The rise of recycling rates in developed countries and the contemporary growth of China and other big Asian economies have created a global transfer network for recyclable materials. Only in 2007, 4.7 million tones of recovered paper and half a million tones of recovered plastics were exported from UK.
Everyone who is involved, even a little bit, in Solid Waste Management and Life Cycle Thinking, knows very well that there are two major findings:
· Recycling is useless without a facility, even far away located, to receive recyclables and drove them back to a new Life Cycle loop.
· The results of Life Cycle Analysis are strongly depended on the geographical boundaries of the system because for some materials regional, national or even continental borders are not enough to materialize the actual benefits of recycling.
As the Climate Change factor got more and more important in decision making, it became clear that the more the distance of transfer the less the global benefits from recycling. Due to the globalization process and the differential requirements for raw and secondary materials between developed and developing countries, a new question emerges: is it worth to recycle if the actual close of the material life-cycle loop will be thousands miles away?
Although we can be quite sure regarding the benefits of recycling, it is a question whether those benefits are traded - off if we take into consideration the CO2 emissions from recyclables transfer for thousands miles.
Trying to answer to that question is not a simple task, but under certain assumptions and limitations WRAP provided an answer in the new report:
“CO2 impacts of transporting the UK’s recovered paper and plastic bottles to China”
The report is available at http://www.wrap.org.uk/
The major finding is that CO2 emissions associated with transporting one tone of recovered paper from the UK to China are estimated to lie between 154kg and 213kg of CO2. The emissions associated with CO2 impacts of transporting the UK’s recovered paper and plastic bottles to China 4 transporting one tone of recovered plastic bottles range between 158kg and 230kg of CO2. These CO2 emissions levels represent less than a third of the carbon savings from recycling identified by a majority of the life cycle assessments (LCAs) reviewed in the study. This suggests that there are CO2 savings to be made from recycling, even if the recovered materials have to be transported to China.
Reading this interesting report I made some more general conclusions.
The result confirms something that we already know: in order to achieve significant benefits from recycling a global network should be developed for recyclables management and utilization. For this network we need a set of flexible but effective rules and regulations that will assure that what is gained locally by recycling will not be lost globally by inappropriate management of recyclables.
Like all the Climate Change issues, recycling either it will be a global practice or it will die. Once again the future of our planet calls not just for cooperation but for a global recycling consortium which will include all continents and all countries. Is that possible? The answer is unknown but ISWA has a very important role to play in order to make it a “Yes”.
And last but not least, in the era of globalization Life Cycle Thinking should be a minimum requirement in order to take decisions for environmental issues. Our planet has become too wired to avoid it…
10.06.2008
9.21.2008
WAste Load Lifter Allocator – Earth class (WALL-E): a dream machine for waste management – a nightmare for the future of earth
Written by Antonis Mavropoulos
20-9-2008
I just watched the movie WALL-E with my daughter. It is a DISNEY – PIXAR production with high quality animation and interesting characters in the form of robots. But what makes the movie really audacious, at least for people working in waste management business, is that the main hero is a professional waste manager robot with the name Waste Load Lifter Allocator – Earth class (WALL-E). And this is why I think that the movie deserves some deeper thoughts about the future of waste management.
Comment 1: The movie presents earth, at least the big cities, after 500-700 years as “Waste Lands”. Different waste types have covered the whole surroundings and a lot of the actual city space. Skyscrapers have been built from packaged waste in order to save space for waste storage. No signal of life is detected. All the residents have been left for a cruise at space that lasts at least hundreds of years.
The only activity that is still going on is the waste packaging and allocation made by a robot.
I have never seen a so direct and full of meaning comment for the future of our civilization in case we will not find radical solutions to minimize waste production and improve their management in terms of maximizing recovery and minimizing residues.
WALL-E comes to remind everyone that solid waste management is directly related not only with the quality of life in big cities but even more with the actual capability to live in them. If we just imagine what will happen to New York, Paris or London, or any other big city in case waste management is completely out of order for 2-3 months…
The movie is also a great caution for the fact that we all know: the biggest challenges in solid waste management are still ahead us. The continuously increased production of waste in combination with the continuously increased variety and complexity of waste streams have created a big problem for our industry: waste management has to run just one step beyond new products consumption, without having the time and capacity to overtake (the curse of “always second”).
The only way to confront this lag – time is to integrate waste management and resources management. But that is something we all know is difficult, it needs radical industry transformations and it takes time. In order to gain more time, waste treatment technologies and recycling schemes are for the time being the only tools available.
The history of waste management has just started and the steps we have done so far are much more less than the steps we have to implement ahead.
Comment 2: Speaking technically, WALL-E as a robot is not so futuristic. Its main capabilities are already familiar in waste management industry, although they do not have been integrated in the form of a robot.
WALL-E moves using caterpillars and allocates the packs using well-designed mechanical arms, a little bit more modern that some lifters already have.
WALL-E can recognize different types of waste, using something like infrared or laser detector. Optical detectors have already been successfully tested in several facilities and are already in use.
Just because there is no human kind in earth, WALL-E makes no recycling or separation of waste streams. He (the robot is a male) peaks only what is a kind of game and all the rest are driven in his square stomach.
Then, his whole body acts as a compactor providing nice compacted waste packs.
WALL-E puts those packs in order creating daily cells, floors and skyscrapers of them.
My first thought when I saw WALL-E working was that this robot could be a kind of achievable machine for waste management industry. I am almost sure that robots that will act like WALL-E could be developed in the next 5-10 years. Maybe they will be not so handsome and sweet like WALL-E but certainly so effective in similar duties.
Comment 3 (final): There are some more interesting highlights in the movie. I peak two of them.
People in the space cruise are so much depended on robots and daily consumption of food and beverages, that they have been mutated to fat and unable to move entities. In general terms, the dependence of human kind on machines has been the subject of a lot of science fiction movies and books. But in this movie people have lost the most vital abilities: to move and communicate directly.
There is also a female robot called EVA. This robot is by far more advanced than WALL-E in terms of a. movement (EVA suspends and flies fast in stead of moving with caterpillars) and b. capacity to detect and recognize items.
The weak point of EVA is that it is by far much more depended from its technological advances and very sensitive to their damages or malfunctions.
WALL-E on the other hand is much more simple and heavy – duty made. Those properties are necessary in order to survive in crude environments, although they are creating troubles when you move to complex technological systems.
Instead of conclusion: go and watch WALL-E. There are a lot to think about…
20-9-2008
I just watched the movie WALL-E with my daughter. It is a DISNEY – PIXAR production with high quality animation and interesting characters in the form of robots. But what makes the movie really audacious, at least for people working in waste management business, is that the main hero is a professional waste manager robot with the name Waste Load Lifter Allocator – Earth class (WALL-E). And this is why I think that the movie deserves some deeper thoughts about the future of waste management.
Comment 1: The movie presents earth, at least the big cities, after 500-700 years as “Waste Lands”. Different waste types have covered the whole surroundings and a lot of the actual city space. Skyscrapers have been built from packaged waste in order to save space for waste storage. No signal of life is detected. All the residents have been left for a cruise at space that lasts at least hundreds of years.
The only activity that is still going on is the waste packaging and allocation made by a robot.
I have never seen a so direct and full of meaning comment for the future of our civilization in case we will not find radical solutions to minimize waste production and improve their management in terms of maximizing recovery and minimizing residues.
WALL-E comes to remind everyone that solid waste management is directly related not only with the quality of life in big cities but even more with the actual capability to live in them. If we just imagine what will happen to New York, Paris or London, or any other big city in case waste management is completely out of order for 2-3 months…
The movie is also a great caution for the fact that we all know: the biggest challenges in solid waste management are still ahead us. The continuously increased production of waste in combination with the continuously increased variety and complexity of waste streams have created a big problem for our industry: waste management has to run just one step beyond new products consumption, without having the time and capacity to overtake (the curse of “always second”).
The only way to confront this lag – time is to integrate waste management and resources management. But that is something we all know is difficult, it needs radical industry transformations and it takes time. In order to gain more time, waste treatment technologies and recycling schemes are for the time being the only tools available.
The history of waste management has just started and the steps we have done so far are much more less than the steps we have to implement ahead.
Comment 2: Speaking technically, WALL-E as a robot is not so futuristic. Its main capabilities are already familiar in waste management industry, although they do not have been integrated in the form of a robot.
WALL-E moves using caterpillars and allocates the packs using well-designed mechanical arms, a little bit more modern that some lifters already have.
WALL-E can recognize different types of waste, using something like infrared or laser detector. Optical detectors have already been successfully tested in several facilities and are already in use.
Just because there is no human kind in earth, WALL-E makes no recycling or separation of waste streams. He (the robot is a male) peaks only what is a kind of game and all the rest are driven in his square stomach.
Then, his whole body acts as a compactor providing nice compacted waste packs.
WALL-E puts those packs in order creating daily cells, floors and skyscrapers of them.
My first thought when I saw WALL-E working was that this robot could be a kind of achievable machine for waste management industry. I am almost sure that robots that will act like WALL-E could be developed in the next 5-10 years. Maybe they will be not so handsome and sweet like WALL-E but certainly so effective in similar duties.
Comment 3 (final): There are some more interesting highlights in the movie. I peak two of them.
People in the space cruise are so much depended on robots and daily consumption of food and beverages, that they have been mutated to fat and unable to move entities. In general terms, the dependence of human kind on machines has been the subject of a lot of science fiction movies and books. But in this movie people have lost the most vital abilities: to move and communicate directly.
There is also a female robot called EVA. This robot is by far more advanced than WALL-E in terms of a. movement (EVA suspends and flies fast in stead of moving with caterpillars) and b. capacity to detect and recognize items.
The weak point of EVA is that it is by far much more depended from its technological advances and very sensitive to their damages or malfunctions.
WALL-E on the other hand is much more simple and heavy – duty made. Those properties are necessary in order to survive in crude environments, although they are creating troubles when you move to complex technological systems.
Instead of conclusion: go and watch WALL-E. There are a lot to think about…
9.05.2008
ISWA “From Open Dumps to Sanitary Landfills” Workshop - Saturday 1 November 2008, Singapore
Disclaimer: This Email is only for general information and is not to be taken as a substitute for specific advice. Views expressed are those of the writers and do not necessarily represent WMAA. WMAA: Suite 4D, 5 Belmore St BURWOOD NSW 2134, T: 02 8746 5000, F: 02 9701 0199. If you do not wish to receive further emails from WMAA please email enquiries@wmaa.asn.au. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)