Paul your note really struck a chord in me. Wondering what your
connection was a few decades ago. Garbagio's?
As an operator in my 31st year of a barely-4-profit paper recycling
business, I appreciated your insights.
And I loved your bringing in the sanipacs of the world. This is gonna
sound like I'm dissing them and nothing could be farther from the truth
as I have an active and healthy business relationship with the local
incarnation--but they've been shielded from the market reality of
recycling ever since they got into it years ago. And they would not
have gotten into it at all if not forced to do so by a well-meaning but
naive city of you gene.
"Let's maintain our stereotype of a hip city by doing what we can to
divert recyclables from the waste stream: let's make it a condition for
the continued issuance of a license to do business in town that garbage
haulers now provide curbside recycling."
They did not bring to the table the most important player in this game:
the folks who buy recyclables. In their myopic way, they never
calculated that--though vast amounts of material would be diverted from
our landfills--the overall market value for these substances would
plummet because of the sudden flood. The handful of haulers who for
years had made a living providing recycling would almost all be put out
of business. (Mine is the only independent paper recycling business
still operating in Eugene).
And the sanipacs of the world immediately shielded themselves from the
resultant plunge in value by "adjusting their fee schedules." Nearly all
the rate increases in the past twenty years have been to shield them
from the high cost of providing recycling. (When expensive vehicles
driven by Teamsters and with many thousands of dollars per year
maintenance protocols are picking up and delivering cargoes with a value
less than straw, something's gotta give).
What I'm talking about is socialism--but surely it was half-assed
socialism to mandate that private sector businesses offer "free"
recycling without also calculating--and making some accommodation--for
the impact of such a supply flood on the market place.
Jimmy Carter was the last President who gave any serious consideration
to recycling by giving tax incentives to businesses who engaged in
it--and of course all of that went away under ronnie ray gun. Ever
since, though recycling becomes more and more a matter of course and not
of choice, its credibility as a viable business model loses ground every
day.
Witness the result of International Paper's recent purchase of all of
Weyerhauser's paper recycling business: their stock value plummeted
while Weyerhauser's soared. (Obviously recycling is NOT a good
investment--more's the pity).
Point of this tirade is to echo Paul's sentiment: all hail those who
struggle to keep recycling viable.
marbux wrote:
Nice post, Chris.
I'll add a note from my own experience working as a board member on a
non-profit recycling organization a few decades ago.
One of the harsh realities of the recycling scene is that non-profits
are absolutely essential to build markets for recyclables. Until the
markets are grown for the recyclables, no profit-making business is
interested.
_______________________________________________
EUGLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
