City dumping the way it retires old computers

africaewasteSan Antonio Express-News
Anton Caputo

The city of San Antonio doesn’t want any more of its old computers to end up in a Nigerian garbage dump. Or any dump, for that matter.

City officials, on the heels of a recent report that revealed one of their computers was among thousands getting dumped as garbage in Nigeria, plan to change the way they dispose of their old PCs to ensure that the machines are properly reused or recycled.

Hugh Miller, acting director of the city’s Information Technology Services, said the pending change is not a direct result of the report or its coverage in the San Antonio Express-News. But he did say the recent revelations “solidified the need to have it done.”

At issue is the fate of the roughly 8,000 computers the city cycles through every four years. Currently, the computers are auctioned 100 or so at a time to the highest bidder, Miller said.

This was the case with computer No. 821465, which was auctioned last November, only to end up as garbage in the Nigerian port city of Lagos.

“Once they are sold, it’s hard for us to keep full track of what that buyer does with them,” Miller said. “They probably sold another lot to Africa, and whoever was in that group went though and said, ‘We can probably use this, and we can use this. What do we do with the rest?'”

The rest is dumped in heaps around the African countryside and then burned or left to possibly seep dangerous chemicals such as lead and mercury, according to a report released earlier this month by the Basel Action Network.

This is a growing problem that is not likely to go away. Nearly 250 million computers in the U.S. will become obsolete in the next five years, according to the National Safety Council.

The average computer monitor contains 4 pounds of lead.

Most of the secondhand equipment is shipped to Africa to be reused, BAN found. But as much as 75 percent of the equipment is considered junk by those businesses in Nigeria that import it and ends up as discarded hulks.

Miller, who has been with the city five months, wants to eliminate the municipality’s contribution to the problem.

He wants to work out a deal with the computer manufacturer to properly dispose of the machines after their working life with the city is over. He’s also considering first offering them for sale to city employees.

The plan will be instituted through a request for proposals put out to computer manufacturers or through a state contract, but Miller said the details likely wouldn’t be worked out until after the first of the year.

Robin Schneider of the Texas Campaign for the Environment applauds the move. She said Dell, which supplies most of the city’s computers, has several programs that could work. A Dell representative did not return calls Tuesday.

“What we found oftentimes is the people who do the purchasing don’t necessarily talk to the people who do the end-of-life handling, and we need to close that loop,” Schneider said. “San Antonio will be in good company.”


Zeroing in on Our Throwaway Culture

landfillheightAustin Chronicle
Daniel Mottola

The residents of Northeast Travis Co. living in the shadow of two decades-old, stinking mountains of trash – expected to rival Mount Bonnell’s height before they are closed – will be the first to tell you that the time has come for a monumental shift in how our community deals with waste.

Much to these residents’ satisfaction, the city’s Solid Waste Advisory Committee is going to back them up today, when it presents to City Council the findings of its Long Range Planning Task Force. The presentation outlines the groundwork for shifting how we handle our garbage. Among other things, it includes an ambitious goal of sending 0% of the area’s waste to landfills and incinerators by 2040, an idea initiated shortly after Mayor Will Wynn signed the Urban Environmental Accords on World Environmental Day, June 5 in San Francisco.

In July, the SWAC task force integrated the accord’s waste reduction principles into its planning, which, in addition to the Zero Waste goal, includes adopting citywide laws that reduce the use of disposable, toxic, or nonrenewable products by 50% and implementing user-friendly recycling and composting programs. It also recommends hiring a third-party consultant to bring the plan to fruition. The goal is to reduce the landfilling and incineration of solid waste by 20% in seven years, as well as to develop profitable, sustainable businesses around material reuse.

“Everything on this program’s scope of work is already being done successfully in many other communities nationwide. We’re just cherry-picking the best for Austin,” said SWAC Chair Gerry Acuna, CEO of Austin’s Tri-Recycling. One place the task force looked for inspiration was Alameda County, California, which is pursuing a goal of 75% diversion by 2010. Alameda County’s Web site, www.stopwaste.org, states that “each dollar spent on diversion instead of landfill disposal generates nearly twice as many sales tax revenue dollars and jobs.”

Austin is diverting about 25% of its waste from landfills, but achieving SWAC’s minimum goal of 75% diversion, including 100% of organic waste, would be fantastic, Acuna said. In the meantime, the city is moving toward implementing a Single Stream Recycling Program, replacing current 13-gallon recycling bins with 65-gallon containers in which all recyclables can be combined without the need for sorting. The new program is expected to double the landfill diversion rate over seven years and could begin within two years, Acuna said.

Neil Seldman, co-founder of the Institute for Local Self Reliance, advised Austin on landfill alternatives during the summer. He said “Zero Waste or darn close to it,” as the program is jokingly dubbed, “places added emphasis on how products are packaged and distributed,” requiring cooperation between producers and communities to end the one-directional throwaway culture. Seldman said the business of recycling and waste diversion, such as new firms recycling construction and demolition waste (which accounts for roughly 35% of landfill capacity), can be “very practical and profitable.”

He also pointed to local waste handler and landfill operator Texas Disposal Systems, which he called a Zero Waste compatible company, describing its site as a “very good example of a modern, efficiently run facility, whose owner is committed to recycling as much as possible.”

Owner Bob Gregory said TDS, opened in 1991 just south of Austin, is the first landfill in the state to incorporate recycling, composting, and resale. “We developed the site to be environmentally and neighbor friendly,” said Gregory. “We did more recycling and composting last year than the city of Austin generated in household garbage.”

The TDS landfill site also houses an exotic game ranch and a cavernous banquet hall, where Gregory says some 50,000 people attended more than 160 events last year. Special Projects Director Dennis Hobbs said composting has been a good business for TDS, which makes more than 41 different organic soil products that incorporate wood waste items like tree limbs, yard trimmings, and wood pallets with paper, bad produce, off-spec or past-shelf-life soda and beer, road kill, and old milk. Hobbs said plans are under way to expand the TDS site into an “Eco-Industrial Park,” housing electronic waste processors and recyclers that could create goods such as planks and pilings from compressed, recycled plastic.

Texas Campaign for the Environment’s Robin Schneider said the SWAC process represents a positive way out of a seemingly intractable problem. “This could be the good news people are looking for after battle upon battle over waste issues.”


A Mighty Wind

mccartylandfillHouston Press
Greg Harman

Swirling, choking dust clouds first alerted Gerald Long and his wife, Vivian, that the McCarty Road Landfill had begun operations in 1972. The grit-filled air around their home in northeast Houston stung their eyes. They bickered with dump managers, and over the next few months the dust began to clear. The couple almost got used to the constant rumblings of garbage trucks and warning sirens. But they never adjusted to the sometimes gut-wrenching smell of rotting refuse and animal waste. After a few years of landfill decay, the sickly sweet odor of escaping methane gases was unavoidable.

But the dump wasn’t an obsession. Not at first. Back in the ’70s and into the ’80s the couple was mostly crazy for square dancing. As members of the Rockin’ R Club, they were some of the youngest dancers on the floor, though they were already past 50. Vivian would spend weeks sewing their outfits — hers swirling floral jobs, his matching respectable Western-style shirts.

Neighbors up and down the block soon began to report burning eyes, painful headaches and breathing problems. Vivian Long’s health also began to fail. Her mother, who had come to live with them a few years before, shared in the neighborhood illness.

Vivian stopped dancing. She kept going to the Rockin’ R, but as a spectator only. She would watch, smiling her approval as Gerald walk-and-dodged and promenaded. Out in the car an oxygen bottle and adrenaline-charged nebulizer were at the ready. “Whenever she’d run out of steam, I’d pump her up,” Gerald, now 85, says, an impish light illuminating his eyes.

In 1986, she quit going altogether. She urged him to continue, but Gerald says it “just wasn’t the same” and gave it up too.

As the health of his wife and mother-in-law worsened, Gerald became their de facto caregiver. To block the bad odors that had come to overpower their lives, Gerald kept Vicks VapoRub steaming in the house at all hours. His wife worked the phones. When she felt able she would walk door to door a petition opposing the dump. She would call U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulators whenever gas and trash smells got unbearable. After oversight was deeded to the state in the mid-’80s, she would call the city of Houston, or Harris County or the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (now the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality). None of it changed a thing, Gerald Long says. “They was just like an ol’ dog with no teeth. They would growl and bark, but they never did a damn thing.”

Over the years, his wife became so sensitive to chemical smells that Gerald had to quit using shaving cream. The light perfumes of the lubricant set Vivian off on asthmatic fits. He also gave up his lifelong hobby of restoring old cars; Vivian couldn’t tolerate the oil and gas fumes that clung to his clothes and skin.

Finally, his wife became too sick to even go outside. She quit calling for help. Then her mother died. A few years later, in 1996, Vivian Long followed. That’s when Gerald quit nursing his anger with the neighbor who had sold the hundreds of acres behind his house to Browning-Ferris Industries and got mad at the dump operation itself. He picked up Vivian’s petition forms and tried his best to carry on the fight.

Waste companies tend to be politically powerful entities — particularly ones like BFI, a homegrown success story bought out by Allied Waste in 1999 now enjoying its position as the second-biggest trash company in the nation. When the McCarty Road Landfill first was proposed, BFI paid for chartered lunches to the Galleria, and its representatives talked of local jobs. Community support followed. Donations to civic clubs and local schools kept that support solid in some quarters, but it wasn’t long after the trucks and fumes began to roil that Long had former supporters coming to his side. However, the opposition wasn’t organized enough to get things done. The petition floundered as the community quarreled about what tack to take. And BFI, Long says, already “had their teeth in the political end of things.”

In time, the fight took the wind out of Gerald Long, who lives closest to the methane gas collection plant at the landfill’s northern boundary. These days, hard words are just about all that’s left of the anger that once fired his activism. “They like to say they’re friends and neighbors, but friends and neighbors don’t build a pile of shit next door to your house so it all runs down into your yard,” Long says, sitting in his carport with the stray dogs that now share his time.

While Long worked petitions with other members of the East Houston Civic Club, Robin Curtis, a local real estate agent and community leader, was tiring of hearing the same old song whenever she approached businesses about locating to her community. She had been working for years to reclaim blighted areas in Houston’s First, Second and Fourth wards, but it slowly began to sink in that while her focus had been elsewhere, her own community’s suffering had been growing. Groceries, drugstores and dry cleaners had disappeared from the area as white flight increased. Filling the gaps left behind were the undesirables: “no-tell” motels, scrap yards and truck lots, a concrete batching plant and landfills — lots of landfills. Curtis counted five landfills and waste depositories operating inside the 45-square-mile area.

“We would try to pitch it to developers and they said, ‘What are you going to do about these no-tell motels and landfills?” So when the McCarty landfill announced late last year that it wanted to take its mountain of trash from its current height of 188 feet up to 316 feet — making it potentially one of the tallest landfills in the state of Texas — Curtis’s group, the Northeast Environmental Justice Association, filed suit. Despite known groundwater contamination and a long history of air violations, the dump had been on a fast track for TCEQ approval until that point. Others soon joined the request for a contested case hearing.

The area’s sensitivity to the topic should not have taken the company by surprise. McCarty had been open for only a few years when Southwestern Waste announced plans for another area dump: Whispering Pines. Marches and protests were the general response, ending in numerous arrests and the first lawsuit ever based on the concept of environmental racism — the gathering idea that communities of color were intentionally targeted for undesirable, dangerous and unpopular industries like landfills and chemical plants.

By then, local sentiment was so strong against the waste industry that protesters had only to point the finger at McCarty to explain their objections: trucks, stink, pollution, sickness.

Those who remember the spirit of those times have a hard time understanding why their current elected leaders have been mum on the topic of expansion. Relative newcomer Joe Pinzón, who purchased his property without realizing its proximity to McCarty, assembled another petition and was received happily by 13 different church congregations last year. Ultimately he collected more than 2,500 signatures opposing the dump. They proved harder to get into the hands of political decision-makers, however, when copies left at both City Hall and local TCEQ offices apparently were misplaced.

Black, yellow, cute little spots, the report doesn’t share much about the physical appearance of the stray dog wandering along Greens Bayou. What is known is that in May 2003 it stopped to drink from a standing pool of water at the base of the McCarty Road Landfill beside the bayou. Then it fell over, dead.

A Houston construction crew there to repair the leaking slope for the flood control district called the event in to the county. They scooped some muddy samples from the stagnant pool and threw some dirt over it to try to prevent the runoff from entering the bayou. Needless to say, the planned excavation and slump repair were delayed while the lab went to work.

Initial test results were through the roof for PCB contamination. PCBs are a toxic class of man-made chemicals known to cause a variety of illnesses, including cancer. Quantum Environmental Consultants reported that the samples’ PCB contamination was thousands of times higher than any regulatory limit, state or federal. County employees and contractors were ordered out of the area.

When the issue of landfill expansion came to the city attorney’s office for consideration, Iona Givens, senior assistant city attorney, wrote the TCEQ on March 11 asking to join the Northeast Environmental Justice Association in its request for a contested case hearing. The letter complained about issues such as stormwater runoff, rat infestation, groundwater contamination, odor and nuisance problems, gas emissions and truck traffic “that need to be explained and analyzed.”

Northeast residents didn’t have time to celebrate the victory before City Attorney Arturo Michel retracted those words two weeks later, directing the TCEQ to communicate with the city’s solid waste director, Buck Buchanan. Michel blamed Givens’s letter on communication problems among his staff. “There was no basis to be opposing it,” Michel said recently.

By turning the matter over to Buchanan, the city essentially washed its hands of the matter. In Buchanan, BFI had perhaps its greatest champion. At a December public hearing on the expansion permit, he rose among the protesters at Shadydale Elementary School and made his position clear: “It is my personal belief that this is one of the best-run landfills in the country…Having the landfill is a definite economic benefit to my budget and, I believe, to the Houston region itself.” Should the landfill be shut down, city costs to transport waste elsewhere would double, he warned.

Grover Hankins, founder of the Environmental Law & Justice Center at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University, shocked many when he also spoke in favor of BFI’s permit. “It’s going to happen,” said Hankins. “The best thing you can do is work with Allied Waste to see that odor is reduced.”

So, do the city’s support and the silence of the established African-American leadership on this issue mean the company has cleaned up its act? Apparently not.

The landfill has been cited for nuisance odor problems for years. “Nuisance,” however, is a misleading term, according to Fred Lee, a Harvard-trained environmental engineer who has worked for more than 25 years investigating the impact of landfills and federal standards. Garbage smells can be far worse than just annoying; they also harbor toxic chemicals that can be dangerous to human health. “Basically, if you can smell it, you’re too close,” Lee says. Landfill gases release known carcinogens without any odor, he writes in a 45-page report. Landfill gas is typically a 50-50 mix of methane and carbon dioxide with trace elements of volatile organic compounds and several known cancer-causers such as vinyl chloride and benzene. Hydrogen sulfide, otherwise known as poison gas and identified by a rotten-egg odor, also is generated and released by most landfills. The EPA is considering whether to list the gas as a hazardous air pollutant, making future controls more stringent.

While little research has been done in the United States about the potential health impacts of living near landfills, recent studies in the United Kingdom and Canada have found elevated levels of birth defects and liver cancers for those who live close to city dumps.

Since 1993, Harris County and the state have cited the McCarty landfill repeatedly for allowing explosive gases to reach concentrations far beyond what regulators call the “lower explosive limit.” But even though the violations were being recorded month after month, the full story wasn’t being told.

The TCEQ criticized BFI’s contractor, Waste Energy Technology, for not listing the actual amount of methane in the air being detected by probes at the landfill. When concentrations passed the level where things could go “boom,” Waste Energy employees were simply recording that number as “100 percent.” Between 1994 to 2001 methane measurements at eight wells were not reported at all, according to the TCEQ.

Brian Franco, BFI’s district manager, insists the landfill’s gas-collection system, in which the company has invested millions, has been “very effective at collecting and controlling methane.” But more accurate numbers released last summer show wells continue to release methane concentrations into the air far beyond the lower explosive limit of 40 percent gas. The two samplings revealed a range of numbers that included 580 percent, 1,220 percent and even 1,680 and 1,820 percent of the limit. The last two figures translate into 84 percent and 91 percent pure gas. As recently as this March, four of five probes tested were above the regulatory limit. While Franco says his company issued notices of these events to area residents as instructed by the TCEQ, no one interviewed for this article recalls ever receiving one.

The dead dog proved to be a false alarm. Follow-up tests confirmed the presence of PCBs in the leaking slope, though at far lower levels than previously reported. Apparently the lab used by the Harris County Flood Control District had missed it by a few decimal points. Instead of 1,100 parts per billion of PCB contamination, the report should have read 1.1 parts per billion, a level barely above the EPA’s regulatory limit for drinking water.

In any event, the scare served to reinforce what was already understood: The landfill was leaking. Regulators had known for more than a decade that hazardous chemicals had leached into the groundwater beneath the site, which was mostly unlined, as it was constructed prior to state and federal laws mandating plastic liners. The company has installed a series of pumps to try to collect the contaminated water and reduce the size of the plume — an effort the company says is working. The dump, one company official wrote optimistically, “can continue to accept industrial and permitted special wastes without concern.”

It can be hard to determine what exactly is buried in the landfill, because of overly general shipping forms, according to a local TCEQ team leader who asked not to be identified. But it’s become clear in recent years that a steady stream of prohibited and highly toxic wastes has been buried at the landfill. The site is allowed to accept animal carcasses (the number doubled from about 12,000 per year to about 24,000 per year about four months ago, Buchanan said) and asbestos-contaminated materials, but waste with high levels of PCBs is verboten.

It was 1993 when the dump alerted the TCEQ that sludge containing high levels of PCBs from Oxy Vinyl “may” have been disposed at its site. Debates raged about the amount of contamination released, and an investigation dragged on for years. The volume involved is immense. From 1998 to 2003, the company trashed more than six million pounds of highly contaminated PCB waste from Oxy Vinyl’s La Porte plant and its predecessor GEON Company, according to TCEQ records.

In March, TCEQ environmental investigator Bruce Arnett conducted a two-day inspection of operations at the landfill and discovered that little had changed. Just the previous summer the company had disposed of almost 6,000 cubic yards of contaminated oil-field wastes in violation of its permit. Questions also were raised about disposal of shredded automotive “fluff” with high levels of heavy metals and PCBs. The EPA’s guidelines for measuring PCBs were still not being followed.

BFI doesn’t test for PCB contamination in its groundwater, according to the TCEQ, and state officials say McCarty officials aren’t interested in sampling Greens Bayou, though Franco says they will do it if asked. Officials at the TCEQ, meanwhile, say they are too underfunded to do it themselves. While high levels of toxins and heavy metals are being tracked on-site, the company says two underground “slurry walls” are preventing contamination of the bayou that borders the eastern side of the dump. While the overall size of the contaminated plume is shrinking, according to company records, the two monitoring wells outside the slurry wall and closest to the bayou show spikes in certain toxins.

In an interoffice e-mail, Arnett wrote a colleague, “There is considerable amounts of contamination in these wells which are east of the slurry wall. I have concerns as to whether there is impact into Greens Bayou. They say there isn’t but I don’t think there is enough data to make that statement.” In the past year, the two wells showed significant increases of vinyl chloride, benzene, dichloromethane and carbon tetrachloride. Flooding conditions during part of the year prevented sampling from some of the wells.

After city officials deferred to their waste manager’s rosy assessment of landfill operations at McCarty, a letter was forwarded to Mayor Bill White. It tells the story of a household of four generations — from great-grandmother Doris down to 13-month-old Kaydie — who live just a couple of blocks from Long and are all suffering varying degrees of breathing problems that they blame, at least in part, on landfill gas.

Concerned for their privacy, they asked that their last names not be used in this article.

“Please help save our lives,” 54-year-old Sandra’s letter opens. “I have very bad breathing problems. Windie (age 32) is on a nebulizer and medication. She and I have bad headaches. Windie faints, has acute asthma. Kaydie already shows signs of asthma and breathing problems, according to her doctor…We have been advised to move but cannot afford to. Would you let your family live here? As Mayor, you can help save our family.”

Weingarten Realty Investors also has begun to worry about its significant area investments, a complex of warehouse and shipping docks abutting the landfill. In its own request for a contested case hearing on the dump’s expansion permit, Weingarten’s attorneys ask whether McCarty is able to keep toxic wastes and explosive gases out of the environment, where they pose a potential danger to employees. The answer, again, appears to be no.

As he powers his SUV up the winding dirt road to the working face of the landfill, landfill manager Charlie Walker passes an almost bucolic scene. Thistle and yellow flowers are winding up from the clayish soils that cover the buried waste. A water truck intended to keep dust levels below federal guidelines sprays the windshield as it passes. “He just looks for folks with open windows,” Walker says as he switches on the wipers.

A Hispanic worker in a hard hat directing traffic has only his orange flag and helmet for protection. No masks are needed, Walker says. “There’s nothing really out here that will affect you. It’s like working outside anywhere else in the city of Houston.”

At the dump’s working face, earth-moving trucks are running back and forth over what appears to be a 50-degree slope of city and industrial trash. Customers wait for the chance to dump their payloads over the few acres of swirling chaos. When asked about the high levels of bio-gas on-site, Walker says methane is the primary constituent. The rest is oxygen, he says, and “other types of things.” While the company has invested heavily in two flares to burn off unusable gas, it continues to be cited for high levels in the air around the 458-acre facility — particularly along the northern boundary, where Long and the other families interviewed for this article live. Director Buchanan said he was unaware of gas problems at the landfill. Anyway, he concluded, “the city inspectors don’t have an issue with it.”

True enough.

The city says it hasn’t issued the dump an odor nuisance violation since September 2001 and has logged only four complaints since 2000.

“I am sure that the citizens would be on the phone if there were issues with the McCarty Road site,” says Chuck Roosevelt, environmental quality specialist at the city’s health department. However, more than a dozen residents interviewed for this story say they have long since quit trying to get satisfaction from the city’s health department. It seems only the county and state have paid the complaints any mind.

The county, using a 24-hour hot line, has logged 34 complaints since 1999 and has written the dump 17 odor violations. Typically, inspectors arrive too late to verify residents’ experiences. Stories in these streets abound about sleeping inspectors being awakened in their trucks with the windows up and the a/c running. But on December 9, 2004, one alert inspector got a noseful. Twice the investigation report lists gas levels in the neighborhood as reaching “alarming” levels. “While I did not experience a headache,” the inspector wrote, “I did feel nausea.”

The McCarty Road Landfill is within Houston city limits, but it’s Harris County that’s in the fight. Negotiations over BFI-Allied’s application are ongoing between county and waste officials. Civil prosecution against the dump was considered as recently as last year, according to a letter from Steve Hupp, assistant technical manager at the county’s office of pollution control. So far, despite the numerous violations, no fines have been assessed, though nuisance odor violations carry civil penalties as high as $25,000 per day.

One of the first questions Assistant County Attorney Snehal Patel asked when she heard of the expansion request was whether the company hadn’t already promised residents not to expand — a well-worn complaint among opponents in northeast Houston.

One company official took the question seriously enough to retain a third party to review all of the company’s written records, reporting back in January that they had found no such written commitment. However, Jim Stipe, the company’s general manager, responding to questions at the December hearing, said, “You’re absolutely right, there have been commitments by other management members about the landfill, but take into consideration, ladies and gentlemen, that over the last 15 years the need for landfills and waste disposal has increased, it has not decreased.”

While the company expects its request to landfill another 35 million cubic yards of trash will take 11 years, the county has suggested that since the license is governed by capacity and not time, decades are also a possibility. It all depends on the market.

In a similar fight over a BFI landfill in Travis County, officials are negotiating a closure date in writing — something that the TCEQ doesn’t typically require. While Travis County officials want better odor and trash control at their landfill, the Harris County Attorney’s Office is also arguing for the sampling of Greens Bayou to “verify” that the known contamination beneath the dump has not spread into the waterway. Harris County officials also want PCBs added to the list of chemicals that are tested for in the plume beneath the site, and more enforceable standards overall.

While Gerald Long will put out a dish of water from his well for the dogs as he paints wildflowers under the carport, he doesn’t drink the stuff. He noticed long ago the increase in mineral content and the multicolored petroleum sheen. He and his neighbors will shower with it, but rely on bottled water to drink.

The decades of fighting with so little to show for it has imbued the community with a sense of fatalism. Long says residents are used to being put off by company officials and regulators alike. “They just keep on keepin’ on and look at you and say, ‘You’re still alive. Why are you worried?’ “


Residents fight landfill expansion

Austin American-Statesman
Marty Toohey

BFI and Travis County officials are working toward compromise, but neighbors are still wary. It was the second time in five weeks that the residents encouraged the Travis County Commissioners Court to oppose any expansion of the landfill.

About 35 residents met at the Travis County Exposition Center with representatives from BFI Waste Systems of North America Inc. to hear about the company’s plans to expand its Sunset Farms landfill off U.S. 290 just east of Austin. The company outlined a proposal in which it would cut back its expansion plans, be legally bound to close the landfill by November 2015 and pursue a new location in the meantime.

“We want to be gone,” Heath Eddleblute, the company’s district manager, told the residents. “We want to move to a different site. . . . We just need a little more time.”

The expansion, he said, would give the company the six to 12 years it says it needs to find and open a new Travis County landfill. The landfill currently is on pace to fill up in about five years, he said. If the compromise developed with county officials is approved as drafted, “We would have to be out (of Sunset Farms) by November of 2015 at the absolute latest,” Eddleblute said.

But residents who have fought for years to close BFI’s landfill and a neighboring landfill run by Waste Management of Texas Inc. said the proposed agreement would be flawed. They said BFI would exploit those flaws and might not leave by 2015.

“I think your problem is credibility,” said Mauricio Childress-Usher, who lives near the landfill.

He and others say odors, windblown trash and other problems persist. BFI says those problems have been corrected. If the company pursues expansion, residents and the county could oppose it, with the final say falling to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

The county, hoping to broker a compromise, has been trying to create a contract with BFI under which the company would have to meet certain expectations, such as a guaranteed closing date. In exchange, the county would not oppose the expansion.

The county could also offer incentives such as condemnation to help BFI find a new site away from neighborhoods (although Gov. Rick Perry has asked the Legislature to pass a law barring the use of condemnation to convert private land to another private use).

Travis County Judge Sam Biscoe, who attended Saturday’s meeting, said residents made legitimate points that should be addressed. He said he wasn’t surprised residents opposed landfill expansion. But he added that Travis County’s garbage has to go somewhere and that he had to keep in mind not only the neighbors but everyone else in the county. He and Eddleblute said they would continue to work on a contract.

Saturday’s meeting followed one on June 4 when about 125 residents voiced unanimous opposition to any compromise with BFI.


Environmentalists Bypass Washington to Pressure Corporations

Scripps Howard News Service
Joan Lowy

After four and a half years of policy defeats at the hands of the Bush administration, some green groups are finding they can achieve greater success outside Washington by exerting pressure directly on corporations.

In recent years, environmental activists have successfully employed pressure tactics ranging from shareholder resolutions to humorous ad campaigns to street theater in an effort to force some of the world’s largest corporations to change their behavior on issues like logging in old-growth forests, greenhouse gas emissions and computer recycling.

Currently, environmentalists are pressuring Ford Motor Co. to do something that they have been unable to persuade the federal government to order despite more than two decades of lobbying: significantly increase the fuel economy of cars and trucks. Since the campaign began in 2003, protesters have targeted more than 100 Ford dealerships around the country.

A local order of nuns met with the owner of a Ford dealership in Madison, Wis. Actor Woody Harrelson transported activists to a Santa Fe, N.M., Ford dealership in his bio-diesel bus. Organizers in Greeley, Colo., persuaded a car dealer to write Ford headquarters asking for increases in fuel efficiency. Greenpeace activists recently forced the temporary shutdown of a Land Rover factory owned by Ford in the United Kingdom by chaining themselves to plant equipment.

“Our goal is to make it the largest corporate campaign on climate issues on the planet by expanding the geographic scope and types of groups involved,” said Michael Brune, executive director of the Rainforest Action Network, one of the groups spearheading the “Jumpstart Ford” campaign.

Ford ranks last among the world’s top six automakers in fleet-wide fuel efficiency. Environmentalists are demanding Ford’s fleet of vehicles achieve an average fuel efficiency of 50 miles per gallon by 2010, which they say is possible using current technology.

“We are doing the best we can to move fuel economy forward – that’s on everybody’s mind,” said Ford spokeswoman Chris Morrisroe. “If we could do that now, we would. It’s not like we’re looking to have bad fuel economy anywhere.”

Called “market campaigns,” the essential strategy is to publicly link one of a company’s chief assets – its brand name – with harmful environmental practices.

“I think it’s an enormously effective tactic, especially in a globalized world where multinational corporations play an increasingly powerful role,” said Idelisse Malave, executive director of the Tides Foundation, which helps fund the Rainforest Action Network and other groups. “The focus of achieving change cannot just be on government.”

Canvasser at DoorIn January 2004, the combination of a market campaign by national coalition of environmental groups and pressure from liberal shareholder activists controlling hundreds of billions of dollars in assets – including the pension funds of religious orders, government workers and labor unions – forced Dell, one of the world’s largest computer markers, to change its recycling policy.

Environmentalists went door-to-door in Austin, Texas, where the company is headquartered, explaining why they wanted Dell to do more to keep old computers, which contain toxic chemicals, out of landfills. At a major electronics show where Michael Dell, the company’s founder, was the keynote speaker, environmentalists showed up in black-and-white striped prison garb and passed out literature criticizing Dell’s practice of using prison labor to crudely recycle computers.

“Dell had this image of themselves as being a positive force for change and as being a clean company,” said Robin Schneider of the Texas Campaign for the Environment, one of the groups leading the protests. “Being shown as a dirty industry … that’s not how they wanted to be seen.”

After nearly two years of protests, Dell announced that it would recycle a computer of any brand at no charge from customers who buy a new Dell computer.

“We thought that was great,” Schneider said. “They are not required to do that by law … We actually gave Michael Dell a certificate that said, ‘Way to recycle, Michael!’ And he talked about how they don’t want to do this just in America, but that it should be a worldwide program.”

Key to the success of the campaign was the ability of environmentalists to show Dell that the company could make money by offering computer-recycling services to big corporate customers concerned about protecting the privacy of data on outdated machines.

“I think the campaign was certainly successful in getting our attention,” said Dell spokesman Bryant Hilton. “What got us really going was that we found we can meet our business needs, we can meet our customers’ needs and we can do what the stakeholders are asking of us all at the same time.”

“The desire of corporations to be accepted by the marketplace and to be personally liked has spawned an entire industry of activism and corporate capitulation that I’ve never seen before – it’s unprecedented,” said Eric Dezenhall, a Washington public-relations executive who defends corporate clients under attack by environmentalists and other interest groups.

“I’ve seen situations where companies are simply being harassed so badly that it pays to get out of a certain endeavor just to make the harassment stop,” Dezenhall said.

In April, banking giant JPMorgan Chase unveiled a set of sweeping new environmental policies that govern the company’s global business activities after more than two years of negotiations with shareholders and activists and after facing an aggressive campaign by Rainforest Action Network. Among other actions, environmental activists put up Old West-style wanted posters featuring JPMorgan Chase’s CEO William Harrison in his tony Greenwich, Conn., neighborhood. The posters accused Harrison of funding environmentally destructive practices and urged his friends and neighbors to ask him to “do the right thing.”

Last year, two other of the nation’s largest banks – Citibank and Bank of America – announced similar policies in response to environmental protests.

“This is not about bringing a company down,” Malave said. “It’s about working with companies so they can do good while they make money.”


Austin postpones landfill changes

landfill2Austin American-Statesman
Kate Alexander

The Austin City Council has effectively scuttled a contract to turn over operations of the city’s landfill to a private company. It caught many observers off guard Thursday when the council voted to postpone indefinitely a vote on the contract with an IESI Corp. subsidiary.

Jeff Peckham, IESI regional vice president, said he was a “little surprised” by the unanimous decision, which came quickly with scant public discussion. The council move got a more effusive response from the contract’s opponents.

“What a shock,” said Robin Schneider, executive director of the Texas Campaign for the Environment. Her group had been preparing to seek a referendum to overturn the contract if the council had approved it. “I think they finally came to their senses.”

IESI currently runs a landfill on FM 812 next to the city’s, near Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. The proposed contract, with a minimum term of 65 years, called for the city and IESI to jointly seek state approval to combine and expand the adjacent facilities.

The company would have paid an estimated $16.6 million over the life of the contract and would have received most of the future revenue. Both the city landfill and IESI’s next door accept only debris from construction and demolition sites.

Opponents argued that the landfill expansion threatened the environment and public safety because birds, which are attracted to landfills, can jeopardize passing planes. Several former members of the City Council, including Gus Garcia, Brigid Shea and Bill Spelman, lent their voices to the opposition in a letter sent to the council Wednesday.

“The proposed long-term contract with a private company to combine our city’s asset with a private landfill into a much-expanded ‘integrated facility’ may not be in the best interests of the city, the taxpayers, or the hundreds of thousands of people who use Austin-Bergstrom International Airport every year,” the letter reads.

In their brief remarks, council members said they didn’t sign the contract because there were too many unanswered questions, particularly about the environmental and financial implications.

Council Member Jackie Goodman recommended a more open and deliberative process to draw up a contract to manage the city’s old, money-losing landfill.

“This one presented to us is not it,” Goodman said.

The vote means that the council is not likely to revisit this proposal, at least in its present form.

“We have no plans to bring it back at this point,” said acting Assistant City Manager Michael McDonald.

He added that the next step is to develop a comprehensive, long-range plan for solid waste. Peckham said his company would continue to seek opportunities to work with the city, including assisting in the development of that plan.


Tech Waste Challenges Earth Day Spirit

appleactionRSAssociated Press
Rachel Konrad

SAN FRANCISCO — When Earth Day dawned in 1970, optimistic environmentalists predicted emerging technologies would help reduce the nation’s reliance on coal, oil, insecticides and other pollutants.

But 35 years later, a big part of the problem appears to be technology itself. Tons of computers, monitors, televisions and other electronic gizmos that contain hazardous chemicals, or “e-waste,” may be poisoning people and groundwater.

Activists say the nation’s biggest environmental problem may be the smallest devices, and this week they’re launching campaigns to increase awareness about recycling cell phones, music players, hand-held gaming consoles and other electronics. Frequently, smaller portable gadgets have batteries that are prohibitively expensive to replace. So consumers in affluent countries simply toss them in the trash.

“They’re small and lightweight, and the electronics industry markets them as disposable. Whenever you upgrade your (wireless) service, you can get a new flip phone for $50, and they never tell you to recycle the old one,” said Kimberlee Dinn, campaign director for Washington, D.C.-based Earthworks, a nonprofit that studies the environmental impact of mining, digging and drilling for natural resources.

Environmentalists are particularly bothered by the recycling and reuse policies of cell phone manufacturers and distributors, not to mention Apple Computer Inc., maker of the iPod digital music player.

The biggest offenders are cell phones, said Dinn, because they pose a hazardous “double whammy” to the environment.To build them, gold and other metals must be extracted from mines in Western states and in Peru, Turkey, Tanzania and other countries.

The Environmental Protection Agency ranks hard-rock mining as the nation’s leading toxic polluter. Then, at the end of their life cycles, many phones end up in landfills, where they may leak lead and other heavy metals that could pollute nearby groundwater.

Americans have about 500 million obsolete, broken or otherwise unused cell phones, and about 130 million more are added each year the equivalent of 65,000 tons of waste, according to the EPA. Less than 2 percent are recycled. Activists are asking consumers to download and print postage-paid labels and send unused phones to the Atlanta-based recycling organization CollectiveGood. The goal is to collect at least 1 million cell phones this year.

But cell phones are just one problem. U.S. consumers retire or replace roughly 133,000 personal computers per day, according to research firm Gartner Inc. According to a study commissioned by San Jose, Calif.-based Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, about half of all U.S. households have working but unused consumer electronics products.

At the prompting of environmentalists, PC makers such as Dell Inc. have begun low-cost or no-cost exchanges for customers buying new computers. And last year Dell teamed up with Goodwill Industries of Central Texas. For $10, Austin residents can have someone come and pick up their old PCs. The nonprofit will refurbish the machines and resell them, or hand them over to an accepted recycling firm.

After starting with Dell, the No. 1 seller of PCs, many e-waste activists now are focusing on Apple. The Austin-based Texas Campaign for the Environment is asking Apple to reduce or eliminate recycling fees for consumers and build in-store recycling centers.

The popularity of iPod MP3 players makes Apple an obvious target for environmentalists. Apple shipped 5.3 million iPods last quarter, a nearly sevenfold increase from the same period last year.

“We’d like nothing better for Earth Day (which is Friday) than for Steve Jobs to say he’s agreed to producer-takeback recycling,” said Robin Schneider, executive director of the Texas group.

Apple declined to comment on environmentalists’ yearlong campaign. Apple charges most American consumers $30 to recycle used or broken computers and laptops. In January, Apple agreed to help sponsor an industry initiative launched by eBay Inc. and Intel Corp. that created an informational Web site to help motivate Americans to resell, donate or recycle used gadgets.

Gateway Inc., Hewlett-Packard Co., IBM Corp. and Ingram Micro Inc. also are participating, along with the U.S. Postal Service, which in some cases will help deliver PCs to eBay drop-off locations or recycling centers.


A Pledge to Revise Landfill Expansion Rules

iesilandfillAustin American-Statesman
Kevin Carmody

Texas environmental commissioners pledged Wednesday to revise state rules that make it possible for landfill operators to seek approval for significant expansions with little public input.

The issue arose as the three-member Texas Commission on Environmental Quality considered whether to overturn its staff’s approval of a 22-acre expansion of the IESI Corp. landfill in Weatherford, west of Fort Worth, under rules that allow minor permit modifications without the public having adequate notice or the right to a formal hearing.

Citizen groups and others had argued that the expansion was significant and that state regulators should have handled the case as a permit amendment, which allows neighbors to request a formal hearing and present evidence. The groups expressed concerns that approval might set a precedent that could thwart public participation in other landfill cases, including several landfills in Central Texas that have indicated they want to expand.

The commissioners upheld their staff’s decision to approve the modifications after the landfill neighbors and the Texas Campaign for the Environment reached an eleventh-hour settlement with IESI and withdrew their objections Wednesday morning. The company agreed to height limits, a larger buffer between its operations and neighbors’ land, and better public notice if it seeks further expansion, said campaign representative Eleanor Whitmore.

But the broader concerns the opponents had raised seemed to resonate with the commissioners.

“I have a real problem with the way we’re handling modifications versus amendments,” Commissioner Larry Soward said. “I’m concerned we do too many as modifications, which cuts off the public’s ability to know what will go on at a site.

“I’m not considering this (approval) a precedent,” Soward said.

Commissioner Chairman Kathleen Hartnett White joined Soward in directing agency staff to examine how those rules could be clarified as part of a current project to revise other aspects of the landfill permitting process.

Commissioner Ralph Marquez said that he doubted the commission would see many cases similar to the IESI request but that he shared concern about landfill operators “seeking individual modifications that add up.”

Whitmore said the commissioners’ reactions showed that, in reaching a compromise with IESI, her group and the neighbors may have improved the chances for meaningful reform.

In the settlement, the company agreed to urge the commission to adopt rule changes clarifying when an amendment must be sought.

“We didn’t want to win today but lose the larger battle over revising the rules,” Whitmore said. “It showed we’re not just trying to obstruct landfill companies.”


Commission to Hold Hearing on Landfill

iesilandfillWeatherford Democrat
Heather Reifsnyder

Parker County residents opposed to a landfill expansion will now be able to have their side heard before the state’s environmental quality agency.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality announced Friday that it will consider during a public meeting petitions to overturn the landfill’s permit modification that would allow it to expand. The meeting is scheduled for 1 p.m. Jan. 26 in Austin.

“We’re thrilled that we’ve gotten this far,” said Robin Schneider, executive director of the environmental organization Texas Campaign for the Environment, which is working with landfill neighbors.

The landfill, located southwest of Weatherford but within the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction, is owned by a company called IESI. In what some consider a shady move, TCEQ Executive Director Glenn Shankle approved IESI’s permit modification in November. This opened the door for IESI to expand its landfill by 22 acres.

Eleanor Whitmore of Texas Campaign for the Environment said IESI should be required to file for a permit amendment, a lengthier process than a modification and one that requires public meetings.

Subsequent to Shankle’s decision, some filed motions to overturn it, including TCEQ’s own Office of Public Interest Counsel. Texas Campaign for the Environment also filed.

Groups who filed motions will have 15 minutes among themselves to present their case. IESI will have 10 minutes and Shankle five. After two deadline extensions, TCEQ’s three ruling commissioners now have until 5 p.m. Jan. 28 to choose to act on the motions to overturn.

TCEQ required IESI to notify people within 500 feet of the landfill of its plans to expand. Some people living close to the landfill, but beyond 500 feet, only recently learned of the proposed expansion.

One of them, Ed Kramer, contacted Weatherford Rep. Phil King for help. One thing King’s office did was broker an upcoming meeting in Austin between IESI and some neighbors of the landfill. Also Friday, IESI gave neighbors a tour of the landfill and answered questions.

Shannon Pana, who is building a home east of the landfill, said IESI officials were cordial and willing to answer questions. But she said she felt no resolution afterward.

“For me, if anything, I had more of a sinking feeling when I could see my home [from the landfill],” she said.

Pana said she is most concerned not about the current proposed expansion, but what could happen farther down the line if IESI needs to expand again.

IESI purchased the landfill from the city of Weatherford in May 2003 for $4.9 million. It began trucking in waste from other Texas counties, greatly increasing the landfill’s intake.


Groups hope to overturn permit to expand landfill

iesilandfillWeatherford Democrat
Heather Reifsnyder

Today could be pivotal for whether the state of Texas allows IESI to expand its landfill operation southwest of Weatherford. Three separate groups filed motions with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to overturn the IESI’s permit modification, whereby the company can use 22 more acres for trash disposal.

TCEQ commissioners had a deadline today if they want to consider overturning the permit modification.

Weatherford Rep. Phil King’s office said it planned to send a letter to TCEQ Thursday asking it to extend today’s deadline by two weeks, giving concerned landfill neighbors more time to make known their stance against the expansion. IESI informally agreed to an expansion through Wednesday, said Trey Trainor, King’s chief of staff.

TCEQ is not required to honor King’s request.

Most of a new coalition of about 50 concerned neighbors only recently learned of IESI’s plans to expand. One of them, Ed Kramer, contacted King’s office Wednesday. It was the first time anyone has contacted the representative with concerns about the expansion, which has been in the works for months.

“Nobody knows that there’s an expansion, so how can you have an objection if there isn’t knowledge?” Kramer said.

Kramer learned of the expansion just two days ago after being called by Eleanor Whitmore of Texas Campaign for the Environment. He and his wife live on 200 acres that is within sight of the landfill and its machines.

“I was incredibly upset,” Kramer said. “I immediately wanted to consider a plan of action.”

As required by TCEQ, IESI informed people who live within 500 feet – less than a tenth of a mile – of the landfill of the plans to expand. But people like Kramer and his neighbors in the nearby Westridge subdivision live beyond 500 feet, yet within sight of the landfill.

IESI Regional Vice President Jeff Peckham said the company has met with many people in the area about its operations, including people who live beyond 500 feet away.

Kramer also contacted Weatherford Mayor Joe Tison and addressed City Council Tuesday night, giving the council members copies of a note which he invited them to send to TCEQ. The letter stated that they no longer approve of the expansion.

The Democrat was not able to find out whether any of the council members sent the letter.

Wednesday night, the neighbors group met with Texas Campaign for the Environment’s Whitmore.

Whitmore said her organization is concerned that TCEQ Executive Director Glenn Shankle agreed in November to IESI’s permit modification instead of requiring the waste company to file for a major amendment, a lengthier process which requires public hearings. Texas Campaign for the Environment, another group of nearby landowners and TCEQ’s own internal public interest council all filed petitions asking for the decision to be overturned. TCEQ’s three commissioners will make the decision.

IESI bought the landfill from the city of Weatherford in May 2003 for $4.9 million. The company then began bringing in trash from other counties, greatly increasing the landfill’s intake.