales. Retailers spent $20 billion on catalog marketing during 2006, an increase of 35 percent from $14.8 billion in 2001, according to DMA. "Many people thought that shopping online would mean the death of catalogs," says John A. Greco Jr., DMA president and chief executive. "Instead, we've seen just the opposite." The industry mailed 19.1 billion catalogs in 2005, according to the most-recent available figures from DMA. To stop retailers from sending us catalogs, we browsed their Web sites and called their toll-free numbers. We learned that calling is the best - and often the only - way to make the request. Web site options for stopping the mailings are tough to find - if they exist at all. A quick review of other retailers' Web sites largely confirmed the findings in our test. At best, we found directions on the L.L. Bean Web site for stopping catalogs via e-mail and phone. We should have called retailers while having a recent catalog on hand. The mailing label contains a customer number that phone representatives use to quickly access your address records. In hindsight, we should have created a master list of our customer numbers to make calling more efficient. We then had to wait about six weeks, while catalogs that were perhaps at the printer, or awaiting delivery, made their way to our home. One day, after thinking we had finally received our last catalog, we opened our mailbox and discovered five. No retailer stuffed our mailbox with more catalogs than Victoria's Secret. The company says it mails 400 million catalogs to consumers annually. We found a link buried online that allowed us to "reduce mailings" but not eliminate them. A recording that answered our call to the toll-free line said, "Due to the overwhelming response to our latest catalog, we're experiencing delays in answering your call" and suggested we visit the Web site. The automated menu offered a prompt for catalog requests and address changes, but none for stopping our catalogs. We pressed "zero" to reach a live person. The catalogs finally stopped a few weeks later. We received three Victoria's Secret titles on just one day during the waiting period, for a total of six following our request. The company didn't respond to requests for comment on the issue of why we received six catalogs. We poked around the L.L. Bean Web site for information about stopping our catalogs, and found directions to call, write or email. When we called, a representative asked if we wanted to stop some or all of the company's catalogs. We had been receiving the company's seasonal clothing catalogs and specialty titles, such as L.L. Bean Traveler and L.L. Bean Home. The phone representative explained that it would "take awhile" for our catalogs to stop completely. Five L.L. Bean catalogs arrived during the six-week period, including two on one day. L.L. Bean says that a lapse of many weeks between the request and cessation of catalogs is normal, because of the printing and mailing processes. L.L. Bean sends out 250 million catalogs a year. It was easy to order catalogs through the customer service page of Eddie Bauer's Web site, but we couldn't figure out how to stop ours from arriving. When a recording on the toll-free line said to hold or leave a message, we chose to hold. A representative answered a few minutes later and asked for our identification number, but we didn't know it, because we threw out our most recent Eddie Bauer catalog. The representative finally dug up our name in the database. We received two catalogs after the call, including one this past week. There was a "catalog request" link on the Pottery Barn Web site, but we couldn't find a "catalog cancellation" link. When we called, a conscientious representative seemed to study our database entry as she spoke to us and assured us that "now you will be removed." Only one more Pottery Barn catalog arrived 12 days after our call. The customer-service link at the Lands' End Web site brought us to a site map, but we couldn't find a way to stop our catalogs. When we searched for the term "catalog," the site directed us to a link for ordering one. A representative at the toll-free number asked for our customer number when we called, which we didn't have, and our reason for requesting the stop. "We don't need them," we explained. "We shop online." Our recent calls to manufacturers and our request to the Direct Marketing Association six months ago seem to have significantly reduced the huge pile of unread mail that arrived in our mailbox daily - at least for now. But we'll be more careful when we order from online retailers who also sell through catalogs. We're waiting for the day when our favorite retailers ask during online checkout whether we want to receive catalogs. An option to click "no" would spare us innumerable headaches and treks down the driveway to our recycling bin. In the meantime, we'll be on the phone quickly, with our customer number in hand, whenever catalogs land in our mailbox. We'll be vigilant about deleting our names from mailing lists, before the catalog floodgates open again. ----------------- Note from Tom: The 1/24/07 Forum mentioned Home Depot's new Eco Options website. The link for that website given in that posting no longer works directly. Try this link instead: http://www.homedepot.com/ecooptions - end - |
