2009 1019plattwastingandclimatechange
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Stop Trashing the Climate
Brenda Platt Institute for Local Self-Reliance
BioCycle West, San Diego April 15th, 2008
Wasting and Climate Change: The Connections
Brenda Platt, Institute for Local Self-Reliance presented at the Zero Waste Conference
Devens, Massachusetts, October 19, 2009
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
10. 54% of waste goes to landfills, a top source of methane emissions
Wasting Trend in U.S.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Thou
sand
s of
tons
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
10. 54% of waste is landfilled
9. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas
Landfill greenhouse gas emissions, % of total
Landfill Methane Emissions
1.8%
All Other98.2%
Total 2005 = 7,260 megatons CO2 equiv.
The global warming potential concept CO2
Methane - 100 year time horizon, 21 times more potent than CO2
Methane - 20 yrs, 72 times more potent
Landfill greenhouse gas emissions, % of total, 20 yr time horizon
Landfill Methane Emissions
5.2%
All Other94.8%
Total 2005 = 8,754 megatons CO2 equiv.
Disposal sector emissions, 8.1% of total, 20 yr horizon
All Other91.9%
Wastewater Trtmt1.1%
Manure Mgt1.6%
Municipal Waste Combustion
0.2%
Landfill 5.2%
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
10. Landfills are a top source of methane
9. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas
8. Incinerators are bad for the climate
Waste incinerators are NOT good for the climate
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
Incinerator Coal Fired Oil Fired Natural Gas Fired
lbs
CO
2 em
issi
ons/
meg
awat
t-hou
r
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
10. Landfills are a top source of methane
9. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas
8. Incinerators are bad for the climate
7. Incinerators require wasting
Incinerators require waste and wasting
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
10. Landfills are a top source of methane
9. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas
8. Incineration is bad for the climate
7. Incineration requires wasting
6. Trash is not renewable
The Wasteberg
For every ton of municipal trash, 71 tons of waste are produced during manufacturing, mining, oil and gas exploration, agriculture, and coal combustion.
Upstream = 71 x MSW Waste
Waste of Energy (WOE)
3 to 5 times more energy can be saved by recycling
Burning materials for their Btu value is a
waste of resources
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
5. Biogenic emissions too often overlooked
Biogenic emissions are not climate neutral
X X X X X
X
X X
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
5. Biogenic emissions too often overlooked
4. Pay as you throw not widespread
Unit-based Pricing Sends a Clear Message
Worcester, MA Population 173,000
San Francisco, CA Population 775,000
Unit based pricing is just a different way of paying for waste Source: Kristen Brown, Green Waste Solutions, www.thewastesolution.com
Worcester, MA: PAYT Results
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
1986'87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 2000
'01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06
Trash Tons Collected Per Year Recycling Tons Collected Per Year
Source: Kristen Brown, Green Waste Solutions, www.thewastesolution.com
Overall Waste Generation Decrease 20+%
Source: Kristen Brown, Green Waste Solutions, www.thewastesolution.com
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
5. Biogenic emissions too often overlooked
4. Pay as you throw not widespread
3. Competes with expanding composting and anaerobic digestion systems
Organics Diversion: Core Climate Protection Strategy
Prevents landfill methane emissions
Stores carbon
Improves soil’s ability to store carbon
Substitutes for energy-intensive fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides
Improves plant growth, and thus carbon sequestration
Reduces energy use for irrigation
Anaerobic digestion offsets fossil fuel consumption
U.S. municipal waste disposed
Source: US EPA, 2007 data (http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/msw99.htm)
Textiles6% Glass
6%
Metals8%
Other materials8%
Plastics17%
Food scraps18%
Yard trimmings7%
Wood8%
Paper and paperboard
22%
169.2 million tons in 2007
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
5. Biogenic emissions too often overlooked
4. Pay as you throw not widespread
3. Competes with expanding composting and anaerobic digestion systems
2. Unchecked consumption
U.S. huge contributor
4.6% of global population Consume one-third of Earth’s timber and paper Generate 22% of global CO2 emissions Produce 30% of world’s waste
Sectors impacted by wasting, % of total, 20 yr horizon
Disposal sector8.1%
Industrial sector24.6%
Truck Transportation
4.4%
Synthetic Fertilizers
1.1%
All Other61.8%
Single use has got to go
Resource Conservation Hierarchy�
Most Preferable
Recycle & Compost
Treat
Avoid & Reduce
Reuse
Dispose
Least Preferable
Top Ten: Why wasting = climate change?
5. Biogenic emissions too often overlooked
4. Pay as you throw not widespread
3. Competes with expanding composting and anaerobic digestion systems
2. Unchecked consumption
1. Prevents real zero waste planning
Zero Waste Path
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
1960
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
2008
2011
2014
2017
2020
2023
2026
2029
1,00
0 To
ns P
er Y
ear
Aiming for zero waste is key GHG abatement strategy
Abatement Megatons % of Abatement Strategy CO2 eq. Needed in 2030 to Return to 1990 Reducing waste via prevention, reuse, recycling, composting 406 11.6% Lighting 240 6.9% Vehicle Efficiency 195 5.6% Lower Carbon Fuels 100 2.9% Forest Management 110 3.1% Carbon Capture & Storage 95 2.7% Wind 120 3.4% Nuclear 70 2.0%
Source: ILSR, GAIA, and Eco-Cycle, Stop Trashing the Climate (2008), and McKinsey & Company, Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much and at What Cost? (2007)
Zero waste path: less coal plants
By significantly reducing waste disposal, the U.S. can take the equivalent of 21% of its coal-fired power plants off the grid by 2030.
Composting & Recycling Collection System Designed For High Diversion
Recycled Paper 21%
Glass and Plastic Bottles Aluminum and Steel Cans
5%
Construction and Demolition Waste
25%
Other 15%
Food Scraps 20%
Yard Trimmings 5%
Compostable Paper 10%
Courtesy of City of San Francisco
Easy to Understand Program
Courtesy of City of San Francisco
Designed for Easy Participation
Kitchen Pail
Labeled Lids
Wheeled Cart
Courtesy of City of San Francisco
Recology’s Jepsen Prairie Organics Regional Composting Facility
Courtesy of City of San Francisco
Toronto
Don’t Waste!
Starve a Landfill Feed the soil
Conserve resources Protect the climate
Create jobs Sustain new businesses
Job Creation: Reclamation vs. Disposal
Type of Operation Jobs/ 10,000 TPY
Computer Reuse 296 Textile Reclamation 85 Misc. Durables Reuse 62 Wooden Pallet Repair 28 Recycling-Based Manufacturers 25 Conventional MRFs 10 Composting 4
Disposal Facilities 1
MRF = materials recovery facility TPY = tons per year
Institute for Local Self-Reliance
Composting = Local
Organics do not ship well
Composting is small-scale
Compost products are used locally
Jobs are local
Dollars circulate within local economies
Local = good for local economies
Institute for Local Self-Reliance
A Call to Action! Implement zero waste targets and plans. Stop disposing organic materials – COMPOST! Pursue recycling-based local economic
development. Make manufacturers responsible for their products. Regulate single-use plastics. Reduce junk mail. Buy recycled. Institute pay-as-you-throw trash fees.
Contact
www.stoptrashingtheclimate.org www.ilsr.org
[email protected] Brenda Platt
202-898-1610 x230