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?’ “


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.


Environmentalists Protest Apple’s ‘iWaste’

appleprotestNew York Times

Apple Computer Corp. has become the darling of the technology sector for its wildly popular digital music player. But scorching iPod sales have also made it the target of an aggressive environmental coalition, which is trashing Apple as rotten to the core. Environmentalists with the Computer TakeBack Campaign are planning a yearlong campaign to protest Apple’s lackluster recycling efforts. Despite drizzle on Tuesday at the annual Macworld Conference & Expo, activists passed out leaflets and erected a giant banner proclaiming, “from iPod to iWaste.”

The advocacy group, which last year badgered Dell Inc. until it significantly bolstered its recycling initiatives, plans protests at Apple’s Cupertino, Calif., headquarters throughout 2005, a letter-writing and e-mail campaign, and other attacks against the maker of Macintosh computers. Environmentalists said they’re targeting Apple because the hardware and software company makes it difficult to replace batteries in its digital music players, and it charges many consumers $30 to recycle their unused or broken computers and laptops.

“We know consumers won’t pay 30 bucks to get rid of something they think is junk,” said Robin Schneider, executive director of the Austin, Texas-based Texas Campaign for the Environment. “Apple can do a lot better — they’re lagging way behind Dell and Hewlett-Packard. Now they need to take the next step and really ‘think different,'” Schneider said, playing off Apple’s advertising slogan.

Apple spokesman Steve Dowling said Tuesday the company would not comment on the environmental crusade. On Thursday, Apple promised to join eBay Inc. and Intel Corp., which launched an informational Web site to help motivate Americans to resell, donate or recycle used gadgets. Apple doesn’t charge consumers to recycle outdated electronics in Japan, Europe, Taiwan and South Korea, but environmentalists say the company is a significant contributor to the growing problem of “e-waste” in the United States.

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, roughly half of all U.S. households have working but unused consumer electronics products. Roughly 400 million gizmos will be thrown out by 2010. Protesters said the popularity of the iPod and iPod Mini — as well as more affordable gadgets such as the $99 iPod Shuffle, which debuted Tuesday — make Apple an obvious target for environmentalists’ scorn. Apple sold 4.5 million iPods in the fourth quarter and more than 10 million since their debut in 2001. During the 2004 holiday season, three of the top five consumer electronics sold on Amazon.com were Apple products.

The falling price and diminutive size of iPods — including the Shuffle, which weighs less than an ounce and is smaller than a pack of gum — promotes the notion that they’re disposable, said Mamta Khanna, program manager for Oakland, Calif.-based Center for Environmental Health. “People think you can just trash these things,” Khanna said. “No one’s thinking about where they end up.”


Power of protest felt by Dell

dellshareholdersAustin American Statesman
Dan Zehr

It only took a few thousand letters and a set of prison uniforms.

When a small band of environmental groups first set its sights on Dell Inc. in May 2002, the world’s No. 1 producer of personal computers had little interest in expanding the recycling programs for the PCs it sold.

Customers didn’t care much about recycling, Chairman Michael Dell said that summer when protesters first showed up at the company’s annual shareholder meeting in Austin.

“At first they did ignore us,” said Eleanor Whitmore, who worked for the Texas Campaign for the Environment in Austin before moving to its Arlington office. “But if you’re a company, and you’re concerned about profit, and you have 6,000 letters coming in from customers and shareholders, it really starts to add up after a while.”

At the time, Dell said the letters hadn’t made it to his attention. That changed when the Texas Campaign began directing correspondence to Dell’s home address.

The letters and the growing number of environmental groups that started joining the nationwide Computer Takeback Campaign helped ratchet up pressure on the company. The small Texas Campaign — it has a staff of about 25 has about 8,000 members enrolled this year — stepped up and took the lead.

“They targeted Dell because they felt it would be the hardest, and it’s also the biggest,” said Julie Gorte, director of research at the Calvert Group Ltd., one of the country’s biggest socially responsible investment funds. “I do think that had an effect, but it wouldn’t have if there hadn’t been some willingness to negotiate, to talk about change, on other side.”

Dell officials soon met with the representatives of the Texas Campaign and the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. The company began looking for ways to promote recycling. It held a public forum on computer recycling at the University of Texas.

Dell eventually hired an executive to oversee its recycling program. It launched free recycling for customers who bought new PCs, including it as part of the online sales process and training sales people on recycling options.

“What they did was give us a bit of a wake-up call,” Dell spokesman Bryant Hilton said. “Environmental responsibility wasn’t new to us, but we probably hadn’t put enough thinking into our ‘product retirement’ strategy.”

Meanwhile, shareholders such as Calvert, which holds about 967,000 Dell shares among its 27 funds worth $9.7 billion, also quietly pushed Dell to change. Gorte, though, gives most of the credit to the environmental groups’ willingness to challenge Dell and Dell’s willingness to learn and respond.

Today, the company is singled out for praise, not scorn, by the once-critical environmental groups.

“Dell, especially, has responded since a couple years ago,” said Sheila Davis, director of the Clean Computer Campaign at the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, a nonprofit group in San Jose, Calif., that’s supported by several thousand dues-paying members. “When we started the campaign, they were laggards.”

Although environmentalists say there is still more progress to be made, Dell is no longer the environmental groups’ primary target.

Said Whitmore, of the Texas Campaign: “It was awesome to get to go to that (July 9 shareholders) meeting and say ‘good job at Dell’ rather than protesting.”

Dell wasn’t chosen so much for its record on recycling compared with other PC companies as its position as the world’s largest computer seller. That’s where grass-roots efforts find the most publicity and can have the most impact, said Alan Siegel, chief executive of the Siegel & Gale brand consultants in New York.

“Dell is a major factor in the industry and voice in the industry,” Siegel said. “You’d expect them to have a constructive stance on this, and, if they don’t, they’ll” draw a negative reaction.

And that’s what happened as the environmental groups “made it a point to show up at every public event to let people know,” Whitmore said.

The groups knew that Dell was sensitive to its public image. After all, Dell instantly dropped its popular television pitchman, actor Ben Curtis, who played Steven in the company’s widely recognized commercials, after he was arrested with a small amount of marijuana.

Two strategies did more to change Dell’s approach than the piles of letters and the slowly developing discussions.

dellcesThe first came at the huge January 2003 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Activists there donned prison uniforms to protest the use of inmates by Dell’s recycling vendor, Federal Prison Industries Inc., better known as Unicor. The protest made news worldwide.

The Las Vegas protest “really threw it out there,” Whitmore said.

Six months later, Dell had dropped its contract with Unicor. But there were larger issues at play.

“It was an opportunity for us to make contact with the rest of the industry, to send the message that you could be next or this is what we’re working toward,” Whitmore said.

The environmental coalition followed by targeting one of Dell’s key consumer demographics: students. The groups, led by the Boston office of Clean Water Action, garnered support from student organizations at 150 colleges in all 50 U.S. states.

“That provided a great amount of momentum for the campaign,” said Toral Jha, program director at the GrassRoots Recycling Network in Madison, Wis.

It also got the strongest public reaction from Michael Dell.

“The issue of effectively disposing of electronic waste has Dell’s full attention, and we’re working to address this challenge and meet our responsibilities,” he said in an open letter to students.

Dell followed that letter with a teleconference during which he answered questions from students and environmental groups. It was during that call that he said the company’s customers want Dell to institute a recycling program, a complete change from his first exchange with the Texas Campaign.

Although the company didn’t like all the coalition’s methods, it now regularly meets with environmentalists to discuss environmental policies. And Dell provides updates on how its programs are developing.

“I was a little surprised by some of their tactics,” Michael Dell told the Austin American-Statesman earlier this year. “We make a whole lot more progress when we sit down and have a conversation instead of someone coming in with 10,000 letters and going away.”

But there’s no denying the impact.

“Their push got us moving in the right direction,” Dell spokesman Bryant said. “Then the natural Dell momentum took over.”

Dell, along with No. 2 Hewlett- Packard Co., scored higher than other computer manufacturers on the Computer Takeback Campaign’s recycling report card this year. Both companies announced voluntary recycling programs last month.

And a few days later, Texas Campaign Director Robin Schneider attended another Dell shareholder meeting. This time, she stood up to praise the company.

But the work won’t end there, environmental leaders said. They want legislators to pass laws that make computer makers responsible for recycling old PCs, and they want the companies to more aggressively promote current programs.

Otherwise, said Davis of the Clean Computer Campaign, “the problem is just sitting there in their closet, or it’s sitting on their desk, or it’s sitting in their garage.”


Dell, HP expand recycling programs

hprecycleAssociated Press
Matt Slagle

The world’s two largest personal-computer manufacturers have gotten a little greener. Dell Inc. and Hewlett-Packard Co. announced free, temporary programs Tuesday to encourage U.S. consumers to recycle toxin-filled computers and electronics.

Beginning next week, Dell customers in the United States who buy a new Dimension desktop or Inspiron notebook computer can recycle their old computers free. The offer expands on a free recycling program the company has had for printers since March 2003.

Rival Hewlett-Packard, meanwhile, has teamed with retailer Office Depot to offer free recycling for computers, digital cameras, fax machines, cell phones and other electronics. Consumers can drop off electronics at any Office Depot store between Sunday and Labor Day. The service is limited to one computer system or other electronic device per customer per day.

Environmental groups, which have long blasted the computer industry for lax recycling efforts, lauded the news. Only about 11 percent of electronics are recycled.

“Finally, consumers and small businesses have some options that don’t charge you to do the right thing,” said Robin Schneider, executive director of the Austin-based Texas Campaign for the Environment.

The group is one of three that teamed up for the Computer TakeBack Campaign, which monitors the recycling efforts of the world’s computer makers. In May, the campaign published a report that ranked the recycling programs of Dell and HP above many foreign competitors. A year earlier, Dell fared poorly in the report, mainly for its use of prison workers who earned 20 cents to $1.26 per hour to recycle hardware.

Round Rock, Texas-based Dell now uses two domestic recycling companies and says none of the parts will end up in overseas landfills. Palo Alto, Calif.-based HP has recycling centers in Roseville, Calif., and near Nashville, Tenn. Michael Rosenstein, Dell’s director of consumer e-business, said the new program was in reaction to demands from consumers and environmental groups. He would not say how long Dell’s limited offer would last.

The Dell program lets consumers get free recycling as part of the checkout process on its Web site. Buyers will get two prepaid shipping labels – one for the computer, one for the monitor – and instructions to put old equipment of any make or model in the boxes that contained the new equipment. DHL will pick up the boxes for free.

Those not buying new Dell computers can buy home pickup recycling for $5 per unit; the price had been $15.

HP also has a mail-based computer recycling plan that costs consumers $35. Similarly, IBM Corp. accepts mailed-in computers, printers and monitors, by any manufacturer, for a $30 fee, with shipping included.


Electronic waste is growing

keyboardsSan Antonio Express-News
L.A. Lorek

Getting rid of obsolete electronics will cost San Antonio taxpayers $56 million by 2015, according to a report released Monday by the Texas Campaign for the Environment. Junk TVs, PCs, cellular phones, and CD and DVD players will cost taxpayers statewide $606 million if actions aren’t taken to prevent more than 2 million tons of toxins from ending up in Texas landfills and incinerators, said Robin Schneider, executive director for the Austin-based environmental group.

“There are so many toxins inside computers,” Schneider said. “These toxins migrate from landfills and incinerators into our air, land and water.”

Government and industry leaders will meet in Austin today for a seminar on what to do about all this electronic waste. Getting rid of old PCs and electronics will cost about $80 per household, but those costs should not be paid by taxpayers, Schneider said. The environmental group wants state legislation to make PC and electronics makers take back products for proper disposal.

Two months ago, Maine became the first state to require producers of monitors, laptops and TVs to take back their obsolete products. California has proposed similar legislation.

Currently, Texas law does not prevent consumers from sending PC waste into landfills — and that’s dangerous to the environment, Schneider said. Each computer or TV display contains an average of 4 to 8 pounds of lead. Computers also contain mercury, cadmium and other heavy metals that pose significant health hazards if they contaminate groundwater or get released into the air.

And the problem of mounting computer and electronic waste threatens to get worse as more computers, TVs and other electronics get replaced with faster, cheaper and better models.

“Consumers have, on average, two to three obsolete computers in their garages, closets or storage spaces,” according to the Texas Campaign for the Environment report. “U.S. government researchers estimate that three-quarters of all computers ever sold in the United States remain stockpiled, awaiting disposal.”

Some manufacturers, such as Dell and Hewlett-Packard, have publicly announced support for policies requiring manufacturers to take back their products.

PC maker Dell, based in Round Rock, has increased its recycling efforts in response to consumer demand, spokesman Bryant Hilton said. In March 2003, Dell launched a recycling program providing home pickup of old computers, no matter what the make or model, for $7.50. For more information, visit Dell.com/recycling.

“We certainly do understand that producers play a role in recycling,” Hilton said. “We don’t have a problem with taking back our product.”

In San Antonio, Discount Computer and Networking at 5500 Brewster recycles computers that consumers drop off or that it collects through computer drives around the city. In Austin, Image Microsystems handles recycling for Dell’s old computers.

Hewlett-Packard also runs a recycling program nationwide that will pick up any brand of PC from consumers’ doorsteps for a fee. For more information, visit its Web site at www.hp.com/recycle.


Study finds suspect chemicals in computer dust

Austin American-Statesman
Kevin Carmody

Dust on computers in government and university offices throughout the country, including one tested at the University of Texas, contained measurable levels of several fire retardant chemicals that are under mounting scrutiny as human health risks, according to a report to be released today in Austin.

PBDEsThe report shows that dust samples swiped from all 16 computers tested at the public offices contained widely varying levels of several brominated fire retardant chemicals used in making computers.The highest levels found were of one chemical — deca-BDE — which an industry trade group contends does not easily seep from computers and enter the environment or people’s bodies, according to the report by a national coalition of environmental advocacy groups including the Austin-based Texas Campaign for the Environment.

The report comes just days before scientists are to gather at the University of Toronto for a third international conference examining the newest research into possible environmental and human health risks posed by those chemicals, which are similar to the now-banned polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, and are suspected of causing neurological and reproductive harm.

Several European countries have banned use of the chemicals based on health concerns, and the European Union is requiring a phase-out of most brominated fire retardants by 2006. In the United States, although manufacturers have agreed to phase out two of the chemicals by 2006 — octa-BDE and penta-BDE — deca-BDE can still be used.

The results of the dust tests do not prove that people are ingesting significant amounts of the chemicals through exposure to dust on computers, as opposed to other routes such as eating contaminated fish or livestock, the report’s authors concede.

However, because deca-BDE is used primarily in electronics, rather than in furniture and other products, the results suggest computer dust might be a significant source, said Robin Schneider, who heads the Texas Campaign for the Environment.

The highest levels of deca-BDE were found on dust on a Compaq computer at a university office in New York State, while the second highest levels came from a 2002 model Dell computer in the Maine state Capitol, the report states.

The University of Texas computer, at the Jester Center, had levels of deca-BDE five times lower than the New York campus computer.

Dell spokesman Bryant Hilton said the company has barred the use of brominated fire retardants, including deca-BDE, in the plastic components of its computers since 2002. Not all of its competitors have done so or even report what flame retardants they use, according to the coalition’s report.

Dell is researching ways to replace a related chemical fire retardant, TBBPA, which is still used in the manufacture of its printed circuit boards, Hilton said.

What are brominated flame retardants?

A family of chemicals, similar to now-banned polychlorinated biphenyls, that have widely used as fire retardants in consumer products. The principal types of brominated fire retardants, and their primary uses, are:

Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA): Epoxy resins (printed circuit boards and printed wire boards of computers and other electronic products), and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (housings of computers, PC monitors, televisions and other electronic products).

Decabromodiphenyl Oxide (Deca-BDE): High impact polystyrene (electronic equipment), polyethylenes (wire and cables of electronic equipment), upholstery textiles, building and construction applications.

Octabromodiphenyl Oxide (Octa-BDE): ABS plastics (PC monitors, housings for televisions, mobile phones and copy machine parts).

Pentabromodiphenyl Oxide (Penta-BDE): Polyurethane foam, mattresses, seat cushions, upholstered furniture, carpet underlay and bedding.

Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD): Polystyrene foam (building materials, i.e. insulation) and textiles (upholstered textiles).

— Source: Bromine Science and Environmental Forum Web site: www.bsef.com


Disposable DVDs at Crossroads

EZD VictoryWired.com

Disney has stopped selling its movies on 48-hour DVDs, but that doesn’t mean the technology is disappearing. Flexplay developed the technology that renders a DVD unreadable after a set period of time. The company has been sold to Atlanta-based Convex Group, which plans to release content in this format.

The EZ-D was marketed to consumers as a way to avoid late fees from movie rental shops. Once opened, the EZ-D can be played unlimited times in 48 hours. Then a chemical compound on the disc combines with oxygen, rendering the DVD opaque and unreadable after two days. Movie fans can throw away the expired disk or pack it off to a special recycling facility to be recycled.

“We believe wholeheartedly in the platform,” said Dawn Whaley, executive vice president of the Convex Group. “I don’t think we would have acquired a company if we didn’t think it would be successful.”

During the holidays, the Convex Group released an independent film, Noel, in the Flexplay format. Copies of the film are still available on Amazon.com for $5 plus shipping. Whaley said the company is talking with retail partners and content providers, and plans to roll out additional titles later in 2005. She declined to be more specific.

Environmentalists criticized Disney for releasing its films on EZ-D, charging that the product would lead to unnecessary waste in landfills. They didn’t buy the argument that movie fans looking for convenience would take the time to send their expired DVDs to a recycling center.

A spokesman for Buena Vista Home Entertainment, the division of Disney that released the films, confirmed that its disposable DVD pilot program is over. He said they are now evaluating what they want to do next.

“It looks like the technology has been set back, at least for now,” said Robin Schneider, executive director of Texas Campaign for the Environment. “This is just a bad idea. I’m glad to see that both the customers and the studio … have not responded very favorably to it.”

Whaley said the Convex Group is aware of the environmental concerns about disposable DVDs and is making an effort to address them. The company refers its customers to GreenDisk, a company that recycles DVDs and CDs.

The Convex Group is also developing a way to include permanent content on a DVD in addition to the short-lived movie. Whaley said the company hopes to include an interactive game tied to the movie, a music video or a trailer that a customer would want to save.

Schneider said the argument to buy an EZ-D to avoid late fees doesn’t really apply anymore, now that one of the largest DVD rental shops, Blockbuster, has nixed its late fees. Netflix, another popular rental service, never charged late fees.

The EZ-Ds didn’t sell particularly well, either. Officials in a number of the stores that carried the EZ-D said the price was too high — about $7 — for a product that self-destructs.

“They just kind of quietly disappeared,” said Tom Mullen, store director for Cub Foods in Peoria, Illinois, one of Disney’s eight test markets around the country. “One day they were gone, and I haven’t heard anything about them since.”