1 / 42

Disposal By Whatever Method or Name Still Stinks Of Wasted Resources

Disposal By Whatever Method or Name Still Stinks Of Wasted Resources. Dr. Jeffrey Morris Sound Resource Management - Seattle jeff.morris@zerowaste.com 206-599-6734 SWANA Winter 2005 Technical Symposia. Purpose of presentation.

jenis
Download Presentation

Disposal By Whatever Method or Name Still Stinks Of Wasted Resources

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Disposal By Whatever Method or NameStill Stinks Of Wasted Resources Dr. Jeffrey Morris Sound Resource Management - Seattle jeff.morris@zerowaste.com 206-599-6734 SWANA Winter 2005 Technical Symposia

  2. Purpose of presentation • Outline life cycle analysis results to show pollution prevention/resource conservation benefits of recycling (and waste reduction) • Explain indexing of pollutant impacts • Examine the costs of diversion • Examine the non-market economic value of pollution prevention/resource conservation • Discuss ending subsidies for wasting vs. subsidizing waste reduction & recycling • Outline methods for subsidizing recycling

  3. Environmental impacts of recycling in San Luis Obispo (SLO) County compared to landfill disposal with landfill gas (LFG) collection and energy generation

  4. Energy Use -- Resource Extraction, Resource Refining & Product Manufacturing

  5. Total Energy Usage: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  6. Net Energy Usage: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  7. Net Greenhouse Gas: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  8. Indexing of pollutants • Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) covers about 650 chemicals and chemical categories • There are 50,000 or 75,000 or more chemicals in use in the economy • Indexing releases of these chemicals according to their environmental impacts vastly simplifies the problem of interpreting pollutant release data • Example – global warming is one environmental impact category and is indexed by carbon or CO2: CO2 =1, CH4 = 23, N2O = 296; CF4 = 5,700, CFC-12 = 10,600. • Similar indexing for acid rain, nutrification, asthma and lung cancer, human toxicity; ecological toxicity, ozone depletion, smog, etc.

  9. Net Acidification: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  10. Net Eutrophication: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  11. Net DALYs: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  12. Net Human Toxicity: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  13. Net Ecotoxicity: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  14. Environmental impacts of recycling in San Luis Obispo (SLO) County compared to hypothetical waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration

  15. Net Energy Usage: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  16. Net Greenhouse Gas: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  17. Net Acidification: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  18. Net Eutrophication: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  19. Net DALYs: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  20. Net Human Toxicity: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  21. Net Ecotoxicity: SLO RLC vs. TLC

  22. Environmental impacts of recycling in four regions of Washington State compared to landfill disposal with LFG flaring and to waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration

  23. Disposal methods in WA regions • Urban East – 90% waste-to-energy incineration • All Other Regions – 100% landfill • Landfill energy/environmental impact calculations assume 75% methane gas capture and flaring; in fact smaller, older landfills in WA do not have landfill gas capture systems. Also, 75% may be too high for actual landfill lifetime methane capture rate at most landfills.

  24. Net Energy Use Reductions From Curbside Recycling In Washington State

  25. Net Greenhouse Gas Reductions From Curbside Recycling In Washington State

  26. Net Acid Gas Reductions From Curbside Recycling In Washington State

  27. Net Eutrophication Reductions FromCurbside Recycling In Washington State

  28. Net Human Toxicity Potential Reductions From Curbside Recycling In Washington

  29. Net costs of curbside recycling in four regions of Washington State

  30. Curbside Recycling Costs Vs. Avoided Disposal Costs In Washington State

  31. Curbside recycling costs & revenuesin four regions of Washington State • Curbside recycling costs = $173 to $265/ton • Recycling market revenues averaged $70 to $80/ton over past five years • Avoided disposal costs = $32 to $77/ton • Curbside costs = $25 to $70/ton, net of market revenues and net of avoided disposal costs, for programs collecting all recyclable materials. • Curbside costs = $65 to $140 for programs not collecting all materials.

  32. Average Value Per Ton For Puget Sound Curbside Recyclables

  33. Unbleached Softwood Kraft Pulp vs. Recycled Cardboard

  34. Polyethylene Terephthalate Pellets vs. Recycled PET Bottles

  35. Aluminum Ingot vs. Recycled Cans

  36. Economic value of pollution prevention and resource conservation benefits of recycling

  37. Curbside Recycling Costs Vs. Avoided Disposal Costs & CO2 Offsets

  38. Economic Value Of Pollution Reductions From Recycling In San Luis Obispo

  39. SO2 Emissions Allowances Average Monthly Spot Market Prices

  40. End subsidies for wasting or subsidize recycling?

  41. Types of subsidies for wasting • Direct - subsidies (local, national and international) • Direct - tax breaks • Direct - security, military and insurance services at low or no cost • Indirect - cheaper energy due to subsidies/tax breaks for energy production • Indirect – free disposal of pollutants to air, land and water

  42. Potential solutions • End subsidies for wasting • Direct subsidies for recycling – e.g., Bundle recycling costs into garbage fees or provide direct payments for tons recycled • Bundle recycling costs into product prices – deposit/refund and other EPR systems • Internalize pollution costs in either garbage costs or virgin materials costs – e.g., greenhouse gas reduction credits for recycling or organics diversion programs

More Related