From United Kingdom to U. Quantity: Condition: New. Language: English. Brand new Book. Publisher's Note: Products purchased from Third Party sellers are not guaranteed by the publisher for quality, authenticity, or access to any online entitlements included with the product.
An integrated approach to the planning, design, and management of economical and environmentally responsible solid waste disposal systemIn a world where waste incinerators are not an option and landfills are at over capacity, cities are hard pressed to find a solution to the problem of what to do with their solid waste. This handbook offers an integrated approach to the planning, design, and management of economical and environmentally responsible solid waste disposal system.
Let twenty industry and government experts provide you with the tools to design a solid waste management system capable of disposing of waste in a cost-efficient and environmentally responsible manner. Focusing on the six primary functions of an integrated system--source reduction, toxicity reduction, recycling and reuse, composting, waste- to-energy combustion, and landfilling--they explore each technology and examine its problems, costs, and legal and social ramifications.
Used - Hardcover Condition: As New. Quantity: 5. Condition: As New. Unread book in perfect condition. New Condition: New. No Binding. New Condition. Ships Within business days. New - Hardcover Condition: new. Condition: new. In a world where waste incinerators are not an option and landfills are at over capacity, cities are hard pressed to find a solution to the problem of what to do with their solid waste.
In this practical resource more than 20 top industry and government experts provide all the tools needed to successfully plan, design, implement, and manage a cost-efficient, environmentally sound municipal waste management system. Addressing both the technical and regulatory aspects of municipal waste disposal, the authors cover such wide-ranging topics as facility siting, financing a sold waste management program, environmental risk assessment and considerations, oil and battery recycling, tire disposal, ash disposal, emission monitoring and control, and much more.
There is also new material on optical separation techniques, weight-based collection systems, yard waste management, economies, collection cost and technologies, and safety and risk assessment. Supplemented by revealing case studies and hundreds of how-to illustrations, this is an indispensable working tool for engineers and public officialsinterested in planning, designing, constructing, or managing the most effective waste management facility possible.
Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability. Used - Hardcover Condition: Very Good. Condition: Very Good. Book is in very good condition with minimal signs of use. Brand New!. Published by - -, Please note that we cannot guarantee delivery by Christmas.
Maria Alzira P Dinis. Download PDF. A short summary of this paper. This implies, actually, two very diferent human activities have been developing towards such a concepts, which the book clearly distinguishes.
Finan- consumption of resources that everything relating this cial issues and life-cycle cost are always explored. When we look at the word waste we must understand that a huge set We have then in this edition, the 2nd one, the contri- of concepts, practices and technological issues arise. The whole and complete list would be long, sustainable and cost-efective.
Questions like monitoring and control, safety and several parts, focusing speciic practical problems com- risk assessment are also discussed. Frank kreith has provided assis- Paciic, an M.
Where such designations appear in this book, they have been printed with initial caps. McGraw-Hill eBooks are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales promotions, or for use in corporate training programs.
For more information, please contact George Hoare, Special Sales, at [email protected] or Use of this work is subject to these terms. You may use the work for your own noncommercial and personal use; any other use of the work is strictly prohibited.
Your right to use the work may be terminated if you fail to comply with these terms. McGraw-Hill and its licensors do not warrant or guarantee that the functions contained in the work will meet your requirements or that its operation will be uninterrupted or error free.
Neither McGraw-Hill nor its licensors shall be liable to you or anyone else for any inaccuracy, error or omission, regardless of cause, in the work or for any damages resulting therefrom. McGraw-Hill has no responsibility for the content of any information accessed through the work. This limitation of liability shall apply to any claim or cause whatsoever whether such claim or cause arises in contract, tort or otherwise. DOI: We hope you enjoy this McGraw-Hill eBook!
Williams 1. Repa 2. Kundell and Deanna L. Ruffer 4. Franklin 5. Quantity Reduction Harold Leverenz 6A. Toxicity Reduction Ken Geiser 6B. Collection of Solid Waste Hilary Theisen 7.
Spencer 8. Nightingale and Rachel Donnette Other Special Wastes Part 11A. Batteries Gary R. Brenniman, Stephen D. Casper, William H. Hallenbeck, and James M. Lyznicki 11A. Used Oil Stephen D. Hallenbeck, and Gary R. Brenniman 11B. Scrap Tires John K. Bell 11C. Brenniman and William H. Hallenbeck 11E. Diaz, George M. Savage, and Clarence G. Golueke Incineration Technologies Calvin R. Brunner 13A. Emission Control Floyd Hasselriis 13C. Landfilling Philip R. Artz, Jacob E.
Beachey, and Philip R. Artz CHAP. Franklin Associates, Ltd. Beachey Franklin Associates, Ltd. John K. Gary R. Calvin R. Brunner Incinerator Consultant, Inc. Stephen D. Luis F. Diaz CalRecovery, Inc. Marjorie A. Franklin Franklin Associates, Ltd. Clarence G. Golueke CalRecovery, Inc. William H. James E. Click here for terms of use.
David E. Philip R. Edward W. Deanna K. George M. Savage CalRecovery, Inc. David B. Marcia E. At that time, the management of solid waste was considered a national crisis, because the number of available landfills was decreasing, there was a great deal of concern about the health risks associated with waste incineration, and there was growing opposition to siting new waste management facilities.
The crisis mode was exacerbated by such incidents as the ship named Mobro, filled with waste, sailing from harbor to harbor and not being allowed to discharge its ever-more-fragrant cargo; a large number of landfills, built with insufficient environmental safeguards, that were placed on the Superfund List; and stories about the carcinogenic effects of emissions from incinerators creating fear among the population. In the 12 years that have intervened between the time the first edition was written and the preparation of the second edition, solid waste management has achieved a maturity that has removed virtually all fear of it being a crisis.
Although the number of landfills is diminishing, larger ones are being built with increased safeguards that prevent leaching or the emission of gases. Improved management of hazardous waste and the emergence of cost-effective integrated waste management systems, with greater emphasis on waste reduction and recycling, have reduced or eliminated most of the previous concerns and problems associated with solid waste management.
Improved air pollution control devices on incinerators have proven to be effective, and a better understanding of hazardous materials found in solid waste has led to management options that are considered environmentally acceptable. While there have been no revolutionary breakthroughs in waste management options, there has been a steady advance in the technologies necessary to handle solid waste materials safely and economically.
Thus, the purpose of the second edition of this handbook is to bring the reader up to date on what these options are and how waste can be managed efficiently and cost-effectively. In addition to updating all of the chapters, new material has been added on 1 the characteristics of the solid waste stream as it exists now, and how it is likely to develop in the next 10 to 20 years; 2 the collection of solid waste; 3 the handling of construction and demolition wastes; 4 how a modern landfill should be built and managed; and 5 the cost of various waste management systems, so as to enable the reader to make reasonable estimates and comparisons of various waste management options.
The book has been reorganized slightly but has maintained the original sequence of topics, beginning with federal and state legislation in Chapters 2 and 3. Planning municipal solid waste MSW programs and the characterization of the solid waste stream are addressed in Chapters 4 and 5, respectively.
Methods for reducing both the amount and toxicity of solid waste are discussed in Chapter 6. Chapter 7 is a new chapter dealing with the collection and transport of solid waste. Chapters 8 and 9, which deal with recycling and markets for recycled products, have been revised extensively. Special wastes are considered in Chapter 11, with new sections on construction and demolition and electronics and computer wastes. Composting, incineration, and landfilling are documented in Chapters 12, 13, and 14, respectively.
Finally, siting and cost estimating of MSW facilities are discussed in Chapters 15 and 16, respectively. Many photographs have been added to the book to provide the reader with visual insights into various management strategies. To make the end-of-chapter references more accessible, they have been reorganized alphabetically. The glossary of terms, given in Appendix A, has been updated to reflect current practice, and conversion factors for transforming U.
He received a B. His principal research interests are in the areas of solid waste management, wastewater treatment, wastewater filtration, aquatic systems for wastewater treatment, and individual onsite treatment systems. He has taught courses on these subjects at UC Davis for the past 32 years. He has authored or coauthored over technical publications including 12 textbooks and 3 reference books.
The textbooks are used in more than colleges and universities throughout the United States, and they are also used extensively by practicing engineers in the United States and abroad. Tchobanoglous is an active member of numerous professional societies. Professor Tchobanoglous serves nationally and internationally as a consultant to governmental agencies and private concerns. He is a past president of the Association of Environmental Engineering Professors.
He has served as a member of the California Waste Management Board. Frank Kreith is a professor emeritus of engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder, where he taught in the Mechanical and Chemical Engineering Departments from to For the past 13 years, Dr.
During his tenure at SERI, he participated in the presidential domestic energy review and served as an advisor to the governor of Colorado. He has written more than a hundred peerreviewed articles and authored or edited 12 books.
Kreith has served as a consultant and advisor all over the world. Agency for National Development, and the United Nations. Williams Human activities generate waste materials that are often discarded because they are considered useless. These wastes are normally solid, and the word waste suggests that the material is useless and unwanted.
However, many of these waste materials can be reused, and thus they can become a resource for industrial production or energy generation, if managed properly. Waste management has become one of the most significant problems of our time because the American way of life produces enormous amounts of waste, and most people want to preserve their lifestyle, while also protecting the environment and public health.
Industry, private citizens, and state legislatures are searching for means to reduce the growing amount of waste that American homes and businesses discard and to reuse it or dispose of it safely and economically. In recent years, state legislatures have passed more laws dealing with solid waste management than with any other topic on their legislative agendas.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide background material on the issues and challenges involved in the management of municipal solid waste MSW and to provide a foundation for the information on specific technologies and management options presented in the subsequent chapters.
Appropriate references for the material covered in this chapter will be found in the chapters that follow. It is related to the evolution of a technological society, which, along with the benefits of mass production, has also created problems that require the disposal of solid wastes. The flow of materials in a technological society and the resulting waste generation are illustrated schematically in Fig. Wastes are generated during the mining and production of raw materials, such as the tailings from a mine or the discarded husks from a cornfield.
After the raw materials have been mined, harvested, or otherwise procured, more wastes are generated during subsequent steps of the processes that generate goods for consumption by society from these raw materials.
It is apparent from the diagram in Fig. Consequently, society is searching for improved methods of waste management and ways to reduce the amount of waste that needs to be landfilled.
Sources of solid wastes in a community are, in general, related to land use and zoning. Although any number of source classifications can be developed, the following categories have been found useful: 1 residential, 2 commercial, 3 institutional, 4 construction and demolition, 5 municipal services, 6 treatment plant sites, 7 industrial, and 8 agricultural. Typical facilities, activities, or locations associated with each of these sources of waste are reported in Table 1.
As noted in Table 1. It is important to be aware that the definitions of terms and the classifications of solid waste vary greatly in the literature and in the profession. Consequently, the use of published data requires considerable care, judgment, and common sense.
Solid waste management is a complex process because it involves many technologies and disciplines. These include technologies associated with the control of generation, handling, storage, collection, transfer, transportation, processing, and disposal of solid wastes see Table 1.
All of these processes have to be carried out within existing legal and social guidelines that protect the public health and the environment and are aesthetically and economically acceptable. For the disposal process to be responsive to public attitudes, the disciplines that must be considered include administrative, financial, legal, architectural, planning, and engineering functions.
All these disciplines must communicate and interact with each other in a positive interdisciplinary relationship for an integrated solid waste management plan to be successful. This handbook is devoted to facilitating this process. These topics are considered briefly in this section and in the subsequent chapters of this handbook. Food wastes, paper, cardboard, plastics, textiles, leather, yard wastes, wood, glass, tin cans, aluminum, other metal, ashes, street leaves, special wastes including bulky items, consumer electronics, white goods, yard wastes collected separately, batteries, oil, and tires , and household hazardous wastes Commercial Stores, restaurants, markets, office buildings, hotels, motels, print shops, service stations, auto repair shops, etc.
Paper, cardboard, plastics, wood, food wastes, glass, metal wastes, ashes, special wastes see preceding , hazardous wastes, etc.
Institutional Schools, hospitals, prisons, governmental centers, etc. Same as for commercial Industrial nonprocess wastes Construction, fabrication, light and heavy manufacturing, refineries, chemical plants, power plants, demolition, etc. Wood, steel, concrete, dirt, etc. Municipal services excluding treatment facilities Street cleaning, landscaping, catch-basin cleaning, parks and beaches, other recreational areas, etc. Special wastes, rubbish, street sweepings, landscape and tree trimmings, catchbasin debris; general wastes from parks, beaches, and recreational areas Treatment facilities Water, wastewater, industrial treatment processes, etc.
Treatment plant wastes, principally composed of residual sludges and other residual materials Industrial Construction, fabrication, light and heavy manufacturing, refineries, chemical plants, power plants, demolition, etc. Industrial process wastes, scrap materials, etc.
This total works out to be over lb per year per person 4. The amount of MSW generated each year has continued to increase on both a per capita basis and a total generation rate basis.
In , per capita generation was about 2. By , per capita generation jumped to 4. The waste generation rate is expected to continue to increase over the current level to a 1. What is important in waste generation is to note that there is an identification step and that this step varies with each individual. Waste generation is, at present, an activity that is not very controllable.
Waste handling and separation, storage, and processing at the source Waste handling and separation involve the activities associated with managing wastes until they are placed in storage containers for collection. Handling also encompasses the movement of loaded containers to the point of collection. Separation of waste components is an important step in the handling and storage of solid waste at the source.
On-site storage is of primary importance because of public health concerns and aesthetic considerations. Collection Collection includes both the gathering of solid wastes and recyclable materials and the transport of these materials, after collection, to the location where the collection vehicle is emptied, such as a materials-processing facility, a transfer station, or a landfill. Transfer and transport The functional element of transfer and transport involves two steps: 1 the transfer of wastes from the smaller collection vehicle to the larger transport equipment, and 2 the subsequent transport of the wastes, usually over long distances, to a processing or disposal site.
The transfer usually takes place at a transfer station. Although motor vehicle transport is most common, rail cars and barges are also used to transport wastes.
Separation, processing, and transformation of solid waste The means and facilities that are now used for the recovery of waste materials that have been separated at the source include curbside collection and dropoff and buyback centers. The separation and processing of wastes that have been separated at the source and the separation of commingled wastes usually occurs at materials recovery facilities, transfer stations, combustion facilities, and disposal sites.
Transformation processes are used to reduce the volume and weight of waste requiring disposal and to recover conversion products and energy. The organic fraction of MSW can be transformed by a variety of chemical and biological processes. The most commonly used chemical transformation process is combustion, used in conjunction with the recovery of energy. The most commonly used biological transformation process is aerobic composting.
Disposal Today, disposal by landfilling or landspreading is the ultimate fate of all solid wastes, whether they are residential wastes collected and transported directly to a landfill site, residual materials from MRFs, residue from the combustion of solid waste, compost, or other substances from various solid waste processing facilities. A modern sanitary landfill is not a dump. While waste reduction and recycling now play an important part in management, these management options alone cannot solve the solid waste problem.
Assuming it were possible to reach a recycling diversion rate of about 50 percent, more than million tons of solid waste would still have to be treated by other means, such as combustion wasteto-energy and landfilling. Waste Not Reported in the National MSW Totals In addition to the large volumes of MSW that are generated and reported nationally, larger quantities of solid waste are not included in the national totals.
These wastes may include construction and demolition wastes, agricultural waste, municipal sludge, combustion ash including cement kiln dust and boiler ash , medical waste, contaminated soil, mining wastes, oil and gas wastes, and industrial process wastes that are not classified as hazardous waste. The national volume of these wastes is extremely high and has been estimated at 7 to 10 billion tons per year.
Most of these wastes are managed at the site 1. However, if even 1 or 2 percent of these wastes are managed in MSW facilities, it can dramatically affect MSW capacity. One or two percent is probably a reasonable estimate. Lack of Clear Definitions To date, the lack of clear definitions in the field of solid waste management SWM has been a significant impediment to the development of sound waste management strategies.
At a fundamental level, it has resulted in confusion as to what constitutes MSW and what processing capacity exists to manage it. Consistent definitions form the basis for a defensible measurement system. They allow an entity to track progress and to compare its progress with other entities.
They facilitate quality dialogue with all affected and interested parties. Moreover, what is measured is managed, so if waste materials are not measured they are unlikely to receive careful management attention. Waste management decision makers must give significant attention to definitions at the front end of the planning process.
Because all future legislation, regulations, and public dialogue will depend on these definitions, decision makers should consider an open public comment process to establish appropriate definitions early in the strategy development planning process. It is even more difficult to engage the public in a dialogue about the choice of an optimal strategy without these data.
While the federal government and some states have focused on collecting better waste generation and capacity data, these data are still weaker than they should be. Creative waste management strategies often require knowledge of who generates the waste, not just what volumes are generated. The environmental, health, and safety EHS impacts and the costs of alternatives to landfilling and combustion are another data weakness. Landfilling and combustion have been studied in depth, although risks and costs are usually highly site-specific.
Source reduction, recycling, and composting have received much less attention. While these activities can often result in reduced EHS impacts compared to landfilling, they do not always. MSW management strategies developed without quality data on the risks and costs of all available options under consideration are not likely to optimize decision making and may, in some cases, result in unsound decisions. Because data are often costly and difficult to obtain, decision makers should plan for an active data collection stage before making critical strategy choices.
While this approach may appear to result in slower progress in the short term, it will result in true long-term progress characterized by cost-effective and environmentally sound strategies. That status has become increasingly confused over the past 10 years as EHS concerns have increased and more waste has moved outside the localities where it is generated. At the present time, federal, state, and local governments are developing location, design, and operating standards for waste management facilities.
State and local governments are controlling facility permits for a range of issues including air emissions, stormwater runoff, and surface and groundwater discharges in addition to solid waste management.
These requirements often result in the involvement of multiple agencies and multiple permits. Understandably, the current regulatory situation is becoming increasingly less efficient, and unless there is increased cooperation among all levels of government, the current trends will continue.
However, a more rational and cost-effective waste management framework can result if roles are clarified and leadership is embraced. In particular, federal leadership on product labeling and product requirements is important.
It will become increasingly unrealistic for multinational manufacturers to develop products for each state. The impact will be particularly severe on small states and on small businesses operating nationally. Along with the federal leadership on products, state leadership will be crucial in permit streamlining. The cost of facility permitting is severely impacted by the time-consuming nature of the permitting process, although a long process does nothing for increased environmental protection.
Moreover, the best waste management strategies become obsolete and unimplementable if waste management facilities and facilities using secondary materials as feedstocks cannot be built or expanded. Even source reduction initiatives often depend on major permit modifications for existing manufacturing facilities. Need for Even and Predictable Enforcement of Regulations and Standards The public continues to distrust both the individuals who operate waste facilities and the regulators who enforce proper operation of those facilities.
One key contributor to this phenomenon is the fact that state and federal enforcement programs are perceived as being understaffed or weak.
Thus, even if a strong permit is written, the public lacks confidence that it will be enforced. Concern is also expressed that governments are reluctant to enforce regulations against other government-owned or -operated facilities. Whether these perceptions are true, they are the crucial ones to address if consensus on a sound waste management strategy is to be achieved.
There are multiple approaches which decision makers can consider. They can develop internally staffed state-of-the-art enforcement programs designed to provide a level playing field for all facilities, regardless of type, size, or ownership. If decision makers involve the public in the overall design of the enforcement program and report on inspections and results, public trust will increase.
If internal resources are constrained, decision makers can examine more innovative approaches, including use of third-party inspectors, public disclosure requirements for facilities, or separate contracts on performance assurance between the host community and the facility.
While a few receiving communities have welcomed the waste because it has resulted in a significant income source, most receiving communities have felt quite differently.
These communities have wanted to preserve their existing capacity, knowing they will also find it difficult to site new capacity. This dilemma has resulted in the adoption of many restrictive ordinances, with subsequent court challenges.
While the current federal legislative framework, embodied in the interstate commerce clause, makes it difficult for any state or local official to uphold state and local ordinances that prevent the inflow of nonlocal waste, the federal legislative playing field can be 1. At this writing, it is still expected that Congress will address the issue in the near future. New state-of-the-art waste facilities are costly to build and operate, and they require larger volumes of waste than can typically be provided by the local community in order to cover their costs.
Waste facilities are often similar in environmental effects to recycling facilities and manufacturing facilities. If one community will not manage wastes from another community, why should one community have to make chemicals or other products which are ultimately used by another community?
While long-distance transport of MSW over mi usually indicates the failure to develop a local waste management strategy, shorter interstate movements less than 50 mi may provide the foundation for a sound waste management strategy. Congress should be careful to avoid overrestricting options.
Because numerous state and federal laws have been adopted, IWM is also evolving in response to the regulations developed to implement the various laws. The U. Environmental Protection Agency EPA has identified four basic management options strategies for IWM: 1 source reduction, 2 recycling and composting, 3 combustion waste-to-energy facilities , and 4 landfills.
As proposed by the U. EPA, these strategies are meant to be interactive, as illustrated in Fig. It should be noted that the state of California has chosen to consider the management options in a hierarchical order see Fig. For example, recycling can be considered only after all that can be done to reduce the quantity of waste at the source has been done. Similarly, waste transformation is considered only after the maximum amount of recycling has been achieved. Further, the combustion waste-to-energy option has been replaced by waste transformation in California and other states.
Interpretation of the IWM hierarchy will, most likely, continue to vary by state. The management options that comprise the IWM are considered in the following discussion. The implementation of integrated waste management options is considered in the following three sections. Typical costs for solid waste management options are presented in Sec. Source reduction includes the switch to reusable products and packaging, the most familiar example being returnable bottles. However, bottle bill legislation results in source reduction only if bottles are reused once they are returned.
Other good examples of source reduction are grass clippings that are left on the lawn and never picked up and modified yard plantings that do not result in leaf and yard waste. The time to consider source reduction is at the product or process design phase. Source reduction can be practiced by everybody. Consumers can participate by buying less or using products more efficiently. The public sector government entities at all levels: local, state, and federal and the private sector can also be more efficient consumers.
The private sector can redesign its manufacturing processes to reduce the amount of waste generated in manufacturing. Finally, the private sector can redesign products by increasing their durability, substituting less toxic materials, or increasing product effectiveness.
However, while everybody can participate in source reduction, doing so digs deeply into how people go about their business—something that is difficult to mandate through regulation without getting mired in the tremendous complexity of commerce.
Source reduction is best encouraged by making sure that the cost of waste management is fully internalized. Cost internalization means pricing the service so that all of the costs are reflected. For waste management, the costs that need to be internalized include pickup and transport, site and construction, administrative and salary, and environmental controls and monitoring. It is important to note that these costs must be considered whether the product is ultimately managed in a landfill, combustion, recycling, or composting facility.
Regulation can aid cost internalization by requiring product manufacturers to provide public disclosure of the costs associated with these aspects of product use and development. Recycling and Composting Recycling is perhaps the most positively perceived and doable of all the waste management practices.
Recycling will return raw materials to market by separating reusable products from the rest of the municipal waste stream. The benefits of recycling are many. Recycling saves precious finite resources; lessens the need for mining of virgin materials, which lowers the environmental impact for mining and processing; and reduces the amount of energy con- 1. Moreover, recycling can help stretch landfill capacity.
Recycling can also improve the efficiency and ash quality of incinerators and composting facilities by removing noncombustible materials, such as metals and glass. Recycling can also cause problems if it is not done in an environmentally responsible manner. Many Superfund sites are what is left of poorly managed recycling operations. Examples include operations for newsprint deinking, waste-oil recycling, solvent recycling, and metal recycling.
In all of these processes, toxic contaminants that need to be properly managed are removed. Composting is another area of recycling that can cause problems without adequate location controls. For example, groundwater can be contaminated if grass clippings, leaves, or other yard wastes that contain pesticide or fertilizer residues are composted on sandy or other permeable soils.
Air contamination by volatile substances can also result. Recycling will flourish where economic conditions support it, not where it is merely mandated. Successful recycling programs also require stable markets for recycled materials. Examples of problems in this area are not hard to come by; a glut of paper occurred in Germany in to due to a mismatch between the grades of paper collected and the grades required by the German paper mills. Government had not worked with enough private industries to find out whether the mills had the capacity and equipment needed to deal with low-grade household newspaper.
In the United States, similar losses of markets have occurred for paper, especially during the period from through Prices have dropped to the point at which it actually costs money to dispose of collected newspaper in some parts of the country. Stable markets also require that stable supplies are generated. This supply-side problem has been troublesome in certain areas of recycling, including metals and plastics.
Government and industry must work together to address the market situation. It is crucial to make sure that mandated recycling programs do not get too far ahead of the markets. Even with a good market situation, recycling and composting will flourish only if they are made convenient. Examples include curbside pickup for residences on a frequent schedule and easy drop-off centers with convenient hours for rural communities and for more specialized products.
Product mail-back programs have also worked for certain appliances and electronic components. Even with stable markets and convenient programs, public education is a crucial component for increasing the amount of recycling. At this point, the United States must develop a conservation, rather than a throwaway, ethic, as was done during the energy crisis of the s. Recycling presents the next opportunity for cultural change.
0コメント