Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Md Troopers Assoc #20 & Westminster Md Fire Dept Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Showing posts with label Enviro Solid Waste Man Recycling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Enviro Solid Waste Man Recycling. Show all posts

Monday, March 17, 2008

20080317 Recent columns on the future of Solid Waste Management in Carroll and Frederick Counties


Recent columns on the future of Solid Waste Management in Carroll and Frederick Counties

March 17, 2008

Folks have asked me where they may find my columns on the current discussions in Frederick and Carroll Counties about the future approach to solid waste management – trash…

Recently I’ve written five columns on the future of solid waste management in Frederick and Carroll Counties. Two have appeared in The Tentacle. Two have appeared in the Westminster Eagle and one has appeared in The Sunday Carroll Eagle.

In the Westminster Eagle:

Trouble with trash is nothing new, but the technology may be

One of the difficult decisions currently facing our community is the trouble with trash.

When the last major decision occurred in 1996 and 1997, I was chair of the county's Environmental Affairs Advisory Board.

At that time, I was impressed with the combination of an aggressive recycling program... [Read full story]


Don't let 'wrap rage' leave you in stitches

It's been two months since Christmas and, with any luck and the power of prayer, perhaps you have been able to break free most of your family's gifts from the dreaded, adult proof, clamshell plastic "blister" packaging.

This oppression of over-packaging is not only a leading cause of holiday depre... [Read full story]

*****

In The Tentacle:

March 6, 2008

Making Trash Go Away – Part 2

Kevin E. Dayhoff

The February 26th joint meeting between Frederick and Carroll County over how to make trash go away came after two years of discussions and deliberations resulting from the Frederick County commissioners’ adoption of Resolution 06-05, on February 16, 2006.

March 5, 2008

Making Trash Go Away – Part One

Kevin E. Dayhoff

On February 26, the Frederick and Carroll County commissioners met to discuss how to make a combined 1,100 tons of trash-a-day go away.

In The Sunday Carroll Eagle:

20080309 The Sunday Carroll Eagle: “History will know us by our trash”

Sunday Carroll Eagle

History will know us by our trash

Sunday Carroll Eagle March 9, 2008 by Kevin Dayhoff

I cannot find my March 9th, 2008 Sunday Carroll Eagle column on the Westminster Eagle web site.

Pasted below, please find the column as it was written. It is my understanding that the column was altered for publication…

Ever since the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970, many of us has felt that the best management approach to solid waste was source reduction and recycling. It would take 18 long years to get the Maryland Recycling Act passed in 1988. That legislation required a recycling rate of 20 percent.

Twenty years later, getting the recycling rate increased is still illusive. In 1998, on the 10-year anniversary of the law, the Baltimore Sun ran a lengthy analysis in which the Maryland General Assembly member who spearheaded the recycling initiative, Montgomery County Sen. Brian Frosh, admitted “that recycling has been costlier than expected. His 1988 bill predicted significant cost savings…”

Read the rest of the column here: 20080309 The Sunday Carroll Eagle: “History will know us by our trash”

_____

For more posts on Solid Waste Management on Soundtrack click on:

Environmentalism Solid Waste Management Waste to Energy

Environmentalism Solid Waste Management Recycling

Environmentalism Solid Waste Management

####

20080317 Recent columns on the future of Solid Waste Management in Carroll and Frederick Counties

20080309 The Sunday Carroll Eagle: “History will know us by our trash”


Sunday Carroll Eagle

History will know us by our trash

Sunday Carroll Eagle March 9, 2008 by Kevin Dayhoff

Folks have asked me where they may find my March 9th, 2008 Sunday Carroll Eagle column... Well... I cannot find it on the Westminster Eagle web site...

Sooo... Pasted below, please find the column as it was written. It is my understanding that the column was altered for publication…

Ever since the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970, many of us has felt that the best management approach to solid waste was source reduction and recycling. It would take 18 long years to get the Maryland Recycling Act passed in 1988. That legislation required a recycling rate of 20 percent.

Twenty years later, getting the recycling rate increased is still illusive. In 1998, on the 10-year anniversary of the law, the Baltimore Sun ran a lengthy analysis in which the Maryland General Assembly member who spearheaded the recycling initiative, Montgomery County Sen. Brian Frosh, admitted “that recycling has been costlier than expected. His 1988 bill predicted significant cost savings…”

Later in the article, the $250 million cost of recycling 2.5 million tons was compared to the $83 million it would’ve cost to landfill it instead. The rest of the article went downhill from there.

Those of us who are opposed to landfilling were less than pleased. Four decades after the first Earth Day, the recycling rate in Carroll County is only around 30 percent.

Meanwhile, on May 29, 1997, Commissioners Donald Dell and Richard Yates voted to transfer the trash out of the county. Commissioner Ben Brown wanted - as many of us wanted - to build a co-composting facility.

This decision came after thirteen years of study which began in 1984 when Carroll, Frederick, and Howard County investigated “building a regional waste-to-energy incinerator,” according to an old press clipping. The commissioners opted instead to build another landfill.

In subsequent research, on a June 17, 1993 visit to the Lancaster County waste-to-energy plant, one of the fascinating components of the operation was mining an existing landfill.

After two years of research, on April 21, 1994, a second “Waste-to-Energy Committee” rejected building an incinerator. The 23 members “instead recommend(ed) aggressive recycling programs… to extend the life” of the landfills.

That was followed on April 24, 1996, when Mike Evans, the Carroll County director of public works first warned the Environmental Affairs Advisory Board (EAAB) that Northern Landfill, which began operations in December 1988 was going to run out of capacity in 15 to 20 years. It takes 10 years to site locate, permit and build a landfill.

The EAAB, for which I was chair at the time, exhausting investigated increasing our recycling rate, co-composting, landfilling, waste-to-energy and charging for trash pickup by weight. The research involved a number of field trips, including a trip to the co-composting facility in Sevierville, TN.

Nevertheless, in spite of our best efforts, our investigation could not justify the economic feasibility of co-composting or convince us that an incinerator would not cause more problems than it solved.

Fast forward to today and the European Union has the strictest environmental regulations in the world. In several EU countries, landfilling has been discontinued in lieu of a waste-to-energy and recycling interactive waste management.

It was noted in a German Federal Ministry for the Environment study released in September 2005: “In the eighties of the previous century, waste incineration plants came to be the symbol of environmental contamination… Today, more than half of all household waste (55%) is recycled… Since June 1, 2005, untreated waste is no longer landfilled. And because of stringent regulations waste incineration plants are no longer significant in terms of emissions of dioxins, dust, and heavy metals…”

Much of the opposition to waste-to-energy these days is based on information that is decades out of date.

Meanwhile many of us are concerned that we cannot increase our recycling rate quickly enough to avoid the costly and environmentally suspect method of hauling our trash to Virginia and throwing it in a hole.

Nevertheless, hopefully Northern Landfill is the last trash dump in the county’s history.

In consideration of the ability to generate and sell electricity and the opportunity to mine all our existing landfills and restore them to a productive use - -waste-to-energy appears to be today’s worthiest trash management option.

One of the earliest references to a landfill in Carroll County is when the Bark Hill landfill began operations in 1892 near Uniontown. The county it over in 1972 and closed it in 1981.

Throughout history there have been around 30 trash disposal sites in Carroll County. How many can you name? What memories do you have of getting rid of trash years ago? How many folks remember one of the first trash hauling companies in Carroll County, G. L. Cubbage?

E-mail me your memories and we’ll throw your name in a hat and draw one for a famous Sunday Carroll Eagle coffee mug. You can use it instead of a throwaway cup and avoid contributing to the trouble with trash.

When Kevin Dayhoff is not recycling, he can be reached at: kdayhoff at carr.org

####

Footnote:

The Sunday Carroll Eagle: October 28, 2007 - On October 28th, 2007 the publication for which I write, The Westminster Eagle and The Eldersburg Eagle, (which is published by Patuxent Newspapers and owned by Baltimore Sun); took over the Carroll County section of the Baltimore Sun.

“The Sunday Carroll Eagle ” is inserted into the newspaper for distribution in Carroll County. For more information, please contact:

Mr. Jim Joyner, Editor, The Westminster Eagle

121 East Main Street

Westminster, MD 21157

(410) 386-0334 ext. 5004

Jjoyner AT Patuxent DOT com

For more posts on “Soundtrack” click on: Sunday Carroll Eagle

http://kevindayhoff.blogspot.com/search/label/Sunday%20Carroll%20Eagle

20071028 The Sunday Carroll Eagle introduction

http://kevindayhoff.blogspot.com/2007/10/20071028-sunday-carroll-eagle.html

Also see: Monday, October 22, 2007: 20071021 Baltimore Sun: “To our readers”

http://kevindayhoff.blogspot.com/2007/10/20071021-baltimore-sun-to-our-readers.html

Friday, March 07, 2008

20080306 Feedback on my columns about recycling and solid waste management


Feedback on my columns about recycling and solid waste management

March 6th, 2008

A colleague emailed me the other day with the following feedback on my columns advocating recycling as the ultimate solution to solid waste management in Carroll County.

They wrote:

Nice read on trash. I was very interested in your take regarding recycling. Do you believe that we have done a notable job over the last 12 years of improving our recycling efforts in Carroll County? I think our campaign (countywide) has been minimal. I wonder what it would be like to have a someone with “fire in their belly” ( a recycling czar, so to speak). Give that person one to two years and a charge to increase recycling and initiate programs that promote reduction and reuse. What do you think about that?

After I sent the following, I called this person up and reiterated, that above and beyond whatever artistic licenses I took with my response; that yes indeed, Carroll County needs a person on staff to take the lead on increasing our recycling rate in Carroll County and then I emphasized that it needs to be the right person.

After the initial feedback from folks who sorta–kinda “questioned” recycling, many folks got back with me to say that I made my point and reaction since has been favorable.

Anyway, pasted below is my response. Please enjoy…

_____

March 5th, 2008

Ever since the 1988 Maryland Recycling Act, which mandated a 20 percent recycling rate; increasing the recycling rate has been a tough nut everywhere. Sure, there is always an anomaly here or there that demonstrates great success. It is almost always an example for which many Carroll Countians cannot relate.

Feedback from some readers is that they don’t care what California is doing, they’re against it.

In the Sunday Eagle column I am on deadline for as I keyboard, I note that Germany, with the strictest environmental regulations in the world, only has a recycling rate of 55%.

In a German Federal Ministry for the Environment study in September 2005, it reported, in part: “In the eighties of the previous century, waste incineration plants came to be the symbol of environmental contamination… Today, more than half of all household waste (55%) is recycled… Since June 1, 2005, untreated waste is no longer landfilled. And because of stringent regulations waste incineration plants are no longer significant in terms of emissions of dioxins, dust, and heavy metals…”

Besides, from 1988 to 1998, recycling was so cost prohibitive that many jurisdictions simply could not afford to maintain an appropriate recycling initiative. Bear in mind, it has taken us four decades, since the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970, to get our rate to 30 percent.

Let’s re-begin with a tenor and a tone about how well we’ve done, now let’s improve upon it; and here’s some pragmatic, practical, real-life ways you can help.

Of course, one of the drivers in the near future could be the municipalities. Those jurisdictions are closer to their citizens and the increased tipping fees will be a great incentive. That said, what is the incentive for folks outside the town limits?

A “recycling Czar?” It needs to be the correct person… and a different approach…

The anecdotal feedback that I have received from last week’s column is that the current condescending, arrogant, preachy, breathless, and emotional advocacy for composting and recycling is paradoxically turning folks off.

One person told me that watching the environmental advocacy on Ch 24 is like inviting their ex-wife into their living room to screech at him about how flawed he is, with no hope of redemption.

The numbing repetition of claims of doom and gloom, followed by claims and counter-claims has created uncertainty to the point that folks are throwing up their arms in despair. Folks have told me that the only truth they know is that their taxes just got raised, they can’t afford to put gas in the car or pay to heat their homes, there worried about their job security, and commuting is from hell.

Then they said: “You’re now going to jack me up over whether or not I put my trash in the correct container? Or I’m supposed to go put on a pair of overhauls and run a compost pile in my back yard and save the world – get out of my face, I’m late to go pick up my kids.”

It’s analogous to the guy who told he never thought much about the airport until he saw the folks who are against it in action and now he wholeheartedly supports expanding the airport.

It’s got to be the right person. I need someone with a NASCAR tattoo on one arm, and an American flag on the other, a pick-up truck with a gun rack, and a cigarette dangling out of his mouth to share with folks in Carroll County that recycling is American and not some alternative agenda of Code Pink.

After I file my next column, it will be my fifth column in a row about the value of recycling and doing something different with solid waste other than throwing it in a hole. Then, I sure hope I find a topic like NASCAR drivers who hunt bears in their free time with a bow and arrow and Ted Nugent in their 8-track stereo...

Meanwhile, sorry I was held back in my candid analysis by my shriveled but nevertheless functional sense of decency…

Thursday, March 06, 2008

20080306 Timeline to date on the Carroll County Maryland Integrated Waste Management Decision


Timeline to date on the Carroll County Maryland Integrated Waste Management Decision

March 6, 2008

March 2005 - Carroll County secured the services of R.W. Beck to complete a comprehensive study on the County’s waste management options.

October 2005 - R.W. Beck presented their report on long term waste disposal options indicating that WTE may be the lowest cost waste disposal option.

January 19, 2006 – Carroll County Commissioners adopted resolution 658-06, which among other things directed the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority (NMWDA) to conduct a procurement for waste-to-energy facilities, as detailed in the R.W. Beck Report.

May 3, 2006 - Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was advertised in Waste News (the most widely read solid waste weekly periodical with a circulation of over 50,000. The RFQ was posted on the NMWDA’s website along with all addenda.

August 1, 2006 - The NMWDA received 12 responses from the RFQ (9) technologies/vendors were deemed qualified to submit.

October 6, 2006 – Request for Proposals (RFP) were released to prequalified vendors.

December 2006 - Frederick County secured the services of RTI International to model Frederick County’s solid waste disposal system/alternatives, using EPA’s Municipal Solid Waste-Decisions Support Tool.

March 26, through April 1, 2007 - Staff from Frederick and Carroll Counties, NMWDA and HDR Engineers visited several European waste management facilities and met with European waste management agencies.

April 20, 2007 - NMWDA receives three WTE proposals from pre-qualified vendors.

July 14, 2007 - Frederick and Carroll Counties hosted a solid waste forum, at Frederick Community College with speakers from the Environmental Protection Agency, neighboring jurisdictions and SWANA.

September 29, 2007 – DPW staff and Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) held a workshop on solid waste disposal.

October 9, 2007 - Carroll County staff attended the presentation of RTI internationals model of Frederick County’s waste disposal system/alternatives. The report showed the net total “Criteria Pollutant Emissions” for WTE to be the lowest of all options modeled (local landfill, and out of state landfill).

October, 2007- Based on a recommendation of the EAC, Carroll County secured the services of Richard Anthony to perform a resource assessment study of Carroll County’s waste.

November 15, 2007 - The EAC presented their recommendation on solid waste option to the Carroll County Commissioners.

November 19, 2007 - DPW Staff with the assistance of the NMWDA presented their recommendation to the Carroll County Commissioners

December 13, 2007 - DPW Staff, NMWDA, EAC and the Carroll County Commissioners had a panel discussion on solid waste disposal.

February 14, 2008 – Carroll County Commissioners adopted a County Government recycling policy

February 21, 2008 - DPW staff presented information on the economics of a WTE facility to the Carroll County Commissioners

February 26, 2008 - The Carroll County and Frederick County Commissioners had a joint meeting on solid waste management strategies. The Frederick County Commissioners invited the Carroll County Commissioners to join them in building a 1,600 ton per day WTE facility in Frederick County.

March 5 and 10, 2008 – DPW hosts public information meetings to explain the integrated materials management strategy for handling all of Carroll County’s waste.

20080306 Recent Eagle columns


Recent Eagle columns

Kevin E. Dayhoff

Thursday, March 06

Trouble with trash is nothing new, but the technology may be
One of the difficult decisions currently facing our community is the trouble with trash.

When the last major decision occurred in 1996 and 1997, I was chair of the county's Environmental Affairs Advisory Board.

At that time, I was impressed with the combination of an aggressive recycling program...
[Read full story]


Don't let 'wrap rage' leave you in stitches
It's been two months since Christmas and, with any luck and the power of prayer, perhaps you have been able to break free most of your family's gifts from the dreaded, adult proof, clamshell plastic "blister" packaging.

This oppression of over-packaging is not only a leading cause of holiday depre...
[Read full story]


Looking at Bowling Brook one year later
More than a year has passed since, on a cold Jan. 23, 2007, Isaiah Simmons III, 17, died after being restrained by staff at Bowling Brook Preparatory School in Middleburg.

Mr. Simmons, from Baltimore, had only been at the facility for a couple of weeks -- since Jan. 10, after a court had sent him...
[Read full story]


'Tech Tax' will have crippling impact on Carroll
The frenzied and frenetic Maryland General Assembly special taxing session has been over for several months, yet the more the layers of this onion are peeled-away, the more it just wants to make you cry.

In a recent phone conversation, Ted Zaleski, Carroll County's director of management and budge...
[Read full story]


It's easy to demonstrate for peace; harder to work for it
Watching the movie, "The Singing Revolution," discussed in last week's column, brought back memories from my trip to Estonia back in Sept. 17-23, 2004.

It was a unique opportunity to represent Westminster in an "assessment and support tour" for the Maryland and Estonia Partner City Partners For Pe...
[Read full story]


More Headlines

How culture and song can save a nation

Dr. Martin Luther King's enduring words

Courthouse history seems to match theatrical flair of current case

Something we really must talk about

####

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

20080305 This week in The Tentacle

20080305 This week in The Tentacle

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Making Trash Go Away – Part One

Kevin E. Dayhoff

On February 26, the Frederick and Carroll County commissioners met to discuss how to make a combined 1,100 tons of trash-a-day go away.

One outcome of the meeting was the Frederick County Commissioners voted to extend a 45-day window of opportunity for the Carroll County commissioners to decide whether or not to join its neighbor in building a two-county waste-to-energy facility.

This comes after two days of hearings in mid-December in which hundreds participated. Then on December 13, in response to requests that Frederick County conduct more studies, the commissioners wisely said enough with the endless studies.

Indeed, the best research and studies are already readily available from the European Union (EU), in addition to over two decades of study and deliberations on the matter in Central Maryland.

This is not the first time that the two counties have discussed joining forces to deal with trash. The waste-to-energy option had earlier been investigated in 1984 with Howard and Carroll counties.

Read the rest here: Making Trash Go Away – Part One


Booze News

Tom McLaughlin

I have started to go back to bars. In my drinking days, I loved them, but with all the medication I take now, it puts a damper on that exercise.


Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Real "Super Tuesday"

Roy Meachum

Pundits and people alike figured the Democratic presidential primaries would be all over after last month's "Super Tuesday." But today we face another Tuesday that shapes up even more "super."


In The “Now”

Nick Diaz

Why do I ride motorcycles? Many who have been riders for a while often ask themselves that question, and every time what seems to be the same old answer reappears in their minds.


Monday, March 3, 2008

General Assembly Journal 2008 – Volume 3
The Mid-way Point

Richard B. Weldon Jr.

No, the title does not refer to the famous naval battle involving bombardment of the island in World War II. I’m talking about being halfway through the 425th Session of the Maryland General Assembly.


Friday, February 29, 2008

Finally, the Courts (I Hope)

Roy Meachum

My opinion on the subject is known. It was formed in part by stupidities like the Walkersville resident warning the town would become a new Mecca. At issue was the request by a splinter Islamic group to put up a mosque and convention center. You know the story.


Solomon and Shaw

Roy Meachum

George Bernard usually precedes the headline's "Shaw," as if the three words are irretrievably wed. The famous playwright receives as handsome a homage as he's ever been awarded currently at the Shakespeare Theatre Company. As you will read, I was thoroughly delighted with "Major Barbara," which opened at Washington's Sidney Harman Hall this week.


Thursday, February 28, 2008

Take a Closer Look….

Joan McIntyre

Budget time is here. Moratorium is in the works. Last year was spent nickel and dime-ing the property owners, fighting with municipalities and the delegation. So many issues, so little time, what’s a commissioner to do? I’ve got the answer. Say no to out of control budget requests. Stop the “tax-n-spend” mentality.


Inside The Smoke-Filled Back Room…

Chris Cavey

The world of party politics is a strange entanglement of political clubs, candidate campaigns, entourages of elected officials and the organized political party apparatus. Many know the value and can recognize the former; but few understand the organization of the party faithful consistently struggling in the trenches – the state central committee.


Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Reality takes The Year Off

Kevin E. Dayhoff

Last weekend the nation’s governors met in Washington for the 100th annual National Governors Association 2008 winter meeting. They had lots to talk about; but it was the faltering economy that eventually stole the show.


News from Ocean City….

Tom McLaughlin

The Town of Ocean City has come up with a brilliant idea to lower their taxes by $14 mil or so, and to raise the taxes of the good people of Worcester County by the same amount.


Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Wayne, I Never Knew You

Roy Meachum

We saw each other on North Market Street; sometimes he was walking that obviously sweet dog. We nodded and smiled to each other. He was usually in black jacket and pants: the usual priest's "off-duty" attire.


A Crack in The Door

Farrell Keough

Over the next few articles, we are going to explore the issues and possible solutions to illegal immigration. During this process, we will ensure correctness of documentation as well as making certain we are not allowing a sense of racism to infect our perspectives.


Monday, February 25, 2008

Pondering a Political Future

Richard B. Weldon Jr.

At a Farm Bureau/Pomona Grange legislative luncheon a few weeks ago, audience members were treated to a little surprise along with their roast beef and ham.


Words, Just Words

Steven R. Berryman

A presidential primary campaign is upon us now, much earlier in impact than in years past. The issues that are forced “off the table” are, in some cases, the ones that should be the defining ones. Shame on us for not forcing them back into the light of day for our proper examination.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

20071112 Frederick County seeks Carroll participation in trash incinerator

Frederick County seeks Carroll participation in trash incinerator

Hat Tip: Mrs. Owl

See also the Carroll County Times editorial from November 14, 2007:

“Talk some trash with the county” [And please report dead links…]

Related: Environmentalism Solid Waste Management or Environmentalism Solid Waste Management Recycling or Environmentalism Solid Waste Management Waste to Energy

And:

20070721 Frederick News-Post Letter to the Editor: “Trash talk no longer funny” by Gregor Becker

19880900 To Burn or Not to Burn an interview with Neil Seldman

19960900 The Five Most Dangerous Myths About Recycling

20070912 Carroll County EAC votes to promote recycling by Carrie Ann Knauer

Nov 12, 2007 AP

WESTMINSTER, Md. (Map, News) - The Frederick County commissioners are awaiting a response from Carroll County about the latter's possible participation in a waste-to-energy incinerator to serve both counties.

The incinerator could be discussed at a Nov. 19 workshop on Carroll County solid waste alternatives, said Cindy Parr, Carroll County's director of administrative services.

Carroll County public works director Mike Evans said the workshop will explore options for handling trash, including recycling, composting, burning and landfills.

The Frederick County Commissioners are considering a 1,500-ton-per-day incinerator.

---

http://www.examiner.com/a-1043996~Frederick_County_seeks_Carroll_participation_in_trash_incinerator.html

Information from: Carroll County (Md.) Times, http://www.carrollcounty.com/

Friday, September 14, 2007

20070912 Carroll County EAC votes to promote recycling by Carrie Ann Knauer

EAC votes to promote recycling

By Carrie Ann Knauer, Times Staff Writer

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

The Carroll County Environmental Advisory Council, charged with the task of reviewing solid waste management strategies, has started drafting a new framework of managing waste and a plan that does not include a waste-to-energy incinerator.

After months of listening to presentations on different solid waste management system alternatives, members of the EAC started discussing concrete recommendations to make to the Carroll County Board of Commissioners at Tuesday’s council meeting.

The six members of the nine-member board who were present voted unanimously to recommend the commissioners adopt a paradigm shift in the county from the old style of “solid waste management” to a new method of “resource management,” which emphasized waste reduction, reuse and recycling at the household and business level, before materials end up in the county’s hands.

A separate motion was passed to make recycling the driving element of the county’s resource management strategy by setting up a system that allows the county to manage the waste stream by increasing funds for public education of recycling efforts and by phasing in mandatory recycling of specific commodities.

Read the rest here: EAC votes to promote recycling

For other recent articles by Carrie Ann Knauer with the Carroll County Times, or click on Knauer watch.

For more information on Waste Management and Waste to Energy issues please click on: Environmentalism Solid Waste Management; Environmentalism Solid Waste Management Waste to Energy; or… Energy Independence or Environmentalism Solid Waste Management Recycling or the label, Environmentalism.

Report DEAD LINKS


Monday, July 23, 2007

20070721 Frederick News-Post Letter to the Editor: “Trash talk no longer funny” by Gregor Becker

Frederick News-Post Letter to the Editor: “Trash talk no longer funny” by Gregor Becker

'Trash talk' no longer funny

Originally published July 21, 2007

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_lte.htm?storyid=62768

The July 11 editorial oversimplifies the trash issue.

[See: 20070711 “Trash talk” - Frederick News-Post editorial]

And also see: 20070714 Solid Waste Management Forum at Frederick Community College

The county has only pursued a $100 million waste-to-energy facility without even trying to reduce its waste stream. Comprehensive recycling programs are lacking countywide, while the landfill has been filled with recyclable materials for the last 15 years.

Disposal -- landfill, incineration, etc. -- is going to be expensive. Why not get the county to commit to maximizing recycling over the next three years and then look at the disposal needs after that. Why not generate income from some waste before we burn or bury it?

Officials have taken industry-funded WTE tours in Europe, but have not investigated recycling programs or composting and materials recovery facilities in Delaware, New Jersey and elsewhere. These options aren't being researched because they aren't a part of the county's chosen "integrated approach."

Residents might ask how viable is a technology that even a Fortune 500 company won't put up the capital for? According to budget reports, the Montgomery County facility processed 640,101 tons of waste in 2004, generating 387,141 megawatt hours of electricity valued at $15M, or $23.43 per ton. But, per ton, the net operating cost was $21.78 and the net debt service cost was $42.36.

That year, Montgomery County spent $41M to operate and upgrade the facility. Not included in this figure: non-financed capital of $2.09M; non-contract operating costs of $772,000 for risk management; county work worth $275,134; residue disposal of $10.80 per ton; and charge backs to the Department of Environmental Protection worth $43,603.

Do Frederick residents want this annual bill and to pay increased tipping fees or higher taxes? Or would they prefer working together to reduce their waste stream before deciding if a capital-intensive disposal method is necessary?

GREGOR BECKER

conservation chair

Sierra Club Catoctin Group

Sunday, July 15, 2007

20070711 “Trash talk” - Frederick News-Post editorial

“Trash talk” - Frederick News-Post editorial

Trash talk

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_editorial.htm?StoryID=62346

Originally published July 11, 2007

When it comes to trash, no one could claim that local government is ignoring the subject. Elected officials and county managers are acutely aware that solutions are required, and they are diligently at work exploring a range of them.

That doesn't mean that any solution(s) they ultimately decide on are going to sit well with all residents. So far, every attempt to address Frederick County's mounting (pun intended) trash problems have been met with resistance from other-minded people, including environmentalists, recycling enthusiasts and, in particular, those whose lives and property would be most impacted.

Solutions that have been proposed include a permanent new transfer station from which to send the country's trash elsewhere, raising the height of the Reichs Ford Road landfill, and constructing a waste-to-energy incinerator that would generate electricity from the heat produced by burning trash.

Opposition to any and all of these proposals is understandable. No one wants increased truck traffic, a higher, more visible landfill with potential safety issues, or a huge, expensive incinerating/generating facility in his or her backyard.

Still, all these potential solutions have been extensively researched and decisions to consider them were not arrived at frivolously or without considering their negative as well as their positive qualities.

The bottom line, however, is that this county generates a huge quantity of trash -- one that will only increase in coming years -- and effective method(s) of addressing its disposal or destruction are imperative. And while recycling is a positive, worthwhile and attractive endeavor that should be encouraged and can be part of the solutions mix, it alone is not the be-all and end-all to Frederick County's trash problem.

There is no solution to Frederick County's trash question that does not involve some negatives, whether they be financial, environmental or aesthetic. It's trash, folks.

It appears as though local officials are pursuing a multi-pronged approach to this issue, with some of the options -- such as the landfill height extension and transfer station -- being stop-gap measures. In the end, a more comprehensive, permanent solution, perhaps in the form of a waste-to-energy incinerator, will likely have to be embraced.

Local officials are acutely tuned in to this issue, as well they should be, and are thoroughly investigating a number of options. But again, when it comes to trash, there is no such thing as a perfect, negative-free solution.

If there were, trash wouldn't be such a dirty word.

Friday, March 09, 2007

20070305 “Better options than burning our trash” Carroll County Times letter to the editor by Sally Sorbello

“Better options than burning our trash” Carroll County Times letter to the editor by Sally Sorbello

Letters to the Editor for Monday, March 5, 2007

Better options than burning our trash

Editor:

In response to the Feb. 14 letter by Brenda M. Afzal titled, "Waste-to-energy is a waste of time," I would like to say thank you.

This letter was a factual counterpoint to the propaganda written by the executive director of the Northeast Md. Waste Disposal Authority, whose job it is to persuade people to believe that waste to energy is somehow not incineration - even though trash is burned and reduced to ash in this process.

Not only are waste to electricity schemes polluting, they are also inherently uneconomic. At a recent tour of the Covanta plant in Montgomery County, I was told that $40 million a year is budgeted for their trash burner. And the sale of electricity does not sufficiently offset the costs.

Many communities, including nearby Harrisburg, Pa., are struggling with huge financial debt as a result of their incinerator contract. Even if Montgomery County recycles more than other counties in Maryland, think of how much more it could be recycling with an annual budget of $40 million. It would take a fraction of that amount to have the best recycling program in the country.

Not only are waste incinerators expensive, they do not eliminate the need for a landfill. For every ton of trash that is burned, one third of a ton remains in the form of toxic ash. And this toxic ash must be handled very carefully. Any leaks of ash from the landfill could contaminate soil and water with heavy metals, dioxins and furans.

Doesn't it make more sense to invest taxpayer dollars in a comprehensive recycling and education program before any talk of burning trash? It would cost much less, it would pollute much less, it would stimulate the economy by creating jobs and it would show that Carroll and Frederick counties are too smart to let resources go up in flames. Waste incinerators burn useful recyclable materials along with trash.

For all interested in learning more, please attend a meeting of the Environmental Advisory Council on Tuesday, March 13, at 3 p.m. in room 003/004 of the Carroll County Office Building, 225 North Center Street.


Neil Seldman, a recycling expert, will be speaking at this meeting. For over 30 years, Seldman has helped communities worldwide to expand economic opportunities through greater recycling.

Sally Sorbello

Frederick

Tuesday, October 01, 1996

19960900 The Five Most Dangerous Myths About Recycling

The Five Most Dangerous Myths About Recycling

Institute for Local Self-Reliance

2425 18th Street, NW · Washington, DC 20009

202-232-4108

bplatt AT ilsr.org

September 1996

MYTH #1: We can recycle only 25 to 30% of our solid wastes.(1)

FACT: Twenty five percent was considered a maximum level in 1985. Today it should be considered a minimum, not a maximum. By continuing to build the reuse, recycling, and composting infrastructure and integrating the best features from the best programs, local and state, the nation as a whole can achieve 50% recycling by 2005.

[…]

MYTH #2: Recycling is more expensive than trash collection and disposal.(8)

FACT: When designed right, recycling programs are cost-competitive with trash collection and disposal.

[…]

MYTH #3: Landfills and incinerators are more cost-effective and environmentally sound than recycling options.(15)

FACT: Recycling programs, when designed properly, are cost-competitive with landfills and incinerators, and provide net pollution prevention benefits. Recycling materials not only avoids the pollution that would be generated through landfilling and incinerating these, but also reduces the environmental burden of virgin materials extraction and manufacturing processes.

[…]

MYTH #4: Landfills are significant job generators for rural communities.(19)

FACT: Recycling creates many more jobs for rural and urban communities than landfill and incineration disposal options.

[…]

MYTH #5: The marketplace works best in solving solid waste management problems; no public-sector intervention is needed.(23)

FACT: The solid waste system has always operated under public sector rules and always will. Currently these rules encourage unchecked product consumption and disposal. Public-sector intervention is needed to shape a system in which materials are produced, used, discarded, and recovered efficiently. We need to change the rules so that disposal alternatives; source reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting, operate in a level playing field. Even after we level the playing field, favoring disposal alternatives makes sense because of its many community and public sector benefits.

Read the entire article here: The Five Most Dangerous Myths About Recycling

For questions or comments, contact:

Brenda Platt, Director, Materials Recovery, Institute for Local Self-Reliance

(Brenda Platt) bplatt AT ilsr.org

19960900 The Five Most Dangerous Myths About Recycling

_____

Monday, September 12, 1988

19880900 To Burn or Not to Burn an interview with Neil Seldman

Recycling is both environmentally sound and economically sensible

An Interview with Neil Seldman, by Robert Gilman

One of the articles in The Next Agenda (IC#19)

Autumn 1988, Page 22

Copyright (c)1988, 1997 by Context Institute | To order this issue ...

Neil Seldman is the President of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (2425 18th Street NW, Washington, DC 20009) and a consultant to cities and citizen groups around the country who are looking for sensible solutions to the growing garbage crisis.

Robert: People aren't nearly as aware as they could be about the waste crisis, in spite of all the media coverage it's starting to get.

Neil: That's right. We've all heard of the garbage barge from Islip. But I wonder how many people have heard of the ash barge from Philadelphia? The material on the Islip barge was municipal waste, technically commercial waste. On Philadelphia's barge the material is waste incinerator ash, not from a modern mass burn plant, but from an old time incinerator going back 80 or 90 years, a garbage destructor. The amount of garbage on the Islip barge was 3,000 tons, but the ash on the Philadelphia barge weighed 15,000 tons. And how long were they at sea? The Islip barge four months, the Philadelphia barge twenty-three months and it's still on the high seas. Where did the Islip barge go? It went from Islip down the East coast to the Caribbean and back to Brooklyn, where the gargage was finally burned and its remains sent to Islip. Now, the Philadelphia barge has been down through all of those states, into the Caribbean, out to West Africa, back to Philadelphia, and back out to West Africa again.

Robert: It's very curious that the media hasn't picked up on this.

Neil: It shows how you can't trust the media. You must go very deeply into these issues, because these issues are going to determine your future directly in your city. And your small town. These problems have to be solved within three years. Right now most of the authorities in the United States want to turn what was on the Islip barge into what is on the Philadelphia barge. They want to burn the garbage and dispose of the ash. And the story is, look how much more difficult it is to get rid of the ash than the garbage!

Robert: I understand this is all coming to a head because so many municipal areas are basically running out of landfill.

Neil: Absolutely. And that's actually understating the problem, because 8 years ago you could put garbage in the ground on the East coast for $5 a ton, and now it's a $100 a ton for landfill space. One of the ironies is that throughout the 1970's New Jersey tried to keep Pennsylvania's garbage out of New Jersey. They went all the way to the Supreme Court and were eventually told they couldn't do it because of the Interstate Commerce Clause. Right now, guess where New Jersey's garbage is going. Into Pennsylvania. That's how quickly and profoundly the situation has changed.

And it's not because of a lack of landfill space. It's there theoretically, but politically it's become impossible because of the incredible growth of cities, towns and suburbs. Literally no one's neighborhood is unaffected. And people don't want to see their property devalued tremendously, their kids' health risked, their environment destroyed.

Robert: So the alternatives are recycling - or mass burn.

Read the entire interview here: To Burn Or Not To Burn

All contents copyright (c)1988, 1997 by Context Institute

Please send comments to webmaster

Last Updated 29 June 2000.

URL: http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC19/Seldman.htm

Home | Search | Index of Issues | Table of Contents