Transcript Keep America Beautiful Public Space Recycling Symposium

Diamond Jubilee
Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
Closing Remarks
June 7, 2011
Thanks
Overview
• How we view our world
• Trends and Back to the Future thinking
• Changes. Yes more changes. Are We Ready?
– Systems Thinking
– Sustainable Materials Management
• Saving Tomorrow The Old Fashion Way: With
hard work and collaboration
• Future is now!
Thanks to you
MSW Recycling Rates
It was the race to the moon
First Earth Shot from the moon
Lunar Orbiter 1 August 23, 1966
Apollo 8
Christmas Eve 1968
Christmas Eve Earthrise 1968
And Stewart Brand insistence
Google before Google
For the first time to see ourselves
In a different way
And that little blue ball
Called Planet Earth
Our home
World Population Trends
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1 billion 1804
2 billion 1927
3 billion 1960
4 billion 1974
5 billion 1987
6 billion 1999
7 billion Oct 2011
How many Earth’s needed by 2030?
How many Earth’s needed by 2030?
How many Earth’s needed by 2050?
How many Earth’s needed by 2030?
But we only have one!
Unsustainable Trajectory
o
In past 50 yrs, humans consumed more resources than in all past history
o
In 2000, U.S. consumed 57% more materials than in 1975; global consumption
increase was even greater
o
U.S. has < 5% of world’s population but is responsible for about 1/3 of world’s
total materials consumption in 1970-1995
o
Our reliance on minerals as fundamental ingredients in manufactured products
used in U.S. (e.g., cell phones, paint, toothpaste) requires extraction of >25,000
lbs of new nonfuel minerals per capita each year
o
1992 Earth Summit world leaders declared that “a principal cause of the
continued deterioration of the global environment is the steady increase in
materials production, consumption and disposal”
Figure 1. MSW Generation Rates,
1960 to 2009
300
10
255.0
242.5
252.4
250
Total MSW generation (million tons)
243.0
208.3
200
166.3
6
151.6
150
121.1
127.8
4.57
104.4
4.52
4.72
4.67 4.63
4.34
88.1
4
3.83
100
3.66
3.25
3.25
2.96
2.68
2
50
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
Total MSW generation
1990
1995
Per capita generation
2000
0
2005 2007 2009
Per capita generation (lbs/person/day)
8
217.3
Figure 1. MSW Generation Rates,
1960 to 2009
300
10
255.0
242.5
252.4
250
Total MSW generation (million tons)
243.0
208.3
200
166.3
6
151.6
150
121.1
127.8
4.57
104.4
4.52
4.72
4.67 4.63
4.34
88.1
4
3.83
100
3.66
3.25
3.25
2.96
2.68
2
50
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
Total MSW generation
1990
1995
Per capita generation
2000
0
2005 2007 2009
Per capita generation (lbs/person/day)
8
217.3
Figure 1. MSW Generation Rates,
1960 to 2009
300
10
255.0
242.5
252.4
250
Total MSW generation (million tons)
243.0
208.3
200
166.3
6
151.6
150
121.1
127.8
4.57
104.4
4.52
4.72
4.67 4.63
4.34
88.1
4
3.83
100
3.66
3.25
3.25
2.96
2.68
2
50
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
Total MSW generation
1990
1995
Per capita generation
2000
0
2005 2007 2009
Per capita generation (lbs/person/day)
8
217.3
1970’s
Godfather, Rocky and The Sting
Figure 1. MSW Generation Rates,
1960 to 2009
300
10
255.0
242.5
252.4
250
Total MSW generation (million tons)
243.0
208.3
200
166.3
6
151.6
150
121.1
127.8
4.57
104.4
4.52
4.72
4.67 4.63
4.34
88.1
4
3.83
100
3.66
3.25
3.25
2.96
2.68
2
50
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
Total MSW generation
1990
1995
Per capita generation
2000
0
2005 2007 2009
Per capita generation (lbs/person/day)
8
217.3
The 1980’s
Platoon, Gandhi, Out of Africa
Figure 1. MSW Generation Rates,
1960 to 2009
300
10
255.0
242.5
252.4
250
Total MSW generation (million tons)
243.0
208.3
200
166.3
6
151.6
150
121.1
127.8
4.57
104.4
4.52
4.72
4.67 4.63
4.34
88.1
4
3.83
100
3.66
3.25
3.25
2.96
2.68
2
50
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
Total MSW generation
1990
1995
Per capita generation
2000
0
2005 2007 2009
Per capita generation (lbs/person/day)
8
217.3
The 1990’s
Internet and Cable explosion
Dances with Wolves,
Forest Gump, Braveheart, Titanic
Figure 1. MSW Generation Rates,
1960 to 2009
300
10
255.0
242.5
252.4
250
Total MSW generation (million tons)
243.0
208.3
200
166.3
6
151.6
150
121.1
127.8
4.57
104.4
4.52
4.72
4.67 4.63
4.34
88.1
4
3.83
100
3.66
3.25
3.25
2.96
2.68
2
50
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
Total MSW generation
1990
1995
Per capita generation
2000
0
2005 2007 2009
Per capita generation (lbs/person/day)
8
217.3
A Different Future is Needed
•
Independently, EPA’s “Sustainable
Materials Management: The
Road Ahead” report and the
WBCSD’s “Vision 2050” report
concluded:
–
“Business as usual” cannot
continue
–
A systems approach is
needed
–
We must start now to
achieve the necessary
changes to minimize
negative environmental
impacts or unintended
consequences of actions
35
Life Cycle Thinking
•
The UN describes one way to include life cycle thinking as the “6 RE philosophy”
RE-thinking
• examining the
product’s
functions
RE-pair
RE-cycle
• design the
product so that
it’s easy to
repair
• choose
recyclable
materials
“6 RE
Philosophy”
RE-duce
• lower the
energy, water,
material use
and other
impacts over
the life cycle
RE-place
• substitute safer
materials for
hazardous or
unsafe ones
RE-use
• design the
product so it
can be
disassembled
Source: UNEP “Life Cycle Management: A Business Guide to Sustainability”
Life Cycle Management
A company might first look to its internal
operations
Life Cycle thinking means looking beyond
the manufacturing process to examine the
impacts of the product over its complete
life cycle, from the design of the product,
the natural resources and materials,
through manufacturing and use, to end of
life.
The UN defines Life Cycle Management as
“a product management system aiming to
minimize environmental and socioeconomic burdens associated with an
organization’s product or product portfolio
during its entire life cycle and value chain. “
This is different from conducting a Life
Cycle Assessment (LCA) for your product.
LCA is an advanced tool and not necessary
for getting started with life cycle thinking.
Source: UNEP “Life Cycle Management: A Business Guide to Sustainability”
Pollution, Waste,
Byproducts
Natural Resources
Extraction of
Raw Materials
Manufacturing
Recycling of
Materials
Product
Design
Recycling and
Remanufacturing
Disposal
Product Reuse
Consumer
Use
Landfill and
Incineration
Transportation
and Distribution
The Footprint of Products
Materials
Use Phase
End of Life Disposal
Manufacturing and
Distribution
Manufacturers have to consider the product’s
impact throughout it’s entire life cycle.
Looking at the Basic Life Cycle of Your
Product
Materials
and inputs
Manufacturing
Product Use
End of Life
Inputs
Processes
Product
Disposal
-extraction pollution
-use of non-renewable
resources such as fossil
fuels
-use of hazardous and
restricted materials
-use of energy, water and
materials in plant
-waste, byproduct, and
pollution production
-use of packaging
-transportation of
materials and products
-electricity or fuel the
product uses
-materials it consumes
-waste or other pollution
it produces
Examples – tropical
hardwoods in furniture,
lead paint, BPA in
plastics,
Examples – water use
in food processing,
energy use in metals,
hazardous materials or
pollutants with some
chemicals
Examples – car fuel
economy,
EnergyStar products,
VOC emissions from
paint
-waste and hazardous
materials that go to
landfill
-products that aren’t
biodegradable
Examples – mercury
light switches in cars, ewaste from electronics,
plastic grocery bags
The Manufacturing and
Product Life Cycle
Raw Materials
Product
Design
Processing
Inputs and
Procurement
Pollution
Waste
Byproducts
Manufacturing
Remanufacturing
Recycling
Transportation
and Distribution
Product Endof-Life Issues
Distribution
Retailing
Consumer Use
Product
Reuse
Waste
Design For Sustainability Process
Product concept
•Use, function, service
integration
Materials Choice
End –of-Life
•Renewable, recycled,
recyclable, low
energy content, less
harmful
•Recyclability,
disassembly,
reusability
Product Life
Materials
consumption
•More reliable and
durable products,
easy to care for
•Less weight and
transport
Product Use
•Lower impact from
use phase of
product such as
energy
consumption
Source: UNEP “Life Cycle Management: A Business Guide to Sustainability”
Production
Technology
Distribution and
packaging
•Less packaging,
energy efficient
transport and logistics
•Cleaner
manufacturing
processes
Sustainable Manufacturing
EPA Packaging Dialogue
So who is at the table?
•
•
•
•
•
•
10 consumer packaging goods companies
2 retailers
7 state governments
5 local governments
6 NGOs
4 EPA staff members
Materials Matter
44
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
Materials Matter
45
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
States
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
New York
North Carolina State Recycling
Washington State Dept of Ecology
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Materials Matter
46
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
Materials Matter
47
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
Local Governments
• Chittenden Solid Waste District, Vermont
• Alameda County Solid Waste Authority
Materials Matter
48
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
Local Governments
• Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency
(OCRRA), Syracuse, New York
• Snohomish County (WA) and Tacoma WA
Materials Matter
49
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
Non Government Organizations (NGO’s)
Materials Matter
50
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
Community Based Recycler
• Bridging the Gap (Kansas City)
Shadowcliff (Grand Lake, CO)
Materials Matter
51
Who?: EPA Packaging Dialogue
EPA Staff for this convening effort
• Sara Hartwell, lead EPA HQ
• Jay Bassett (Region 4),
• Chris Newman (Region 5) and
• Kent Foerster (HQ)
Materials Matter
52
EPA Packaging Dialogue
Project Focus
• Packaging and Printed Materials
• In municipal waste stream (MSW)
• From households, businesses, institutions &
locations away from home
Materials Matter
53
EPA Packaging Dialogue
Project Goals
• Optimize existing system components
• Identify mechanisms to address shortfalls in
current recycling system – including long term
financing
• Maximize source reduction, collection, reuse
and recycling of packaging and print materials
Materials Matter
54
EPA Packaging Dialogue Results
• Meetings in September, December 2010 and
January and April 2011
• Considerable information sharing & webinars
between each meeting
• Subcommittees working on existing system
optimization and financing options
• Final report to be released this summer
Materials Matter
55
• Vance Packard Opening quote in his book
The Waste Makers (1960)
“A society in which consumption has to be
artificially stimulated in order to keep
production going is a society founded on trash
and waste, and such a society is a house built
upon sand.”
Dorothy L. Sayers in Creed or Chaos
Times are a changing, again
• You are part of this change.
• You must become the change
• Congratulations Graduates of 2011!
– You are & always were Material Managers
• Why is it possible for this to happen?
Time: June 6, 2011
Future
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
It is not just about recycling anymore*
Zero Waste
Reduce and Reuse
Organics Revolution
Local & regional markets revolution
Product Stewardship (including EPR)
Sustainable Materials Management
Dawning of another era
Back to the Future
• Learn from Yesterday (3 R’s and what lifestyles
create happiness, environmental, social and
economic well being)
• Do it Today
• Save Tomorrow (the old fashioned way)with
collaboration and hard work! The NRRA way!
Materials Matter
Credits
•
•
•
•
NASA GRIN Photos
EPA Photo Files
Wikipedia
Department of Commerce Morgan Barr
Sustainability 101 Training PowerPoint
• Kent Foerster archives & personal files
Kent Foerster
EPA Headquarters
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
(ORCR)
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (5306P)
Washington, DC 20460
(703) 308 0199
[email protected]
www.epa.gov/rcc