> David South writes: > >As citizens, I do not believe we have to rely on industry to finds ways >to recycle wood products. We can be pro-active and recycle wood ourselves. > >We can:(1) use wood as a fuel and (2) give perfectly good 2X4's away free. > >In Alabama and in Oregon, where population densities are not very high, many >of us burn wood to heat our homes. This is a "natural" way to recycle wood >which nature did for thousands of years before man populated North America. >I realize that there is some work involved to make wood fit into stoves or >fireplaces. However, I believe the extra labor is worth the trouble since I >believe burning old wood in a wood stove is better than burying it in a >landfill. > David is correct in that landfilling wood scrap is neither socially nor environmentally acceptable. Neither is it in most cases physically possible (many landfills no longer take wood scrap, or do so only for a surcharge). However, I do not think that combusting a material/product qualifies as *recycling*. Taking the term "recycling" in its strictest sense, it means to re-introduce a material/product back into the cycle from which it came. In the case of forest products, then, we need to re-introduce those materials into forest products use, not put more carbon into the atmosphere. While putting wood products into a landfill prevents any further beneficial use of the material (no recycling benefit), it has, however, the advantage that it puts carbon directly into the soil environment where it can be assimilated by micro-organisms. Burning wood material, on the other hand, provides one *final* use (heat energy), but it has the disadvantage that it releases carbon into the atmosphere at the same time. I'm not convinced that this beneficial use (heat energy) outweighs the exaccerbating increase of greenhouse gases. Instead of these two alternatives, there are many other ways to recycle wood products. Please see the publications section of our home page for some ways that we are working to recycle wooden pallets (until recently, a major deposition into landfills). http://www.se4702.forprod.vt.edu/SE-4702/pubsubj/palrepar.htm I realize that David was suggesting alternative wood recycling efforts that do not depend on initiation by the wood products industry, and he's right that we should not wait for industry to lead us. But, there are other ways to promote and create wood recycling efforts. For example, much of our research effort in the area of pallet recycling has precipitated from landfill restrictions. Cities and counties (that's us, folks!) have decided that we no longer want that material in our landfills. This has created a problem for wooden pallet users, but it has produced the beneficial effect that there is now greater concern about repairing, re-using, and recycling pallets, and pallet parts. So, what was first a problem for the industry has now become an opportunity that many entrepreneurial innovators have turned to their advantage. And this has all happened within the last 5 years; so, industrial innovators have responded quite quickly to this problem. By politically mandating those things that are environmentally and socially unacceptable, we can force industry to respond in ways that are more E/S acceptable. This type of direction for recycling has a much greater and longer lasting impact than using short-sighted and expedient methods. David is absolutely right in that we need to act locally, but that locality should not be the den fireplace with a match. > >Here where I live, building codes exist in cities but not in the country. >If there were perfectly good 2X4's left next to a main road with a "FREE FOR >THE TAKING" sign, the wood would be recycled very quickly. Next time you >start to throw away good 2X4's see if a "FREE FOR THE TAKING" sign would >work in Oregon. Like the slogan says, "think globally, act locally." >Please encourage other contractors to quit disposing of good 2X4's in a >landfill. > > A good point...another good way to promote recycling is to use the word "free". It's everyone's favorite four-letter word. DAN ------------------------- schmoldt@vt.edu ----------------------------- Daniel L. Schmoldt Brooks Forest Products Center USDA Forest Service Virginia Tech (540)231-4674 (FAX 8868) Blacksburg VA 24061-0503
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0