FROM SCRATCH NEWSWIRE

SCAVENGING THE INTERNET

Archive for the ‘RECYCLING INDUSTRIES’ Category

GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO: PRIORITIZE PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT (Philippines)

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on January 2, 2009

Friday, January 2, 2009

by Dexter A. See

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE MANILA BULLETIN’ (Philippines)

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE MANILA BULLETIN’ (Philippines)

Posted in ECOLOGICAL AGRICULTURE, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT, FINANCIAL CRISIS 2008/2009, INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIES, INTERNATIONAL, JUDICIARY SYSTEMS, PHILIPPINES, RECESSION, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, REGULATIONS AND BUSINESS TRANSPARENCY, THE FLOW OF INVESTMENTS | Leave a Comment »

CHINA MULLS INCENTIVES TO SCRAP OLD CARS

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on December 27, 2008

10:50:00 12/27/2008

Agence France-Presse

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE PHILIPPINE DAILY INQUIRER’ (Philippines)

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE PHILIPPINE DAILY INQUIRER’ (Philippines)

Posted in CHINA, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT, FINANCIAL CRISIS 2008/2009, FINANCIAL MARKETS, INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIAL SUBSIDIES, INDUSTRIES, INTERNATIONAL, MACROECONOMY, RECESSION, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, THE FLOW OF INVESTMENTS | 1 Comment »

CONCRETE MASONERS PUT THEIR CASE (South Africa)

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on December 13, 2008

11 Dec 2008

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE BUSINESS NEWS’ (South Africa)

THE claims regarding environmental issues relating to products and services are often misleading because the subject is a complex matter that is fraught with misinformation and half truths. The claims often only select snippets of information, and the attributes often have no real impact on the environmental issues at large, says Bob Low of Inca, talking on behalf of concrete masoners.

It is therefore key to any discussion relating to environmental issues, to ask the right questions, namely:

– What environmental issues are being addressed? (e.g. global warming, energy, biodiversity, water scarcity etc).

– Are the claims material to environmental issues at large?

– Is the entire ‘cradle to grave’ life cycle (i.e. manufacturing, operational life and end of life) taken into account?

The main concern with environmental issues today relate to global warming, which is directly proportional to the amount of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere. Over 90% of CO2emissions in South Africa are produced in the burning of fossil fuels to produce energy. It is therefore safe to assume that the energy employed during the entire life cycle of the product has a direct impact on global warming issues.

It is estimated that South Africa produces 3.5 billion bricks per annum which equates to 1.6 million tons of CO2 per annum. To put this into context, brick production has the equivalent global warming contribution as the annual emissions from 360 000 average sized sedan cars.

Bricks also constitute approximately 30-60% of a buildings total embodied energy. The global warming effect from masonry products is therefore substantial and material to the environmental issues at large.

One has to analyse the carbon footprint of masonry holistically. The energy employed in the manufacturing of the product (i.e. embodied energy), the energy efficiency of a building built with different masonry materials (i.e. operational energy), and the energy savings resulting from recycling all have be taken into account, before a fair judgment can be made about a products complete environmental impact, Low says.

Embodied energy refers to the amount of energy required to produce the product. Clay and concrete bricks (also called cement bricks in the industry) both employ energy intensive processes. The main contributor of the carbon footprint in clay bricks is in the firing process. Clay is fired in kilns at 1000°C for 2 – 3 days.

The main contributor of embodied energy in concrete is cement. Cement only comprises 10% of a concrete brick. Cement is produced by heating limestone and other materials at 1450°C for 30 minutes. It therefore stands to reason that concrete bricks employ substantially less energy to produce than clay bricks. International and local research concur that the embodied energy of clay products are 2.5MJ / kg whilst concrete bricks are 0.95MJ / kg, according to Low.

The operational life refers to the energy utilized in the life time of the building to heat and cool the ambient temperatures. Clay and concrete have marginally different thermal properties. Concrete generally has a higher thermal capacity (i.e. ability to store heat), which enables the product to store heat at night and release this stored heat during the day. Clay has however better thermal resistance properties making it a better insulating material. Clay and concrete therefore effect the energy utilization of a building differently in different climatic conditions.

“This is however a nebulous comparison as studies show that the choice of masonry has a marginal effect of a buildings energy utilization as more than 80% of heat is transferred via windows, doors and ceilings,” says Low.

He points out that all concrete is 100% recyclable and makes an excellent aggregate to produce other concrete bricks. Clay bricks can be recycled to form sub-base materials in the construction industry. The recycling process ultimately reduces the total embodied energy by only 0.08 MJ / kg (i.e. 8%) which has a marginal effect on the cradle to grave total carbon footprint of clay and concrete masonry.

Low says the correct choice of masonry products will have a massive impact on green house emissions and energy consumption. Embodied energy, the only differential between masonry products, is the most critical and important factor in the entire life cycle of masonry in a building and can account for up to 60% of a buildings embodied energy. Masonry has little impact on the energy utilization during the life of a building and all masonry materials can be recycled effectively.

Concrete has a carbon footprint 2.5 times less than an equivalent clay brick, and the choice of concrete can therefore reduce the carbon emissions of a mid size residential dwelling by 30 tons, which is equivalent to a cars emissions for 7 years. The choice of masonry material is the easiest and most cost effective manner to substantially reduce a buildings carbon footprint, says Low.

FROM SCRATCH NEWSWIRE EDITORIAL BOARD – We would like to highlight the fact that the author of the above text simply did not mention all the mining procedures as to what concerns cement production.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE BUSINESS NEWS’ (South Africa)

Posted in CEMENT, CHEMICALS (processed components), COAL, COMMERCE, COMMODITIES MARKET, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, ENERGY, ENERGY INDUSTRIES, ENVIRONMENT, FINANCIAL CRISIS 2008/2009, INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIES, INTERNATIONAL, MINING INDUSTRIES, RECESSION, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, SOUTH AFRICA, THE FLOW OF INVESTMENTS, THE WORK MARKET | Leave a Comment »

RUBBLE TOO HAS ITS USES (South Africa)_

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on December 13, 2008

10 Dec 2008

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE BUSINESS NEWS’ (South Africa)

Black empowered construction materials supplier, Afrimat Limited, is actively involved in the promotion and manufacturing of crushed rubble. Through its subsidiaries, Malans Quarries and Melani Materials, Afrimat has been involved in marketing crushed rubble since the early nineties.

On one of the company’s initial projects – the demolition of the Paarden Island Power Station – material was crushed and sold commercially instead of being carted and dumped at the municipal landfill sites which would have wasted vital air space.

It has not always been plain sailing for the material due to the reluctance from some quarters to use crushed rubble because of concerns about durability and its lacking track record. Divisional manager for Afrimat Cape Town Hylton Hale emphasises that this is definitely not the case as in the nearly 20 years that Afrimat has supplied crushed rubble there have been only two recorded minor failures, which were easily resolved using replacement recycled material.

This prompted the company to approach the University of Cape Town’s Civil Engineering Department in 2002 to embark on a research programme on the use of recycled aggregates in concrete and road layer works. A detailed report was compiled, outlining the use and capabilities of crushed rubble. The report demonstrated that the material is a viable option provided certain criteria such as initial raw material sorting and the exclusion of organic, plastic and other waste, is met.

Since the company has entered the recycling world, Afrimat, through Malans Quarries, has sold over 2.5 million tonnes of recycled road building material.

The company has supplied this material to some prestigious projects including the parking areas and minor roads in the Victoria and Alfred Waterfront, Grand West Casino, Somerset Mall, Westlake Office Park, Noordhoek Shopping Mall, Cape Town Convention Centre, Century City, amongst others. Afrimat has also supplied recycled material to a number of urban minor roads in townships throughout the Cape Metropolis.

Notably, the City of Cape Town has now recognised the use of recycled material in construction as evidenced in their recent tender for contractors to crush waste rubble at their landfill sites.

Afrimat Cape Town was awarded the contract and distributes and manufactures crushed concrete base and sub base from the Bellville South, Coastal Park and Gordons Bay sites.

“Crushed rubble is here to stay as it not only provides a more economical solution to road building but also plays a vital role in combating minimisation of the ever-expanding and valuable air space at our municipal landfill sites,” says Hale.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘THE BUSINESS NEWS’ (South Africa)

Posted in COMMERCE, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT, FINANCIAL CRISIS 2008/2009, INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIES, INTERNATIONAL, RECESSION, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, SOUTH AFRICA, THE FLOW OF INVESTMENTS, THE WORK MARKET | 1 Comment »

SEVEN INVESTORS SUBMIT OFFERS FOR RUNNING KREMIKOVTZI (Bulgaria)

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on December 11, 2008

11 December 2008, Thursday

PUBLISHED BY ‘BULGARIAN BUSINESS – NOVINITE.COM’

Bulgaria’s Economy Ministry has received seven offers with bids for the purchase or the operation of the troubled Bulgaria's Economy Ministry has received seven offers for Kremikovtzi by Bulgarian and foreign companies - Photo by Yuliana Nikolova - Sofia Photo Agencysteel-maker Kremikovtzi, the Trud Daily reported Thursday.

The paper points out that the most serious bidder is the Ukrainian company Smart Group which offers an emergency plan for saving the factory, and a longer-term recovery program by restructuring and acquisition of new assets. It is expected to present its demands about Bulgarian state guarantees for Kremikovtzi within several days.

The Czech company ML Moran offers to finance Kremikovtzi enabling the plant to buy raw materials, and manufacture and sell its production. The bulk of the revenue, however, would go to the creditor so the main advantage of this plan would be to keep the factory running.

Each of two other foreign companies – the Russian Prominvest, and an unnamed Italian company – are offering to provide raw materials, and working capital for Kremikovtzi in exchange for guarantees by the Bulgarian state.

The former owner of the steel mill Valentin Zahariev, who sold the plant to the Indian tycoon Pramod Mittal in 2005, has offered to run the plant after setting up a new firm for the purpose. In the event of liquidation of the factory, however, he is asking to be allowed to buy out the assets on sale.

The Bulgarian metal wastes trader Econmetal Engineering, whose facilities are located nearby Kremikovtzi, is offering to provide 60.000 tons of raw materials for the steel-maker in exchange for being allowed to realize the manufactured products on the market after that.

A group of bond holders is offering the factory a credit of EUR 345 M in exchange for Bulgarian state securities with a redemption date in 2013.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘BULGARIAN BUSINESS – NOVINITE.COM’

Posted in BULGARIA, COMMODITIES MARKET, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, FINANCIAL CRISIS 2008/2009, FINANCIAL MARKETS, FOREIGN POLICIES, INDIA, INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIES, INTERNATIONAL, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, IRON ORE, ITALY, METALS, METALS INDUSTRY, MINING INDUSTRIES, NATIONAL WORK FORCES, RECESSION, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, RUSSIA, STEEL, STOCK MARKETS, THE FLOW OF INVESTMENTS, THE WORK MARKET, THE WORKERS, UKRAINE | Leave a Comment »

SUPER SUSTAINABILITY – CAN YOUR SUPER FUND SAVE THE WORLD?

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on December 5, 2008

Last Updated – December 04th 2008

by John Kavanagh

PUBLISHED BY ‘CORPORATE CITIZEN’ (Australia)

Blair Comley wants people in the investment community to change the way they think about the Australian Government’s climate change policy. With over $1 trillion sitting in Australian superannuation funds, the scope for changing the investment landscape is huge. Even a subtle shift in investment decisions by the managers of this capital could go a long way to unlocking some of this money and, in turn, help to achieve those policy goals.

BLAIR Comley, deputy secretary of the Department of Climate Change, believes companies and investors have become obsessed with the detail and have lost the big picture. They worry about how much a tonne of carbon emissions will cost in the new emissions trading scheme. They worry about how quickly the limits on carbon emissions will be adjusted. They worry about whether they will qualify for compensation and how much they will be entitled to receive. And investors in particular will worry about how many percentage points to knock off their earnings forecasts for polluters.

Comley finds this thinking understandable but narrow. After all, he says, achieving a low carbon economy is a major reform, a structural transformation of the economy. One estimate of the amount of investment required to build clean power generation facilities in Australia to meet the Government’s goals over the coming decade is upwards of $40 billion. The opportunities for investment in infrastructure are enormous.

The other thing that surprises Comley is how impatient business is over the issue, especially the investment community. Speaking at a climate change conference in Sydney in October, he reminded his audience of mostly financial services industry professionals that economic reform is usually a graduated process. Using the example of tariff reform, a major micro-economic policy launched by the Hawke Government in the 1980s, he said it was part of the socio-economic compact to spread the burden of reform by bringing in change over a number of years.

And it is not just a matter of spreading cost in an equitable way. The government knows it risks causing serious damage to the Australian economy if it gets things wrong. One risk factor is leakage – companies moving their polluting activities to economies where the rules are less stringent to avoid having a price and a cap put on their carbon emissions.

The issue of climate change has taken on a great deal of importance for investment managers following the release in July of the Government green paper on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, and the Garnaut recommendations on emissions reductions. Both papers contain proposals that will have an impact on earnings, costs and investment programs for a wide range of Australian businesses over the coming decade, and both papers put forward a number of options.

The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, also known as an emissions trading scheme, will set a price on a tonne of carbon emissions and determine which companies are included in the scheme and how they are to report their emissions. It will set up a compensation scheme and it will exempt certain industries (see breakout).

The Garnaut paper sets out the blueprint for emissions reduction and, in the process, points to the type of investment that will need to be made in renewable energy, transport, water systems and more.

The Government will publish a white paper in December and most analysts are waiting until then before they start drawing conclusions about how the investment markets will be affected by all of this.

Comley is right in thinking that the investment community is obsessed with detail and short-term issues. Respondents to a survey of fund managers conducted for Corporate Citizen by the Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility (ACCSR) found that they were near-unanimous in saying they were not prepared to make investment decisions around climate change issues until they had a clear picture of the rules and the regulatory framework for the Government’s proposed carbon pollution reduction scheme.

It is those investment managers, analysts and asset consultants not ready to invest in climate change who are guiding the asset allocation decisions of the country’s biggest investors – the superannuation funds. Typical of the response is this comment from Elaine Prior, a senior analyst at Citi Investment Research: “Very clearly, we need a regulatory environment that allows change solutions to become economically viable. At the moment we have a lot of talk about climate change solutions and carbon emissions and so on but we don’t have a regulatory authority. And given that a lot of the things that will cut emissions will cost a lot of money, there needs to be that regulation to act as a catalyst for investment.”

Some specialist managers, however, report that they are finding investment opportunities. The managing director of Australian Ethical Investments, Anne O’Donnell, says an area where strong investor demand is emerging is for green commercial buildings. Community awareness of where energy savings can be made in buildings is relatively high and, as a result, tenants want to move into them and institutions want them in their portfolios.

Helga Birgden, head of responsible investment for the Asia Pacific at Mercer, says superannuation fund trustees with experience in investing in the agribusiness sector are starting to ask about how the issue of carbon sequestration fits into investment in the sector.

Managers in the small, specialist funds groups say the attention of large funds management groups has been caught by the imminent introduction of a system that will put a price on carbon emissions and have a direct impact on the earnings of many of the big companies in which they invest. But, like Comley, they see this as a very narrow focus. They need to look at renewables such as wind, which has demonstrated its viability already, consumer products that will assist households reduce their energy consumption, carbon capture technology, and suppliers to the public transport sector.

But the investment management industry is dominated by large financial institutions and they are fundamentally conservative organisations. Many of them have adopted standards such as UNPRI, the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investing, or ESG (environmental, social and governance) but they tend to use these metrics as overlays for making adjustments to their mainstream equity and fixed interest portfolios. In other words, they might reduce their portfolio weighting to steelmaker Bluescope if it shows up as a bigger polluter than OneSteel. What they are not doing is investing in clean energy start-ups or other businesses with a direct stake in climate change.

What many of the managers argue is that their mandate is to invest conservatively on behalf of people who are committing funds to their retirement savings. It is not their job to take risks on new ventures. And they also argue that the biggest impact of climate change policy will come from changes that big companies make to their business practices.

Survey respondent John Guadagnuolo, an investment manager at Portfolio Partners, says: “For instance, you might decide to invest in a company that participates in a process to capture carbon from coal-fired power stations. You are taking on significant risk because you are betting the carbon price will be high enough to pay off that investment. As a fund manager we might like low emissions or sustainability to be present in a company that we invest in but it’s not a deciding factor. If there’s too much risk it’s not something we can get into.”

Unspoken in all of this is the fear that investment managers have of being caught up in the next bubble, and the reputational damage that would follow. In 2000 the fund manager BT launched a fund called the BT TIME Fund. It was set up to invest in technology and new media and, coming on the crest of the dotcom wave, it was one of the most successful retail investment product launches ever. The wave crashed soon after and the BT fund has been a chronic underachiever ever since. It has reported an average annual loss of 14.5 per cent a year since its launch. No investment manager wants to be associated with such disasters and, in the case of clean technology, managers fear there are too many unknowns. Some investment managers say there has already been something of a bubble around biofuels and that the sector represents more hype than substance.

Some commentators argue that one reason there are too many unknowns is that the investment management industry has been slow to equip itself with the expertise that would allow it to make informed investment decisions in the sector. In October this year, the Financial Services Institute of Australia (Finsia) released the findings of a study it had undertaken with Griffith University Business School, looking into the preparedness of the financial services industry to respond to climate change and its capacity to do so. Like the ACCSR, it found that regulatory uncertainty was the biggest road block for investors, along with a perception that investment in emerging climate change technologies involved excessive risk and low returns.

But it also found that there was a lack of expertise, skills and knowledge about climate change throughout the industry. Finsia chief executive Martin Fahy says most investment managers were prepared to admit their engagement with the issue was inadequate and that there was a lack of leadership within their organisations pushing for change.

Some investment managers are prepared to concede this. Colonial First State head of sustainability and responsible investment, Amanda McClusky, says: “There’s a gap around education. The traditional training for an analyst is a finance degree and most of the education that analysts get does not include sustainability issues and, more broadly, social issues, reputation tracking, human capital and some corporate governance factors.”

The consensus among investment managers in the ACCSR survey was that in five or 10 years time climate change and sustainability will be mainstream investment issues. It took about 10 years for corporate governance to move from the fringe, where a handful of investment managers paid attention to issues of board independence, fair remuneration policies and transparency, to a situation today where investment managers are asked to justify why they don’t vote on director elections and remuneration proposals.

In the meantime, the field will have to be developed by a handful of specialists. One such specialist is Sean Wiles, an investment manager at CVC Sustainable Investments, a venture capital fund that aims to increase Australian private investment in renewable energy and enabling technologies through the provision of equity finance. (Funding is provided under the Australian Greenhouse Office’s Renewable Energy Equity Fund licence as well as from private sources.) Wiles reports that his fund has been investing in emerging Queensland gas producers such as Blue Energy. While gas is not exactly clean, it produces about 40 per cent of the carbon emissions of coal and receives favourable ESG scores from fund managers for that reason.

Wiles says he has trouble getting good research from brokers and investment bankers but has, nevertheless, been able to put together a portfolio of stocks in areas such as renewable energy, waste management and water. It all sounds great until you see the numbers: CVC has a mere $400 million invested across four funds.

In the end, it seems that a mix of strong, sound government policy as well as strong impetus from super clients is what is needed to shift money into climate-aware investment strategies. As Guadagnuolo says, “At the end of the day we’re a fund manager, not a venture capital firm. That makes a difference to how we see things. It’s not our job to develop new technologies, it’s our role to invest our clients’ money as we see prudent. As a venture capital firm you have much higher approval from your investors to take on risk.”

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘CORPORATE CITIZEN’ (Australia)

Posted in AEOLIC, AGRICULTURE, AUSTRALIA, BANKING SYSTEMS, BIOFUELS, BIOMASS, COMMERCE, COMMODITIES MARKET, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT, FINANCIAL CRISIS 2008/2009, FINANCIAL MARKETS, HEALTH SAFETY, HYDROGEN - FUEL CELLS, INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIES, INTERNATIONAL, MACROECONOMY, NATURAL GAS, RECESSION, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, REFINERIES - PETROL/BIOFUELS, REGULATIONS AND BUSINESS TRANSPARENCY, SOLAR, SOLAR CELLS INDUSTRIES, STOCK MARKETS, THE FLOW OF INVESTMENTS, THE WORK MARKET, WATER | 1 Comment »

RECYCLING SHOWS CONCERN FOR OTHERS, AS WELL AS ENVIRONMENT (USA)

Posted by Gilmour Poincaree on November 14, 2008

Nov. 13, 2008

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

First, an important announcement: This Saturday is America Recycles Day.

There will be an e-waste recycling fair, collecting all computers, monitors (no TVs), keyboards, mice, REDUCE REUSE RECYCLEprinters, fax machines and cell phones, whether they work or not. There is no charge for this service. They offer a secure hard drive erasure service for a small additional fee. The event is coordinated by the Blind Center of Nevada in conjunction with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Rebel Recycling Program and will run from 9 a.m.-1 p.m.

The drop-off location will be at the UNLV Rebel Recycling Program behind the solar dishes off of East Flamingo Road east of Swenson Street. For detailed directions, call 895-3760. If you have questions about acceptable materials, please call 642-6000 or visit http://www.blindcenter.org.

Please celebrate America Recycles Day by recycling your unwanted electronics and computers.

Now, some thoughts on recycling:

I believe that most Americans are good people. With all our diversity of color, beliefs and origin, the vast majority of people care about others. It’s part of what makes our country great. Given the opportunity, most people will come to the aid of someone in distress. It’s an admirable trait.

But if that’s the case, why are there so few red, white and blue bins on the sidewalk each recycling day? If we care about each other, why don’t more of us care about our waste? Perhaps it’s simply because we don’t realize the magnitude of our consumption and the harm it creates.

I’m sure you’ve heard of the three Rs: reduce, reuse, then recycle. Reducing our consumption is the most important principle. Finding ways to reuse more of what we do have is next. The final step is to recycle those things that have reached the end of their useful lives. No part of this equation contains the words “throw away.” In fact, you can throw those very words away. We need to eliminate the entire concept of waste, lest we ultimately suffocate ourselves with it. Besides, just where is “away?”

When we throw things away, it usually results in a trip to the landfill via the garbage truck, resulting in a toxic mix of stuff we’d like to just forget about. By consciously integrating the three Rs into our daily lives, we can greatly reduce the amount of stuff going to the landfill. But that is only the beginning of the benefits.

When we recycle, we reduce air pollution and the need for raw materials. We save lots of energy. Recycling helps keep our water clean. It should be an essential part of every household and business.

We could rebuild our entire commercial air fleet with just three months worth of the aluminum we currently send to landfills. Recycling a single aluminum can saves enough energy to power a TV for three hours. The average person has the opportunity to recycle more than 25,000 cans in a lifetime. Why would we not?

The amount of paper we throw away each year is staggering, yet producing recycled paper reduces contributions to air pollution by 95 percent. Recycling a stack of newspapers just 3 feet high saves one whole tree. Just think of all the hugs.

Glass is forever. It never wears out and can be recycled over and over again. Using recycled glass cuts water pollution by 50 percent. Recycling one glass jar saves enough energy to run an 11 watt compact fluorescent bulb for 20 hours.

In 2005, 3.3 billion pounds of post-consumer plastics were recycled in the U.S. Just five PET (plastic soda) bottles yield enough fiber for one extra large T-shirt, 1 square foot of carpet or enough fiber insulation to fill a ski jacket. The plastic recycling industry alone provides jobs for more than 52,000 American workers.

A strong recycling ethic is a key element to a successful and sustainable community. Jobs are created, pollution reduced and entire forests can remain standing, continuing to clean our air and provide crucial habitat for other species. Imagine, we can reduce asthma and other respiratory problems simply by recycling. If we truly care about others, we must embrace recycling as an integral part of our lives.

Republic Services offers curbside recycling at no extra charge. It will provide you with recycling bins. Just call the company at 735-5151. There is no reason that every home should not have those red, white and blue bins on the curb every pick up day. Remember, compact fluorescent lamps can be safely recycled at any Home Depot store.

For commercial or construction project waste, call Evergreen Recycling at 646-1446. It is doing some great work. In just the third quarter of 2008, Evergreen recovered enough material to offset the equivalent of 97,000 metric tons of CO2. Yes, recycling is part of the solution to the climate crisis.

As is often the case, simple acts can lead to great results. Recycling costs us nothing, but provides tremendous benefits. It is part of the cycle of life.

– Steve Rypka is a green living consultant and president of GreenDream Enterprises, specializing in renewable energy, green building, alternative transportation and lifestyle choices for both residential and commercial clients. The company is committed to helping people live lighter on the planet. Rypka can be reached via e-mail at steve@greendream.biz. More information relating to this column is posted at http://www.greendream.biz.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

PUBLISHED BY ‘LAS VEGAS REVIEW JOURNAL’ (USA)

Posted in ALUMINUM, COMMERCE, COMMODITIES MARKET, ECONOMIC CONJUNCTURE, ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT, INDUSTRIES, METALS, RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, USA | Leave a Comment »