Zero Waste – recent questions asked

It means 90%: Absolute zero waste is not technically feasible at this time. It means striving to do 100% to minimize and divert waste stream from the landfill. The 90% will most likely be composted or recycled and made into new products.

What is what: Compostable – food or a fiber-based product; recycle – if it looks like plastic, and if in doubt treat it as recyclable.

What is being done to achieve absolute zero waste – like can it be done: Right now it is an aspirational goal, and fully developed technology may take some years to make this goal achievable, even the full 90% might not be fully achievable for a number of reasons but inside a budget period 90% should be possible.

CO2Land believes the level of achievement is directly proportional to the effort taken, and it is making the effort that is important – that is moving from policy to action.

What is needed to go to zero waste: As usual it requires steps in several stages, like convince you local council of the need to implement a successful program. Steps include:

  • Sell Minimizing waste, working partners need to be established to eliminate waste at its source.
  • Switch to compostable and recyclable products: work with partners to find compostable and recyclable alternatives to products at the enterprises use point.
  • Update the infrastructure: to have recycling and composting containers throughout the sites.
  • Operations: We are also working to modify and enhance the way the business operates to ensure a successful program.
  • Education: Bringing in additional help to monitor our waste stations and to educate the population in the appropriate recycling practices. Additionally, ensure proper methods are used by those preaching, and invest in very visible signs that help educate fans about the new program.

What do I do with my trash: If you have any trash, please dispose of it into the recycling. The recycling facility will pull the trash out of the recycling and dispose of it properly.

What is compost: Definitions can vary, but CO2Land org likes this one “composting is the biological decomposition of organic material; people taking a natural process and manipulating it.” The organic waste taken will be decomposed and turned into nutrient rich material for healthy plant growth. For more information see: OSU-OARDC Compost Research Group

What are typical types of waste categories in proportion: The best endeavors are an estimate is representing the three types of waste found in most academic buildings.  The biggest portion is recycling, comprising of 60% of waste. Then compost, with 30% and the remaining 10%, is trash. However, it is a long term commitment to search for treatment alternatives for trash.

Thank you to those that contributed to this information, and CO2Land org understands ZeroWaste Australia Inc is well advanced on these very matters, and should be the inspiration of Australian efforts for appropriate accreditations.

Trends – Food and Nutrition Report

Australia’s Food and Nutrition Report 2012.

Modern agriculture has focused on just a few plant varieties intended for intensive farming – although 250,000 plant varieties are available for agricultural purposes, fewer than 3% are in use today – as a result, this has dramatically reduced the diversity of plants contributing to food supplies – this trend is known as ‘genetic erosion’.The production of 1 kilogram of wheat requires about 1,000 litres of water, whereas for meat-based foods about 5 to 10 times more water is required.

The loss of biodiversity occurring in food and agricultural systems is a risk to future world food security – fewer than 20 animal and plant species now provide most of the world’s food –  just three crop plants, wheat, rice and maize (corn), supply more than half of the world’s food energy – agricultural systems with low genetic variation are more susceptible to pests and diseases and are also less able to adapt to environmental challenges, such as climate change and water scarcity.

Since the 1950s, world beef and mutton production has more than doubled, world grain production has tripled and oceanic fish catch has more than quadrupled – world fertiliser usage rose from 14 million tonnes in 1950 to 141 million tonnes in 2010.

Over the past 50 years, global fish stocks have fallen considerably, with more than 70% of the world’s fish species now either fully exploited or depleted – more than 200 million people rely on fishing and aquaculture for their income and 1 billion people rely on fish as their main source of animal protein.

Australia is one of the largest net exporters of virtual water i.e. much of the water used to grow crops, such as wheat, rice and cotton, is exported.

Like virtual water, Australia is also a net virtual exporter of phosphorus from the food system – only 5% of phosphorus fertiliser used in agriculture ends up in the food Australians eat – the remaining 95% is lost as waste at all stages of the food system, or exported off our shores as agricultural commodities or fertilisers.

Despite having only 6% of Australia’s surface water run-off, the Murray-Darling Basin accounts for more than 50% of Australia’s freshwater use.

Nearly 90% of the world’s phosphate reserves are found in just 5 countries: Morocco/Western Sahara, Iraq, China, Algeria and Syria, with 70% under the control of Morocco alone – as fertiliser prices increase, this is likely to have major geopolitical consequences.

Unlike fossil fuels, phosphorus can be captured from waste streams and recycled as a form of renewable fertilisers – as this element does not decompose, it is theoretically available somewhere on the earth, but extracting it is likely to become increasingly costly – although the global population consumes about 3 million tonnes of elemental phosphorus from food, about five times this amount is mined for food production – this is because large amounts of phosphorus are currently being lost throughout the food supply chain – from mine to paddock to plate and then sewage.

Compared with average world apparent consumption of various food commodities, Australians have much larger per person availability of alcoholic beverages (308% higher), meat (290%), milk (274%),and animal fats (267%), and moderately higher amounts of sweeteners (196%), vegetable oils (191%),fruit (156%), and seafood (147%) – in contrast, the availability of several categories is less than the world average, such as starchy roots (87% lower), vegetables (83%), eggs (75%), cereals (58%), and pulses (33%).

Bananas have the highest sales in fruit lines – average consumption per person is estimated to be 13 kilograms a year – this makes them one of the top 10 selling supermarket items – 70% are sold to Coles and Woolworths.

In recent years, consumers have preferred unblemished bananas that are large and uniform in shape – it is estimated that 10–30% of all bananas produced are discarded before they leave the farm with the majority of this waste due to the fruit failing to meet the product specifications set by retailers – over 52,000 tonnes of edible bananas are discarded each year due to cosmetic imperfections – embedded in this waste are large amounts of water (16 gigalitres) and non-renewable resources, such as oil (1,407 tonnes), coal (1,064 tonnes), natural gas (1.8 million cubic meters) and phosphate ore (681 tonnes) – in addition, the decomposition of this waste has the potential to generate 23,200 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents.

Diet-related chronic diseases are now the major cause of death in Australia and their prevalence is increasing – male life expectancy is 79.5 and female 84.0.

The prevalence of Type 2 diabetes has more than doubled between 1989–90 (1.5%) and 2007–08 (4.1%), and by 2023 is expected to be the leading cause of disease – this increase is linked to the rising prevalence of people who are overweight or obese, and low levels of physical activity in the population – the incidence of treated end-stage kidney disease is also increasing, with diabetes the main cause.

As of 2011, more than half of the world’s population live in urban areas – this represents a significant shift from the 1950s when the figure was less than 30% – 39% live in cities of more than 1 million residents and only 10% in mega cities of more than 10 million – globally, urban dwellers generally eat more meat, fruit and vegetables, whereas rural dwellers eat more cereals, tubers and roots.

Despite a 70% increase in the population, the world’s food system generates 17% more energy per person today than it did 30 years ago – the amount of food produced could supply each person on earth with at least 11,300 kilojoules per day – despite this, there are more than 925 million people without access to sufficient food, mainly due to poverty – in contrast, there are more than 1.6 billion people who are overweight and at least 400 million who are obese.

As countries become more prosperous, there is a shift in eating and physical activity patterns, characterised by people eating more fat, sugar and processed foods, and becoming more sedentary – 8 out of the 10 countries with the greatest increases in obesity rates are developing or newly industrialised nations – in countries such as China, Mexico, Thailand, Brazil and Morocco, obesity is increasing faster than in the Unites States – paradoxically, some countries, like Bangladesh, are experiencing increased rates of obesity and yet are still struggling with high rates of under-nutrition.

Each Australian household throws out an estimated average of $616 worth of food each year.

Greenhouse gas emissions arise from food waste include indirect emissions that are embodied in food from production, transportation, processing and refrigeration, as well as direct emissions from the natural processes associated with the breakdown of the waste.

 A by-product of organic waste decomposing in landfill is gas, with about half (55%) being methane which has a global warming potential 21–25 times that of carbon dioxide – therefore, reducing the amount of organic waste going to landfill would help reduce greenhouse gas emissions – household food waste is estimated to be responsible for 5.2 megatonnes of carbon dioxide emissions from landfill, equivalent to the total emissions involved in the manufacture and supply of iron and steel in Australia.

CO2Land org has the view, cutting waste benefits all round – no excuse pun intended!

Thanks again the Garry Reynolds of NRM DAFF for these insights.

Look in your garbage

Gaze into the future, look in your garbage bin and think about the waste!

Think Zero Waste and chances are you will be embroiled in spirited debate over whether it is a concept, a physical, or a cultural idiom. CO2Land org suggests it is carbon management program and distinctly an approach to risk and opportunity, with products that evolve with the strategy. It is with consternation that Mother Jones published that “in the United States, we hear “zero waste” and think sanctimonious yuppies. But lets look at the rubbish facts and think:

  • The US has a big trash problem, but China’s will soon be even worse.
  • Projected World Trash Generation, increases per person by 2025 lbs./year
  •  Richer countries generate more paper waste, one third of it because of packaging

Poor countries have a very high proportion of organic waste such as food scraps or grass clippings. Paper, on the other hand, is the single largest component of waste in high-income countries; in the United States, one person generates 705 pounds of paper waste each year. According to an EPA report on trash in the US, one-third of that paper waste comes from the corrugated cardboard boxes in which nearly everything they buy gets packaged and shipped.

In the EPA report you will find composition data for China is missing from this analysis and India’s reporting it highly suggestive that the category of “other” is applying a different standard for sorting trash.

  • Even if we recycled all of our trash, it wouldn’t be enough.

Theoretically developed nations can achieve 86 percent recycling. The quoted report concludes all organic waste is compostable and all plastic, metal, paper, and glass are recyclable and the only trash meant for the landfill is the “other” category, which includes ash, electronic waste, and old appliances. What is frightening about the report is the “other” category in America means the per person ratio the other trash of each american is greater than the total trash of an average person in India.

The story, therefore says: Recycling alone won’t solve our trash problem.  CO2Land org has no reason to think Australia is any different – we need more to be done.

Credit for the story: Sarah Zhang (editorial intern at Mother Jones).

 

 

 

innovative solution for waste handling

Underground bioreactor – solution for waste handling?

The Cooperative Research Centre (CRCCARE) is noted as supporting a pilot scale project on biofuel generation. Currently they are working with piggery waste for the pilot.  The advantage for that industry is where waste did tend to be disposed of onto land and into water ways, and although some improvements had been put in place for larger farms to convert solid and liquid wastes to biofuel, this development of an underground reactor system virtually eliminates to problems of odour contamination of the air and allows smaller and larger farms to get an improved environmental benefit from the process.

CO2Land org found it particularly interesting that the project has been running 3 years, and CRCCARE has successfully run the trials under laboratory and field conditions.

We look forward to hearing of the technology being scaled up to large-scale conversion of solid wastes to energy in the not too distant future.

Reported in Remediation Australia Issue 9 2012.

Woodlawn Ducks

On 11 June 2012, the Sydney Morning Herald wrote that the French company Veolia has been approved to increase the maximum amount of rubbish dumped in the disused Woodlawn mine at Tarago, near Goulburn, (originally 360,000 million tonnes then increased to 500,000) to 1.13 million tonnes a year.

The issue is new transfer facilities are required, and no evidence is obvious that the Sydney end or the Tarago end is able to handle the increased waste transfer rates.

For example the current Sydney facility can handle 500,000 tonnes per year. Tarago has a rail siding capable of transhipping from rail to road for the remainder of the journey at the rate of the Sydney transfer capability.

Veolia is quoted as saying: “new transfer infrastructure would be needed to handle increased waste from Sydney”.

In March 2012, when approving the Woodlawn expansion the (NSW) Planning Assessment Commission did conclude waste levies, not caps, would reduce garbage flowing to landfills. But they failed to disclose that the approved waste sorting facility(s) was not coping or missing from the equation.

What is even more compelling is the NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water thought the Woodlawn expansion plan failed to address planning regulations that require landfill proposals to demonstrate “a suitable level of recovery of waste”. Co2Land believes fiqures of recovery are significantly lower than predicted. Co2land also notes the methane-capture facility at the site converts greenhouse gas emissions into renewable energy, but is underperforming. The new windfarm at Woodlawn helps offset the losses by this underperformance.

With all this good example potential.  Why don’t they rail direct to the Woodlawn site? It might make all the planets align!