Recycling is truly a win-win:  it is an engine for economic growth AND a vital element in environmental conservation.

Despite budgetary pressures to divert funds away from recycling, most states have continued to honor the legislative intent of policies to support recycling, and Indiana should follow suit. Recycling continues to garner the widespread public support that drove the original implementation of these policies. Citizens recognize that using a product or package once then disposing of it makes no economic or environmental sense. Indeed, more people in this country participate in recycling than vote. 

Companies serving Indiana, citizens, recyclers, and recycling program managers, join the conversation here. If you have a question you think we should post here, let us know.

If it can actually be done in a non-polluting manner, what’s the concern about capturing energy from waste?
What’s the harm in allowing certain burn technologies to be classified as recycling?
Is Indiana pushing to change recycling definitions based on sound data?
What’s happening in the legislature?
How will this affect my community?
Why is the state willing to embrace companies that really don’t recycle?
How is DefendRecyling.org involved in the debate?
What other HOT Topics are on the radar screen?

If it can actually be done in a non-polluting manner, what’s the concern about capturing energy from waste?
Current Indiana law, together with all the other states and the EPA, does not recognize burn technologies and waste-to-energy as recycling—it is disposal. Period. EPA standards have always called for waste prevention, reduction and recycling. Those are the real solutions to managing waste and saving energy. This policy has set the national tone for recycling standards for more than two decades. If the materials we now gather to recycle suddenly become garbage again, what’s the incentive to keep recycling?

Additionally, there are significant questions about some waste-to-energy companies’ claims of “zero emissions.” A company now looking for a new home in central Indiana has facilities in Taiwan and Malaysia; both are recent start-ups with no long-term environmental track records. For additional information from different perspectives, visit: no-burn.org and wte.org.

What’s the harm in allowing certain burn technologies to be classified as recycling
In late 2006 a pitch was made to the state board governing the Recycling Promotion and Assistance Fund to allow plasma arc waste treatment to be considered for recycling funding. The Indiana Department of Environmental Management has said that other waste-to-energy processes, like incineration, should also be eligible for state recycling funds as a “lower level of recycling.” If they’re classified as recyclers, they compete with legitimate recycling projects for a limited pot of state dollars. This raid of recycling funds would open the door to many waste-to-energy technologies — some with established histories and well known environmental impacts, others without.

“Conversion technologies” like plasma arc treatment can take in virtually every type of waste; medical discards, animal manure, sewer sludge, tires and more. A solid waste rule, LSA Document #05-297, addressing plasma arc and other thermal technologies, is making its way through another board and can be tracked here by entering the document number into the search feature.

Is Indiana pushing to change recycling definitions based on sound data?
The state admits there’s a serious lack of data in its draft “Integrated Recycling Plan,” a document that state environmental officials began selectively circulating in the past few months. There is no serious poll of public opinion or valid assessment model in place that can honestly evaluate recycling technologies, according to the state’s own report. DefendRecycling.org wants the state to do a comprehensive review before changing public policy. That’s the common sense approach before opening the floodgates to industries that don’t have environmental track records. Defend Recycling efforts have prompted state officials to open a dialog for recycling advocates to provide input and constructive critique to this plan. While the battle is not won, this is a positive step in the right direction. 

What’s happening in the legislature?
Senate Bill 154 was enacted and directs the Environmental Quality Service Council (EQSC), an interim legislative committee, to “study and make findings and recommendations” about “the goals, funding, markets, and structure of recycling in Indiana.” A similar study of recycling was completed by the Legislative Services Agency in 2003. We support an honest review of recycling policies in the state of Indiana and believe that the final version of SB 154 provides the opportunity for a broader discussion of recycling— striking any special emphasis on reviewing waste-to-energy facilities as recyclers. However, the definition of recycling will still likely be a prominent aspect of the study and discussion. We are gearing up to give a presentation on recycling at the EQSC’s October 3rd meeting.

How will this affect my community?

Successful business and municipal recycling programs could fall to the wayside if these disposal technologies are labeled as recycling and if state funds are diverted to support them. Established Indiana recycling businesses could suddenly become ineligible for state assistance and may have to lay off workers and close. Businesses and municipalities looking to increase their recycling rates may be tempted to do so artificially by using waste-to-energy treatment instead of legitimate recycling. No one can easily predict the harm that could trickle down to urban and rural communities, but the state needs to make that potential impact part of its review.

Why is the state willing to embrace companies that really don’t recycle?
Gov. Mitch Daniels says Indiana’s “abundant supply of waste streams, such as animal waste …” is a substantial source of new fuel for energy development. That’s part of his energy agenda. Terminology like waste-to-energy, and phrases such as “biomass to biogas” sound progressive and catchy, but this push for energy independence shouldn’t come at a cost to recycling. Instead, the energy saving benefits of recycling should be promoted by the state. For example, recycling one ton of aluminum cans is estimated to save 40 barrels of oil!

How is DefendRecyling.org involved in the debate?
DefendRecycling.org is the advocacy web site of the Indiana Recycling Coalition (IRC). When the IRC was asked its opinion by top state environmental officials, our board members weighed in with some serious questions on a draft plan to overhaul recycling standards. Some progress has been made to address these concerns, and the IRC is still at the table to make sure the business of recycling is well understood by decision makers. We are also monitoring legislation and other state policies and advocating for the state to support legitimate recycling activities, not disposal methods masquerading as recycling. Other groups – Indiana-based and national - have joined the debate as advocates on this Web site and are weighing in and raising important questions.

Do you have a question or concern about the recycling debate in Indiana? If so, send it to news@defendrecycling.org.

Information Sources: