From: matus [matus@snet.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 11:45 PM
To: matus@snet.net
Subject: MFD List - N.Y.C recycling program ended by Mayor

(There are many arguments flying about I have come across lately about the
value of recycling.  Opponents say that in some instances the energy used to
recapture the used goods, re-process it, and re-enter into circulation is
actually greater than the energy needed to actually produce the good from
raw resources.  The amount of energy needed is, of course, not the only
variable to consider, but when that energy is in the form of large gas
guzzling trucks carting around trash labeled as 'recyclables' all day and
producing CO2 emissions (the greenhouse gas of primary concern to
environmentalists these days) Then some flags should be raised and a more
careful analysis made.  Take, for example, the production of a more energy
efficient washing machine.  The effort and energy that may go into designing
a more efficient washing machine may actually exceed the life span energy
savings of the machine over conventional models.  Is it reasonable to
produce more efficient machines when this is the case then?  Similarly, the
energy spent in some recycling programs may do more *harm* to the
environment than good.  This should be determined on a case by case basis,
and it is likely that aluminum recycling will always be around, since
processing the bauxite ore which aluminum is produced from is quite energy
intensive.  Other recyclables, however, like paper and plastic, are less
clear in the benefits.  New York Mayor Bloomberg, as this article relates,
recently pulled the plug on the glass and plastic recycling program in NYC.
Its interesting to note that this article mentions that much of it was
ending up in a landfill anyway.  From a scientific and objective standpoint,
all materials can and likely will be recycled.  There is a common claim that
we are 'running out' of resources, such as metals and manufactured goods,
but these resources only go to one of two places, in circulation as a
useable product, or trashed in a junk heap.  Eventually as the expensive of
digging deeper exceeds the cost to re-process existing waste, we will see
massive industrial recycling centers which essentially melt all waste into
its constituent atoms, separate it, and re-use.  The structure of the atoms
never change, only their patterns.  Which means resources are never truly
'used up' they only ever require an application of energy to be made in a
usable form again.  The only exception to this, of course, is Nuclear
transformations, which actually become new elements. Chemical reactions are
reversible, nuclear ones are not. - Mike)

1. Recycled Spin

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is taking his own stab at heroism,
puncturing the tired myth that recycling programs save money. Bloomberg
announced that he is killing the plastic and glass components of the city's
recycling program in order to save his stressed budget $40 million a year.

Recycling programs for paper and metal will continue -- for now.

"In the case of plastic and glass, the fact of the matter was that it was
phenomenally expensive and most of it ended up being dumped in a landfill
anyway," the mayor said. "The paper recycling has worked for a long time,and
we believe that the metal recycling will certainly pay for itself."

Predictably, unionized workers in the recycling industry howled that the
changes would cost 200 of the city's 1,000 recycling jobs.

Recycling has long been the nation's civic religion, and the act of sorting
through one's garbage has become an act of contrition for living too well.
But even with all the donated labor from homeowners, hired hands, and
preschoolers, the economics of recycling remain dicey.

The truth is, well-designed, well-run landfills area a better deal for all
concerned.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/06/30/newyork.recycling.ap/index.html

N.Y. recycling rollback 'unprecedented'
June 30, 2002 Posted: 2:05 PM EDT (1805 GMT)

NEW YORK (AP) -- The nation's largest city is eliminating glass and plastics
from its recycling program on Monday in what recycling advocates say is the
first significant rollback of such a program in the United States.

"No other big cities have taken a step back like this, and I'm not even
familiar with any smaller cities taking out elements of their recycling
programs," said Laura Haight, senior environmental associate of the New York
Public Interest Research Group.

"It's unprecedented," she said. "People across the country are looking very
closely at this."

Starting Monday, sanitation workers will collect only paper and metal for
recycling.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg says the change will save the deficit-troubled city
$40 million in the coming fiscal year.

"In the case of plastic and glass, the fact of the matter was that it was
phenomenally expensive and most of it ended up being dumped in a landfill
anyway," the mayor said. "The paper recycling has worked for a long time,
and we believe that the metal recycling will certainly pay for itself."

Critics say the change threatens the future of a program that took more than
a decade to establish.

Vicente Alba, a spokesman for Local 108, a union representing workers in the
city's private recycling industry, said the change will cost more than 200
of the city's 1,000 private recycling jobs. One plant already has said it
will close, he said.

Bloomberg, facing a multibillion-dollar city budget deficit, originally
proposed a suspension of all recycling except for paper.

Instead, his final budget, which seeks to close the deficit through various
cost-cutting and revenue-generating moves, eliminated only plastic and
glass.

The plastics recycling will be suspended for at least one year and glass
recycling for two while the city examines whether the labor-intensive
recycling program can be made more cost-effective.

"Our commitment to recycling is just as strong as ever," Bloomberg said.
"We're just trying to be practical."

www.matus1976.com - Article archives