Eco-Cycle: Building Zero-Waste Communities
by Collin Dunn, Corvallis, OR, USA on 10. 5.06
Many readers were less than impressed with the all-stick-no-carrot approach of the "pay as you throw" scheme, mentioned yesterday, that may be coming to the UK. Happily, several commenters wrote in with helpful alternative solutions worth a mention. We've already covered RecycleBank, the program that pays you to recycle (instead of charging for garbage, as the UK program would), so we'll concentrate on Eco-Cycle, a Boulder, CO-based initiative to not just recycle more, but create a zero-waste community. By involving businesses, schools, government, retailers, manufacturers and volunteers, they've got ways for everyone to be involved as they encourage and enable more recycling. It isn't as simple as being sure all your empty bottles and cans end up in the right place, though; they're leveraging change from the top down, by working with designers and manufacturers to incorporate more recycled materials and make products more recyclable in a Cradle-to-Cradle-type model. Their services include assistance with hard-to-recycle goods, a Freecycle-type exchange of reusable goods and recycling services for businesses. There's a lot going on here, but going zero-waste isn't particularly easy or simple, and we like the diversity of available resources and services. The more people they can get involved, the more they recycle and the less waste they produce, and we like the sound of that. Eco-Cycle via tipster ecogal
How To Dispose of Toxic Household Waste In Your Own Backyard?
|
The TH Interview: Beth Fetterley of the Urban Ecology Center
|
In Chapel Hill, when I was there, one of the recycling centers had a shed where people could leave unwanted, useable items. One person's trash being another's treasure, and all. Thought that was a great, simple way to encourage reuse. Sadly, thrift stores today (even the charity-run) are so profit-driven that they send tons to the landfill.
The American Red Cross*, for example, gives disaster victims 'cash cards' to buy new stuff, rather than distribute to them the wealth of useable items that well-meaning citizens donate in times of disaster. They say that they do not have the personnel to wash clothes.
Wouldn't you think that say a Katrina survivor with no home or possessions would be willing to put in some time at the laundromat with their lovingly donated clothes, blankets, et al. and the rolls of quarters supplied by a charity?
Likewise, Habitat for Humanity does not use donated used items either. They might sell them at their thrift store for pennies, but I'm not sure that is the best use. Seems that there should be better efforts to REUSE, if our materialistic ways are not curbed.
I understand that storage space is a legitimate issue for organizations, but I see _lots_ of vacant strip malls sitting around. Perhaps local municipalities could dedicate some of their landfill budgets to the temporary/interim rental of such buildings. And, certainly there are plenty of volunteers who could open the free store once per week.
The Goodwill and Salvation Army thrift shops are not for the poor. Having facilities that could provide more for the needy while at the same time keeping less from the landfills is a desirable goal. Two benefits for the price of one is still a good value in my book.
[abbreviated, believe it or not, diatribe]
There are probably legal concerns with used items. In this day and age of entitlement, someone would not hesitate to sue.
There are probably legal concerns with used items. In this day and age of entitlement, someone would not hesitate to sue.
Of course. That's why Goodwill, the Salvation Army, used car dealers, real estate agents, and countless other entities selling used items have been sued out of business.
Excellent point.
Well beyond the sarcasm and hiding behind an Anonymous tag, selling used items is different than giving used items.
Well beyond the sarcasm and hiding behind an Anonymous tag
Ad Hominem
selling used items is different than giving used items
Really? Tell us how, counselor. Refer to actual law. So, for example, if I put a couch on the corner that says "free" I'll be likely to be sued?
As to the legal concerns: See example Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act.
Liability concerns have been an issue with people/companies (e.g., restaurants, grocery stores) wanting to donate prepared and otherwise "unused" food to homeless shelters, rescue missions, and such. The Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act (Public PUBLIC LAW 104-210) 'removes' the liability from donors. See http://www.usda.gov/news/pubs/gleaning/appc.htm.
(Whenever possible, I take the tons of leftover food from our film sets to my local rescue mission.)
Can't recall if there is a similar act for non-food items (will investigate), but certainly if such an act can be created to apply for food, it can be created to apply to more inocuous items such as clothing, home improvement items, etc.
How can we ever have a zero waste community when humans must excrete the remnants of what they consume? The collective consumption of one family over a month's time is extraordinary. How much effort can we expend to reduce our carbon footprint without being consumed by the idea and at some future point, causing wide-spread eating and pyshological problems?