Login / Register

You must Login or Register to rate this ad

Description:
Waste Managment Inc. is now claiming trash incinerators are a form of renewable energy. In reality, recycling waste saves _far_ more energy than burning it would create. And then there's the fact that trash incinerators are the leading source of dioxins, the most toxic chemicals know to science.

RATINGS & COMMENTS

0.0HAL9000d’s
Rating
Comment:
They don't incereate the garbage silly! Landfill gas is produced by organic waste decomposing under anaerobic conditions in a landfill. The waste is covered and compressed mechanically and by the weight of the material that is deposited from above. This material prevents oxygen from accessing the waste and anaerobic microbes thrive. This gas builds up and is slowly released into the atmosphere if the landfill site has not been engineered to capture the gas. With the case of waiste management, their land fills have a network of pipes that capture the gas-purify the gas and send it to a modified diesel engine that is supposed to burn the methane and turn it into electricity. I have visited a landfill and they produce upt to 4 megawatss. Study.

2.3Thor’s
Rating
Comment:
While the ad is true about the fact that capturing methane to produce biogas is very green because methane that esacpes from landfills is very toxic and biogas can replace petrol and natural gas, it depends on the quality of the incinerators filters. It should not be an excuse to get more garbage but more to reduce the impact of garbage and waste on the Planet. It's still way better than agrocrops like ethanol!

4.4rungrrl’s
Rating
Comment:
It's true that this ad refers to their capture of methane and turning it into electricity. It is still greenwashing for several reasons - including the fact that much more methane escapes into the air (thereby contributing to global warming) than is captured. And waste companies are starting to flood their landfills with liquid to make the garbage decompose faster so they can capture and sell more gas. This is causing even more methane to escape into the atmosphere than would have normally. Large landfills are required by law to capture the gas, but they do have the option to flare it off. Yes, they are capturing some gas and turning it into electricity. But in the process they are killing the climate even faster. See: Sin of the hidden trade-off."

1.6kropchock’s
Rating
Comment:
According to the EPAs WARM calculator landfill gas collection is fairly efficient. The issue isn't the waste hauls but rather the people who make all the stuff that gets thrown away in the first place. Additionally, if everyone wants the waste companies to recycle all we need to do is to start paying what we pay for cable instead of what we pay for trash. trash $20/mo. Cable $85/mo. Think about it.

3.4R’s
Rating
Comment:
Here's what bothers me with this ad and the overall general notion -- if garbage is/becomes deemed a resource, then there is no incentive not to create it in the first place. This is the wrong direction we should be going regarding managing our waste!

2.0saihokulani’s
Rating
Comment:
In my neck of the woods, Waste Management runs biodiesel trucks, negating the posting about pollution from trucks. While I agree with the other posting about perhaps the wrong message, that is trash as a resource, I still think that it is better to use it as a resource than to pretend that everyone is going to magically reduce, reuse and so on....

3.6redheadedgreengirl’s
Rating
Comment:
"The waste we collect powers over one million homes" is in fact true, but does not reflect the true breadth and size of their operations. I would like them to produce numbers about what percentage of the waste they collect actually gets converted to energy. Furthermore, the image of a urban metropolis is false. WM is managed regionally and their environmental responsibility efforts are limited to select regions and not in MAJOR cities with the exception of Portland, San Fransisco and Minneapolis. They do not have standardized environmental friendly practices. Here is the thing, many people accept the launching of "green" pilot projects as a sign of leadership, for example BP's helio house. But the BP's role as environmental leader is palatable because they don't try to claim that their entire company is about "green". WM's entire bra, but their green practices are still limited to test/pilot locations. I want to know the amount of money they spend on marketing their "green" efforts vs. actual dollars spent on "green" efforts. nding is now centered around it as a "green" company

3.4JL1288’s
Rating
Comment:
I think the ad is ironic because they use huge diesel powered garbage trucks that put out a lot of pollution to pick up the "waste" that is powering these homes. They could use electric garbage trucks to make the company more green.