June 06, 2007
Time for some modest proposals

The Seattle City Clowncil wants to reduce waste:

City leaders are looking at ways to bump recycling and composting rates from the current 44 percent up to 72 percent -- a goal that could be hit by 2025 if sweeping changes were embraced, according to a study released in April.
Among the proposed changes:
* Require disposal of food waste in yard waste containers

* Ban Styrofoam restaurant food containers and plastic shopping bags

Here are some of my own modest proposals:

* Ban newsprint. Most people get their news from the Internet now anyway. Think of all the trees would be saved in a a newspaperless world, not to mention the gasoline currently used by delivery trucks.

* Forbid city employees from driving solo to/from work or to work-related meetings. Require them to carpool, walk, bike, take the bus or telecommute.

* Ban junk mail from political campaigns. Start with City Clowncil and Mayoral races.

Your turn.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 06, 2007 11:02 PM | Email This
Comments
1. A .50 "green fee" on any Starbucks purchased NOT served in the buyers own reusable cup.

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on June 6, 2007 11:05 PM
2. frequent garbage collection used to be a public health issue. Growing up in the 60s and 70s in ny, garbage was collected twice a week and that was viewed as a huge improvement from the old days when garbage would rot, fester and attract rodents. I guess Seattle wants to go back to the middle ages with rats, fleas & the bubonic plague.

Posted by: patrick on June 6, 2007 11:07 PM
3. Somewhat more seriously:
* Reduce auto emissions by improving commute times by doubling the lane miles of arterials within the city while halting all up-zoning.
* Reduce construction waste by halting all utopian transit boondoggles.
* Reduce trash produced by city government by half, by laying off the less useful half of city employees.

Somewhat less seriously:
* Hire young men in brown shirts to conduct random inspections of trash receptacles all over the city, and smash in the windows of any home or business whose receptacle fails to comply with the 72% requirement.
* Stop collecting trash altogether. Announce that it is everyone's civic duty to find innovative new ways of producing no trash whatsoever, and the fate of the world depends on it.

Posted by: TB on June 6, 2007 11:25 PM
4. "Forbid city employees from driving solo to/from work or to work-related meetings. Require them to carpool, walk, bike, take the bus or telecommute."

The only thing you're missing from this one is providing the proper incentive for it to work - plus, there's already at least one "clowncil" member who should be solidly behind the proposal!

Posted by: Ironman on June 7, 2007 06:42 AM
5. They are now having trouble finding markets for the recyclables. How about when it is increased?

Posted by: swatter on June 7, 2007 07:10 AM
6. Stefan's suggestion that the City Council "ban newsprint" should get the support of the PI.

The PI Editorial pages ran a piece recently called "Global Warming: Raise gas taxes." It was predictable and provided nothing new nor unexpected from the PI Editorial Board. On the upside, it doesn't appear to have been written by D. Parvaz, as there were no quasi-adolescent jokes about Dick Cheney or words like "dude" or "skank" or "wuss'" anywhere in the copy.

The editorial encourages a substantial increase in the gas tax, in part because America's "addiction to oil is poisoning the environment."

I proposed the PI advocate a crippling tax on newpapers, citing a research study that looked at the full range of industrial processes needed to supply a Berkeley resident with the New York Times (print edition) for one year vs. digital delivery:


Global Warming? Raise taxes on newpapers

Posted by: Brian White on June 7, 2007 07:54 AM
7. I've read that Seattle's recycling program goes millions in the hole every year. The more we re-cycle, the more we pay.

My Waste Management re-cycle behemoth cruises up and down my alley and street four the six times every thursday. Kinda non-green in spite of its paint job.

Where's the incentive? What's the reward?

Civic pride?? Feels more like civic embarassment to me.

Can't we find a better way to help Mayor Nickels prop his head up high at the next national Mayor's meeting?

If the "green movement" is really going to sustain itself, a system of true incentives and rewards needs to be invented.

When we conserve water, eletricity, gasoline and reduce trash outputs, the governments raise the costs associated with those things since they aren't selling or taxing enough. Rewards absent, penalties created.

Then we hire the new enforcers like the trash police, and viola! A triple penalty system via increased taxes.

A final tidbit. A one square mile by 200 foot deep pit would be large enough to accomodate ALL of the waste produced by the entire U.S. for the next 500 years. I'm looking into real estate on the "dry side".

Posted by: Bart Cannon on June 7, 2007 08:15 AM
8. Bart, I have a hard time with that figure. Source?

I personally really like to recycle because the cost to recycle is much, much less than the cost to dump in the garbage and increase those costs.

But, if it doesn't go anywhere?

Posted by: swatter on June 7, 2007 08:29 AM
9. TB - The brown shirt comment isn't funny. See Seattle Ordinance 121372, effective 1/1/05. Seattle businesses are required to recycle. More than 10% recyclables in the garbage can result in a fine. The inspector has been to the small business where I work once that I know of.

Posted by: fieryfood on June 7, 2007 08:29 AM
10. Ragnar #1, I don't know if you hate Starbucks, but that is the most ridiculous anti-business thing targeted to one particular company. It will either have to be all restaurant business serviing with disposable cups or no such rule. Starbucks, Tully's, McDonald's (for their cold/hot drink cups), Burger King... The list is long and the possibility for unlimited taxation potential is there.

Posted by: DopioLover on June 7, 2007 08:37 AM
11. fieryfood,

"More than 10% recyclables in the garbage can result in a fine."

I will be sure to partition off 10% of my dumpster and throw any recyclables in there. I wouldn't want to make the trash nazis job more difficult than it is.

How about banning unsolicited snail mail? It seems that we get enought of this crap a year to save several hundred trees.

Let stop supplying footing the bill for car transportation for overpaid, overfed, and underworked politicians. Mayor Quimby could stand to lose a few pounds anyway.

Posted by: NW Denizen on June 7, 2007 08:54 AM
12. Um, Dopilover... hello! it was tongue in cheek.... but then again it's not much different from requiring reusable grocery sacks, now is it?

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on June 7, 2007 09:26 AM
13. Ban all politicians from public speaking. Start with Ron Sims. Think of all the fuel wasted to listen to these people and think of all the hot air that won't be spewed into the atmosphere from the politicians! Talk about contributing to "global warming"! LOL

Posted by: drw on June 7, 2007 09:48 AM
14. I'd like to see it written into law the recycle police examining every trash can (accompanied by the local media) every pickup day of every elected city pol. Let the frog marches begin.

Posted by: Gary B on June 7, 2007 10:01 AM
15. Stefan could run for the City Clowncil yourself and propose whatever true conservative proposals he wanted. Of course that's too much to ask. Everyone on here is an armchair politician.

Posted by: All Bark, No Bite on June 7, 2007 01:01 PM
16. Ah, another Leftist on the side of free speech.

Posted by: Gary B on June 7, 2007 01:25 PM
17. change MLK logo to a Paris Hilton logo;
many of us are already green...

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on June 7, 2007 01:40 PM
18. SET* (steam emission tax) on all espresso machines who add to the global temp increase.
start with that $15k beauty in Edmonds School Dist.

monies collected subsidize free ice cream and party ice for high income taxpayers & boaters.

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on June 7, 2007 01:53 PM
19. Swatter @ 8.

I did a fair amount of research on this back in 2004. I have a large file on the topic, but I was admittedly writing from recollection. I also recall that the actual figures were nearly impossible to determine, even when this was all fresh for me.

There are two re-cycle contractors in Seattle. Rabanco and Waste Management. The re-cycle contract for my part of town is with Waste Management. Something in the neighborhood of 6 million dollars per year. The re-cycle cost recovery was well below the expense.

I advocate re-cycling from a personal emotional basis. I straighten out used nails and strip the glassine windows from letters I receive. I work at home. I use electricity mostly during the early morning hours when it is evaporating from the storage capacitors. My complaint is that not everyone needs to pay the city to heal a green neurosis such as the one I suffer from.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on June 7, 2007 02:57 PM
20. TB,

You are funny. But then I'm biased in that regard...

Back in the day folks in Seattle would burn trash.
We still do it out in the country.

Posted by: Don Ward on June 7, 2007 04:18 PM
21. Waaaay back in the early 80's TECO, (Tampa Electric Co) was trying out a new pilot program that we were invited to participate in. In essence they installed some kind of remote device to our home that allowed them to regulate the power during peak morning and evening times. I don't think the current program is quite the same but in essence we did without air conditioning and diswasher during peak usage periods: we never missed it but enjoyed the cash rebates.

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on June 7, 2007 05:12 PM
22. We all know that market forces lead to more efficiency than comand and control bureaucracy, as long as externalized costs are at a minimum, and the market is allowed to work unfettered.
So let's consider ways that deregulation and market forces can lead to less waste.

How 'bout we end all subsidies to the oil and energy and packaging industries? If we do that, we can expect them to pass all of their costs through to the consumer instead of artificially increasing sales do to taxpayer subsidized prices. Gas, electricity and packaging costs will all go up, and this will cause consumers to decide whether to conserve or not, depending on the cost increase. This would cause more people to opt for public transit voluntarily, which should be totally funded by rider fees and charitable contributions... This would leave more money for road construction which would reduce congestion and save a non-renewable resource: commuters' time and lives.

Hmmm. Politicians won't like that because then their campaign finance bribes from big corporations would dry up...

How 'bout privatizing garbage pickup, so that there is competition? This would open up more collection service options and billing schemes, such as charging by the pound of garbage, instead of a fixed fee for pickup. This would give some people a market-based incentive to reduce waste.

Hmmm. Politicians won't like that because then their campaign finance bribes from garbage collection unions would dry up...

Turns out the causes of most of our problems are from the government... We, the voters asked the government to provide us with these programs. We have met the enemy, and he is us.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on June 8, 2007 10:27 AM
23. Oh, then there is allowing competition with the post office, and eliminating special mailing program pricing so that bulk mail is no longer subsidized.

Allow the market to work, and the environment will be much better off.

It is in societies with central control, like China, the frmr Soviet Union where the environment gets trashed the most.

But our City Council will probably follow the socialistic path instead.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on June 8, 2007 10:31 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?