"No Waste by 2010" joins the other crap in the landfill

What, nobody has mentioned the Chronicle? Canning that will meet half the target by itself!

In Adelaide last month, walking down the street, a toothless old lady with plastic bags full of bottles stopped me and said. “There’s money in me bottles…I love me bottles” Then she shuffled past.

5 cents return on bottles would be good.

I was about to say…

Let’s confine debate to waste disposal here in Canberra shall we?

Stanhope makes a comment about solid waste management, and all you’re off on a tangent about greenhouse gases.

“About 250 million years ago, our planet was struck by an asteroid that devastated our environment and decimated just over 90% of all life on the planet. The quintessential nature of our planet is spoken to by this simple fact—the environment has survived much more horrifying things than human beings. Global Warming activists cannot accept that we simply do not wield enough ecological influence to alter our planet’s entire ecosystem. They want it done and now. Only the aforementioned forces have this ability. Drastic differences in the Earth’s climate are the result of significantly small changes in the axis and rotation of the planet over thousands of years. Are we to believe that the concept of Global Warming has elevated the influence of mankind over that of the sun? Process that for a minute.” (http://thesil.ca/?p=1094)

Sorry, forgot to preview my post above which should read:

Hmmm, and your point?

Atmospheric methane levels have risen over 150% since the Industrial Revolution, as have levels of a number of other gases which are 100-1000s times more powerful as greenhouse gases than CO2. None of which denies the fact that atmospheric CO2 levels have risen by about 40% since the start of the Industrial Revolution, CONTINUE TO RISE, and that that is influencing climate change. The increases in concentration of all of these GHGs is CAUSING CHANGE TO THE CLIMATE WHICH IS occurring 10-100 times quicker than “natural cycles” ever have.

As for methane, there are huge quantities of methane locked up below the ice (as clathrates) in northern Siberia and Greenland, and if IT IS ever released the world will experience the runaway greenhouse warming that scares the crap out of scientists and anyone who has a clue about the impacts.

But yeah, I’m not going to debate the science yet again, because only people who haven’t read it and don’t know what they are talking about bring up the usual, spurious, mythical anti-claims that have already been disproven by the scientists thousands of times over.

jakez said :

RuffnReady said :

If govts across the country were actually serious about landfill, and it is a serious issue, they would require deposit return schemes (like the 5c bottle deposit scheme in SA) for most packaging and get manufacturers to pay for it.

The irony in that plan would be that the price of the 5c deposit that the manufacturers would wear, would be a cost passed down to the consumer through the price of the item.

That’s fine with me – it’s an act of job creation for low-income earners – there are people who supplement or make a living off bottle deposits in SA. It’s also a great community service (reduced landfill, less resource depletion from having to make new packaging, cleaner environment).

proofpositive said :

Certainly is Gorebull warming due to CO2
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/methane-tt1029.html
“methane is 25 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide”

Hmmm, and your point?

Atmospheric methane levels have risen over 150% since the Industrial Revolution, as have a the levels of a number of other gases which are 100-1000s of times more powerful as greenhouse gases than CO2. None of which denies the fact that atmospheric CO2 levels have risen by about 40% since the start of the Industrial Revolution, and that that is influencing climate change, and that the increases in concentration of all of these GHGs is occurring 10-100 times quicker than “natural cycles” ever have. There are huge quantities of methane locked up below the ice in northern Siberia and Greenland, and if they are ever released the world will experience the runaway greenhouse warming that scares the crap out of scientists and anyone who has a clue about the impacts.

But yeah, I’m not going to debate the science yet again, because only people who haven’t read it and don’t know what they are talking about bring up the usual, spurious, mythical anti-claims that have already been disproven by the scientists thousands of times over.

I hate Monty Python, but love Faulty Towers!
LMAO!

How can you hate Monty Python!

😮

No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

…and I hate Monty Python! 😛

Move over far right Christians, Muslims and Jews – “global warming” replaces you all with a new in-vogue fundamentalist religion – http://thesil.ca/?p=1094. Lest anyone dare mention anything remotely at odds or at variance to the proscribed doctrine. Welcome to the modern day resurgence of a Spanish Inquisition.

What, and we needed Stanhope to tell us that?! Some of you actually voted for the idiot – don’t blame me!

PsydFX said :

I reckon we could achieve a higher recycle rate if we looked at changing our collection methods, surely weekly collection of recyclables, and fortnightly collection of general waste would force people into being more diligent with what they put where.

I couldn’t agree more and would love for the recyclable trucks to come once a week instead of once a fortnight as our recycle bin fills up quicker than the rubbish bin.
There is no incentive to recycle.

You can get a second recycling bin. just ask Urban services and a fresh new wheelie bin will be delivered.

Yes but it will cost you $78 bucks a year for that second bin, I rang them last year because I needed the extra bin, and they hit me with that.
As I said there is no incentive to recycle, otherwise the fee would be wavered.

I even had my recycling bin stolen once and I rang up and got a replacement, only to find that the original one had been put somewhere else by another family member.

I thought I would take advantage of both bins and recycle as much as I could, to my disgust on recycling bin morning, I had both bins on the front lawn and the truck only emptied one of them, leaving me with a not quite over flowing recycling bin. Whats the go with that?

I wear a seat belt caf and not just because it is the law. I was more referring to the concept of the risks transferring to the third party and how the compensating effect (note, not negating effect) renders the example as different to the other examples.

Road fatalities have come down for a number of reasons caf we both know that, and the point isn’t so much about raw fatality numbers anyway. I’m not saying that seat belts are bad (although I will say that I don’t believe in seat belt laws for adults), I’m simply saying that seatbelts don’t belong as an example with CFC’s (black and white science) and the fact that the earth is round (black and white science). Seat belts save lives on the aggregate, whereas the other two simply are facts.

So, for example, when the government passes a seatbelt law, some drivers may respond by driving less safely.

The important bit here is “some”, jakez. Road fatalities per distance driven have declined massively over the past 40 years, showing that improvements in vehicle safety are not completely offset by the Peltzman Effect.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

As was the case with CFCs, seat belts and a round earth, change will just whoosh over the heads regardless. If they were dinosaurs, they’d be the ones saying “Rocks have crashed into the planet before. We’ve been here for over a hundred million years! Andrewboltasaurus says it’s all a scam to…well, he’s vague on the motive behind the conspiracy, but if it means I can point at eggheads and howl, so be it!”

I was with you until the seat belts bit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peltzman_Effect

RuffnReady said :

If govts across the country were actually serious about landfill, and it is a serious issue, they would require deposit return schemes (like the 5c bottle deposit scheme in SA) for most packaging and get manufacturers to pay for it.

The irony in that plan would be that the price of the 5c deposit that the manufacturers would wear, would be a cost passed down to the consumer through the price of the item.

It was Carnell-era idea, but as soon as it became a multi-year Government program, it became a “whoever is in charge at the time” problem.

I didn’t think Stanhope actually created the “No Waste by 2010” programme – I thought it was commenced under the previous govt, but happy to be corrected.

Now seat belts cause gorebull warming too?

@proofpositive: you conveniently forgot this bit:

Methane account[s] for around one-fifth of the human contribution to greenhouse gas-driven global warming. Until recently, the leveling off of methane levels had suggested that the rate of its emission from the Earth’s surface was approximately balanced by the rate of its destruction in the atmosphere.

Yeah, let’s all freak out about methane and pretend CO2 isn’t a problem.

And Cletus, you’re wasting your time. You won’t change their minds. All you can do is take solace from the fact that they’re largely irrelevant to the debate. As was the case with CFCs, seat belts and a round earth, change will just whoosh over the heads regardless. If they were dinosaurs, they’d be the ones saying “Rocks have crashed into the planet before. We’ve been here for over a hundred million years! Andrewboltasaurus says it’s all a scam to…well, he’s vague on the motive behind the conspiracy, but if it means I can point at eggheads and howl, so be it!”

The devout gore disciple probably believed there’d be no waste by 2010 too.

Who woulda thunk a thread could go so off topic by a suggestion that the mayor may have to rethink his stance on the lack of gorebull warming and perhaps think of natural climate cycles.

What was the name of the slack jawed one in The Simpsons?

Was it a full moon last night?

Cletus 2… no, it’s a term used when a group of people self confirm their ideas, religiously defend them and ridicule anyone who dares to voice a differing opinion.

Personally I’m convinced global warming is happening, and the only arguments are about quantities and causes. But I’m not about to drink the kool-aid just yet. What’s the carbon footprint of burning eco-heretics at the stake?

Certainly is Gorebull warming due to CO2
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/methane-tt1029.html
“methane is 25 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide”

Our barking toad’s a deranged chimpanzee, and we love him. We love our deranged chimpanzee barking toad.

“…groupthink…”

Is that the standard the response for continuing to screw other people and future generations while enjoying your standard of living guilt-free?

“…typical of denyers…”
“…stupid morons…”
“…singularly idiotic…”

barking toad had a throwaway quip about global warming and you respond with the vitriol and name calling… is this the standard punishment for mocking the groupthink?

barking toad said :

– Gorebull warming – nobody told me about cooling and natural cycles!

This sort of shit blows my mind. Childish name calling, pseudo science, and advertising campaigns is typical of denyers. Let me guess, you don’t have any real facts to quote except for “studies” funded by oil or coal industry, so you “win” the argument by making fun of people?

I’ll let you in on a secret. The debates don’t stop because you have won. They stop because the other party realises you are a fool and there is no point debating.

You don’t think it is a good idea to err on the side of caution and think “wow, perhaps if all these people who are much smarter and studied the problem much longer than I have[*], maybe there is something in it afterall. Given the possible consequences, maybe it is prudent NOT to stick my head in the sand and pump out as much greenhouse gas as possible until it is absolutely 100% proven that the planet is fucked”? That never occurred to you?

[*] I don’t mean to belittle what are I’m sure your extensive years of studies and simulations and calculations on the problem.

If a bunch of scientests published reviewed papers with findings that your drinking water contained dangerously high levels of some chemical, and another group funded by a factory making money from pumping that chemical into your drinking water told you it was nothing to worry about… would you keep drinking it until absolutely 100% proven that it was a problem?

How did your caveman ancestors not get naturally selected for the shit-can long ago?

No, now I’m really curious. I’ve met a lot of stupid morons in my time, but I don’t recall many people that stand out as singularly idiotic as someone who would say “gorebull warming”. I mean, you do get a lot of that on the internet, but this being a Canberra website kind of gives you a bit more credibility of being a real person than a deranged chimpanzee posting on internet forums just to get a response. What sort of person are you? I consider people like you, mindless followers, the biggest problem with our society. No, the tax you pay on your $80K job doesn’t impress me. The negative externalities generated by your attitude outweigh that, I think.

it will never ever be achieved. I think it was…an appropriate target.

Fail.

I rang Urban Services (as it was then) a coupla years ago, inquiring when we were going to get a hard rubbish collection [like practically everywhere else except Canberra! But I digress . . .]
. . . and when I had the ‘audacity’ to question the unrealistic nature of the no waste policy, I was roundly told off by some grumpy lady, as if I were the eejit, for daring to doubt! Well lady, who’s right now, huh? huh? It was dumb from the start. Better to set a realistic goal and (if we must have a catchy darn slogan) call it something realistic! Like, I know, ‘do the right thing’?

I don’t mind catchy slogans and I don’t mind goals that aren’t 100% achievable as long as there is a genuine attempt to get as close as possible. But it seems to me that after putting the effort into designing the logo things have been going backwards.
A few weeks ago I rang to find out about where to take a particular material which is recyclable but not accepted in recycling bins. I was put through to supposedly the right area but the person I spoke to hadn’t even heard of “No Waste by 2010” and suggested perhaps it was a federal government matter!

I’m a huge fan of the multicultural festival but, for the life of me, I can not fathom why they don’t provide ANY recycling bins, considering the number of beer bottles sold…

PsydFX said :

I reckon we could achieve a higher recycle rate if we looked at changing our collection methods, surely weekly collection of recyclables, and fortnightly collection of general waste would force people into being more diligent with what they put where.

Absolutely- our recycle bin is full after about 9 days and the rest just goes in the ordinary bin -which is usually only half full each week

This is the mayor going to confession – again. Expecting absolution without the Hail Marys’

– Doogan inquiry – Sorry, I shouldna done what I did
– No rubbish 2010 – didn’t really mean it
– GDE – whoopsy about the other lane
– New motel in Sep 08 – oops, done it again (the sad one can cop this)

There’ll be more to come

– SIEV X memorial – well, I thought it’d get votes
– Bus lane – as above
– Pubic art – the yartz mob conned me
– Nolan Gallery – that wasn’t my fault!
– Tech centre/power station – bloody greens got me
– Solar farm – ditto
– Oldies on buses – I don’t read press releases!
– Gorebull warming – nobody told me about cooling and natural cycles!
– Bike lanes on roads – they said if I built it, they’d ride their bikes

etc,etc….

The mayor wants his sins forgiven before going into retirement.

I’d heard prior to the last election the phrase was changed to “No Waste”.

Funny about the timing of the media coverage, as ususal…

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

If they treat us all as idiots, that’s how we’ll act…

Personally, I don’t have to act. Neither, for that matter, does Our Almighty Chief.

Apparently he sees himself as our leader; what a joke. He’s an administrator, and if he would do a little more administration and a little less oration we might be a little closer to having no waste…

PsydFX said :

I reckon we could achieve a higher recycle rate if we looked at changing our collection methods, surely weekly collection of recyclables, and fortnightly collection of general waste would force people into being more diligent with what they put where.

Nice idea, although it may lead to a higher rate of trash being put in the wrong bin by lazy people who don’t care, which would increase the load on the recycling plant.

Another area that should be targeted more heavily is green waste – there is no reason for green waste not to be 100% recycled into compost.

Also, there needs to be an awareness campaign by govt that there are all kinds of companies out there recycling all kinds of things – for eg. scrap metal people like ezyscrap who will come and take away anything metal for free. There are also companies recycling e-waste (computers, monitors, other electronic goods), but the number of items I see going into landfill bins is depressing. The other day I saw someone dump a computer monitor in a bin outside the Ainslie PO – what a fucking cretin! But you have to make these things easy for people or they won’t do them.

I have a box of old video cassettes I want to get rid of but don’t want to throw out. it took me 2 minutes on Google to find a company in Melbourne that will recycle them for free, and I will take them down with me on my next trip there, but how many people would bother? Not many, sadly.

Stanhope is the portfolio holder for TaMS, he made it his problem.

I think the fault actually lies with us, not even Stanhope can take the blame for our own laziness.

The Solution. Hopefully this will serve to be both inspirational and aspirational.

I reckon we could achieve a higher recycle rate if we looked at changing our collection methods, surely weekly collection of recyclables, and fortnightly collection of general waste would force people into being more diligent with what they put where.

We recycle around 70% of our garbage by mass, which isn’t bad, but there are still massive gains to be made. Many individuals are still very lazy about recycling (I know this from looking in bins everywhere I go, and from my own apartment block), many businesses don’t do it at all (Manuka is especially shocking – I have seen restaurant workers dumping bags full of bottles in the landfill bin and then telling me they don’t have a recycling bin! Why???), and I can’t believe how lax the ACT government has been in replacing all public bins with dual waste/recycling bins. I carry rubbish home to recycle it, which should not be the case.

If govts across the country were actually serious about landfill, and it is a serious issue, they would require deposit return schemes (like the 5c bottle deposit scheme in SA) for most packaging and get manufacturers to pay for it. As a consequence manufacturers would have an incentive to reduce their packaging loads and head in the direction of full-cycle manufacturing (ie. planning for the disposal/reuse/recycling of products, not just their production). However, govts now believe it is their job to kowtow to industries, so we will never see this.

Short of forcing all manufactures to only sell 100% recyclable products including all packaging and then making it illegal to transport anything which was not recyclable across the NSW \ ACT border, there was no chance that No Waste by 2010 was going to be successful.

What’d they think, take control of a couple of rubbish tips in a city and watch the cities rubbish issue disappear?

If they treat us all as idiots, that’s how we’ll act…

“By 1990 no Australian child will live in poverty…”
“There are no American troops in Baghdad, their soldiers are committing suicide by the hundreds at our gates…”

and now, “No Waste by 2010” can be added to that list.

To be fair, the name was “No Waste by 2010”, but the target was a 95% reduction.

And up until we put Hargreaves in charge of TAMS, I think we were at a reasonable level of compliance (73% was thrown around in this 2006 paper (page 5)).

And in 2004 Gerry Gillespie (once the Zero Waste Australia chairman, developer of Canberra’s NoWaste by 2010 strategy and former Revolve board member, and who was at one point Manager of the NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change, Queanbeyan office) was confident enough in our progress that he was willing to congratulate the City of New York on adopting some of Canberra’s policies, and say how Canberra had ‘become the model’.
http://www.consumersunion.org/other/zero-waste/visions-of-zero-waste.html

And then suddenly, in May 2008 the tyres started falling off (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/29/2258709.htm), with John Hargreaves behind the wheel.

And now, Stanhope doesn’t seem willing to fix it.