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

bplatt@ilsr.org Brenda Platt

202-898-1610 x230