|
<br />~.')S-fD CaSI. :It":f-
<br />rfrJV!1Ja ,BY.. .PJtiJ(;e ~.!.....,....!..i...... 'r.
<br />. .-JJlplnlons
<br />
<br />
<br />oy David Morris
<br />
<br />City sanitation chiefs rarely talk to city
<br />~conomic develoJXrs. They should. We
<br />must SlOp treating garbage only as a dis-
<br />posal problem and begin to see it as an
<br />economic development opponunity.
<br />
<br />Waste handling is this nation's fastesl
<br />growing industry. A SIOO billion markel
<br />may exisl. Twin Cilians will invesl more
<br />than S400 million from 1985 to 1990 to
<br />develop new garbage handling systems.
<br />Yet this enonnous sum will not be
<br />judged by the same criteria as would
<br />smaller investments in a convention cen-
<br />ter or an industrial park or an downtown ,
<br />office buddings.
<br />
<br />We should demand the greatest benefit
<br />for our local economy from such an in-
<br />Vestmem. We need to consider the num.
<br />ber and quality of jobs created, the num-
<br />ber ot businesses developed, the amounl
<br />of innovations spurred and the value of
<br />expons generated JXr ton of garbage
<br />hanJled. No Minnesoca agency has ever
<br />unJercaken suc~ an analysis.
<br />
<br />("n,ider employment. A Canadian
<br />,"udv found that recvcline creates six
<br />lIme's as many jobs ~s la~drilling. If a
<br />similar ratio holds lor incineration. the
<br />Twin Cities would create 0000 more
<br />jobs by investing in recycling than by in-
<br />vesting in incineration. That is a signi-
<br />ficam number. especially if we consider
<br />that most of these would likely be entry-
<br />level jobs, suited ,for those age and skill
<br />groups with the highest unemployment
<br />rates.
<br />
<br />Our goal should be to create as much
<br />value as possible from our "raw materi-
<br />als. - The worst policy is to put them in
<br />the ground. The second worst is to burn
<br />them.
<br />
<br />Why is incineration inherently uneco-
<br />nomical? Because it is inefficienl, It
<br />recaptures only the direct energy of
<br />wastes, not the energy and eXJXnse that
<br />transforrne~ raw materials imo finished
<br />products in the first place. All the ex-
<br />pense of making a tree into paper is 1051.
<br />Only the bru value of the paper itself is
<br />recovered.
<br />
<br />Materials recovery is only the first step
<br />in a development process, We receive
<br />relatively little benefit if we merely ex-
<br />pon the scrap we recover. We become
<br />like a developing country that expons
<br />raw materials and impons more expen-
<br />sive final products.
<br />
<br />The real bene h t 10 the local economy
<br />comes from convening scrap into useful
<br />products: processing aluminum inlo in.
<br />gOls and paJXr into pulp. then making
<br />
<br />,-
<br />
<br />ingols into bicycles and pulp ltack into,
<br />paper, How far a city can mo~e illthi$
<br />direction is ~ function of ilS sife and
<br />density, induslrial mix and polltidal will.
<br />The Twin Cities and Minnesof,p cpuld
<br />tapture a great deal of the pot<<nti!ll val-
<br />uc added, in the economists' .Ii&go. Afrer
<br />all, Minnesoca has a larger int~m*1
<br />ec~nomy than more than 50 infep;cndent
<br />nallons. -
<br />
<br />Consider how we might apply " vah.~-
<br />,added approach 10 a small but trouble-
<br />some waste ilem - scrap tires. q,n ~ver-
<br />age, each Minnesocan diSposes ,bf about
<br />one 20-pound tire a year-SO llIillian
<br />pounds in the Twin Cities alont!:. When.
<br />Minnesota banned landfilling oC tireS in:
<br />1986, the cost of disposal was ~bo!lI,IO
<br />cenls a pound. So we in the r"'ln (:ilies
<br />were paying about S5 millioll ~rclyto
<br />dump the IIres into the groulld, txdud-
<br />ing the cost of transponalion.
<br />
<br />Tires can be recycled in several;ways.
<br />They can be shredded and bum" as
<br />fuel. But compelition from todat's '
<br />depressed oil prices would keep.th~
<br />price al aboUI 1-2 cenlS a poun<(l1l!lis
<br />method only creates another $50jl,OOO Iq
<br />S I million in value for the comrilunity.
<br />Tircs shredded into finer pieces ,an'be
<br />added 10 road asphall and are mqre'valu..
<br />able,',!',.
<br />
<br />But the real benefit 10 the local ejoriomy
<br />'. comes when the scrap can beco~vei'ted ;.
<br />inlo a high-valuc final material. 1'hi$ has
<br />been done by a Minneapolis llaScil ~nn,.
<br />Rubber Research Elastomerics <RR.8!). A'
<br />patented liquid polymer is added iollUl- :;
<br />veri zed tires which enables the rrQlterial "
<br />to compete both with virgin rubbjr and
<br />with plastics. RRE's primary cusl'Pmcrs
<br />are thermoplastic molders. For t,\!spur- .
<br />pose the material can be sold for Ilxwt
<br />50 ccnts a pound.
<br />
<br />4\ ?I fiG,
<br />
<br />IYrTclt
<br />
<br />..:.,
<br />'2%
<br />~
<br />
<br />I J.~ J
<br />'. ~ Ii, ~' .
<br />~. -..
<br />.' '. - ~I"", r;:oiJ,.'
<br />. ....!:::"": . '~~ k'"
<br />'. iii /.. '-'}':"'I..~' ,. ~. ". -:.:; -k. ~-...:.
<br />}t: . ..... '. I
<br />. ...' -~ 0 . 4-YI
<br />--;: . ,.--~ .~;.;.. ~'..~. '..:.:.).:= .:::!:!
<br />- . ~,....... - . -'
<br />. , ., - . ..-
<br />~ .....,.- - , -=-....... ........ .
<br />
<br />If all of the Twill Cities' tires were recy-
<br />, cled in this manlier the economy would
<br />not {'"iy avoid \hI! disposal cost bUI
<br />could crealc a S2S million a year busi-
<br />ness. Mor~ver . these sales would spur
<br />f urther.res~archand development efforts
<br />I.' irr.provethe quality of the final mate-
<br />rial. And tljis knOWledge, in turn. could
<br />become a significant eXPontoothet
<br />pans of the country facing similar dis-
<br />posal problems.
<br />
<br />Finally, having a supply of valuable
<br />materials IllIIY anl';1ct other. finns who
<br />make th,emllterialinlo a final producI,
<br />adding still'funher 10 thl! value captured
<br />by the localecOl\Qmy. One manufacturer
<br />has already moved ,from Ohio to Babbin
<br />to ~ near ilS raw material supplier.
<br />
<br />The same vlilue.added criteria could be
<br />applied to paper ,glass, organic wasle or
<br />melllls.
<br />
<br />Unfonul!ately such a vision does not in~
<br />form our pulllic pQlicy. I.n 1985 the
<br />Metropolicall Council deeidedlo bum 80
<br />percent of our garbage and recycle less
<br />than 20 perc~lIt. ltneverevaluated the
<br />economic intpacl of alternative strate.
<br />gies. City ollicials in the metro area are
<br />no beller. tn fact. at this point our recy-
<br />cling effon! I~g be?ind even the very
<br />modeSI goals,sCI by the council. Mean-
<br />, while weare ahead of its 'incineration
<br />schedule.
<br />
<br />Even, those otlicialswho suppon inciner-
<br />ation agrllethill we.could achieve very
<br />high ~ecYclinB levels. The Japanese cily
<br />of Machicja. th.e site of Minneapolis,
<br />recycles 75 JlI!rcent ,()f its IOlal waste
<br />slream. SevefojJl small U.S. cities on the
<br />east coastrecyclempre than SO percent
<br />of their hOUSl'holdg~rbage, compared to
<br />10 percenl in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
<br />
<br />~-t'T!:.
<br />
<br />~ ~<I,
<br />.,~
<br />
<br />
<br />,', '~'.';.
<br />
<br />......
<br />. ,:". ....
<br />'~.,"". ..~
<br />
<br />
<br />'i
<br />~
<br />..~
<br />~
<br />1
<br />l!
<br />~
<br />
<br />It is nOllao lale for our eommunities to
<br />rethink and redirect their garbage poli-
<br />cies. Indeed. cities in Hennepin Coumy
<br />have recently been given a marvelous
<br />opponunity to do just thai. The' county
<br />commissioners have agreed to pay 80 .
<br />JXrcenl of the costs of recycling pro- -
<br />grams for cilies that achieve a 16 per-,
<br />Cent recycling rate by 1990. For every
<br />dollar spent. 80 {'cnts can be recovered
<br />from the county. Cilies could undenake
<br />an accelerated. materials recovery-based
<br />economic development policy that will
<br />be almost entirely paid for by the .
<br />County.
<br />
<br />....
<br />
<br />This window of opponunity should spur
<br />county cities to invest quickly in materi-
<br />als recovery and processing at a level
<br />equal to thai of investmems that have al-
<br />ready been approved for incinera.tion _,
<br />thai is. S50-75 million.
<br />
<br />Waste handling is a fasl growing indus-
<br />Iry worldwide. Entrepreneurs in this.
<br />fieldo.ften are al the CUlling edge of
<br />technological developments in both' ma-
<br />terial and biological sciences. The com-
<br />munilY that learns how to gel the most
<br />value from its scrap malerials will find a
<br />ready market for its equipmenl and its
<br />~nowledge.
<br />
<br />If will take a great collective effon and
<br />even grealer imagination for the Twin
<br />Cities and Minnesota to shift our present
<br />garbage policy, BUI the rewards will be
<br />equally greal. Garbage is not a dispQsal
<br />problem. It is an economic developmenl
<br />opponunity.
<br />
<br />O.vld Morrl. I. a St. Paul re.'de.,t, director
<br />01 the W.shlngton D.C..based In.lItute lor
<br />Local Sell.Rellanee and a regular columniat
<br />lor the SI. Paul Pioneer P.... Dlsp.tch.
<br />
<br />-.
<br />
<br />~ c_ _ ,_
<br />
<br />Reduction: state's W.Ml~d9iclr_ag;estrategy
<br />
<br />by Bill Du nn vast majority of its waSle. ~r It to aS5f:sstllei{itpacf'of their products boYCOllS are very difficult 10 execute,
<br />. . ~ ,t ;,( and Pl!c~~ijn~;poll~l~rs muslpay Ihe But these may be needed to do the job.
<br />Wasle reduction: the prevemion of waste ~C!l:n.....hl.I,e. r~ucllon ~as ~ re. alll'O~...~.,. InU.,> true SQCla,~Costs fO'il!teir decisions and "
<br />at,f.s source by redeslgnlRg products or dealing ",m MlRnesolllS sohdwa'e, .. actIons. Future waste reduction measures must
<br />olherw"e changing SOCietal production stream. which grows at abouI 't c % ..,1 create an accounlable method 10 track
<br />and com:um tin _ "
<br />
|