John Trotti

As I was growing up, January First was marked by three major events: the Rose Parade, removal of the Christmas tree, and its replacement by a small statue of double-faced Janus, the Roman god of beginnings and endings. It was a time, my father informed us with a solemnity quite far removed from the festivities of the season, for assessing the year that had just passed and then looking to the opportunities that lay ahead. Each of us had to relate an experience and a goal, and since we knew from prior years that we could not escape to savor the joys of the holiday until we had come up with something worthy of paternal approval, all of us spent some portion of New Year's Eve preparing for the moment. It was not, upon reflection, such a bad idea, so maybe it's time to put Janus back up on the mantle and due my duty.

2004: Winds of Change

It will be hard to forget the hurricanes that battered Florida or the carnage left in their wake that has left a lasting impression on all who manage waste. Yes, what happened there was apocalyptic—well beyond what our systems can envision, much less handle—and while none of us expect to find ourselves the target of three monster storms in succession, we can never consider ourselves immune from situations where the consequences are just as dire. Not surprisingly, nearly every waste manager I've spoken with lately has held a disaster plan review, and more than a few have approached their elected officials for additional funds to upgrade their preparations while the lessons of the fall were still on their minds.

Disaster preparedness aside, the largest change I've seen this past year has been in the growing awareness among waste professionals that if we're not going to forfeit many of the gains in waste diversion we've experienced over the past decade, we need to reenergize the public's interest, which has shown a steady erosion over the past several years. It would seem that support has shifted from maintenance of a static model of environmental value to one that recognizes and addresses societal needs as well, and this is where I see us poised as we enter the New Year.

2005: New Beginnings

After what seems like forever—you may recall that MSW Management hosted a colloquy (http://forester.net/msw_9912_colloquy.html) on the subject five years ago—we're actually seeing movement in the area of what have come to be known as conversion technologies. Not surprisingly, the first entries into today's waste arena are almost sure to be anaerobic digesters, but what is important is the undeniable fact that, ready or not, politically correct or not, economically viable or not, the doors to the conversion of the unrecyclable fraction of the wastestream are beginning to open. The pacing item in this is—and will continue to be—concern over energy both in terms of fuels and efficient systems for their use. Already we have seen landfill gas playing an increasing role in a variety of internal-combustion, turbine, and microturbine applications, but as more conversion systems come online, these applications will move farther up the food chain… almost certainly to the MRF/transfer station level where organic wastes heretofore headed for landfills can be converted and used to power facility systems or perhaps even local microgrids.

So could 2005 be the year in which MSW is managed as much for its material value as for its affront to the sensitivities of those who are offended by the presence of waste? You bet, if for no other reason than that the public has given firm notice that it is more interested in addressing the pressing concerns of the economy and energy than achieving artificial diversion goals.

I'll go further and suggest that even the most committed recyclers have recognized that for diversion to move to the next level they must embrace technologies that may not satisfy their desires for returning materials to their original state, but that meet the needs of a society that has lost some of its zeal for traditional modes of recycling. As Dr. Kay Martin's article "Recycling the Hierarchy" in our September/October 2003 issue (available at http://forester.net/mw_0309_hierarchy.html) points out, the present waste management hierarchy addresses only environmental concerns, essentially ignoring societal and economic issues in the process.

As fate has it, much of this debate will take place on the floor of the California Integrated Waste Management Board, where such subjects as the board's jurisdiction over post-separated materials (for instance, why should there be a difference between materials bound for remanufacture and those headed for conversion destinations?) and the equal diversion credit footing for all post-separation diversion materials should make for hearty discussion. If history is a good judge, whatever emerges from the Sacramento discussions will find its way elsewhere before too long.

So happy or not, 2005 is shaping up to be an exciting New Year.

Send John an Email

MSW - January/February 2005