The United States continues to lag behind leading countries in pushing aggressive environmental programs to reduce pollutants and garbage. Two stories this week highlight the sharp and disappointing contrast. In Sweden, the government has made an incredible leap in reducing household garbage and appears close to attaining the impossible: a zero waste national objective for landfills. Currently, less than one percent of Sweden household garbage ends up in landfills. In the meantime, Germany (which continues to outstrip the U.S. on green policies while continuing strong economic growth) has announced that it will add one million electric cars on the road by 2030 and expects to drop greenhouse emissions from transportation by 26 percent by 2030 from 1990 levels.
Sweden has had astonishing success in reducing landfill waste which is notoriously bad for the environment from residual ground and air pollution as well as the failure to fully recycle trash. The Swedish government has pushed the concept of garbage as a commodity for recycling or fuel production. Swedish families now Produce just 461 kilograms of waste which is slightly below the half-ton European average, but the country does an amazing job in managing the trash.
One of the biggest reasons for the low level of landfill use is a law that I have often spoken about in some countries. In Sweden, producers are responsible for handling all costs related to collection and recycling or disposal of their products. This gives companies an incentive to reduce packaging and increase recycling.
As for Germany, we have previously discussed the incredible achievements of that country in alternative energy sources. Merkel’s government has now announced the plan to have the million electric cars on the road by 2020 and set the 26 percent drop as the goal. Germany is making these achievements while maintaining one of the strongest economies in the world.
These laws of course have the obvious value of not just reducing greenhouse gases but reducing pollution and improving public health. The garbage rules also force greater cost internalization for manufacturers rather than to allow them to simply externalize the costs of packaging and pollution.
“What do you people THINK, that people of course are UNABLE to Re-Cycle ????
Do you think that only white people with blue eyes and blonde hair, know how to recycle ?????”
Yes.. I am unable to recycle. I think that it is impossible for some people to recycle due to geography, lack of facilities and prohibitive costs. You might want to wrap your mind around the concept that not everyone is you. I have blue eyes and auburn hair and find it impossible to recycle. Do I know how? Sure. Will I? No.
Other people do not value recycling as a cultural goal. Some people do not have the means or desire. Others who might want to find it too expensive.
The main point that went…… wooosh….. over your head is that programs that work in small countries where 85% of the population lives in urban areas, like Sweden, may not work in countries that are geographically large with urban as islands and with large spread out areas of non urban development.
If the powers that be want to have garbage reduction and encourage recycling then they need to make the programs user friendly and available to the NON urban living population. Otherwise, they are wasting their breath and people will continue to dump tires, appliances, old mattresses from their vehicles or just leave them in the back 40. They will continue to throw away recyclable materials because there is no other viable option.
What works in Sweden….good for them, may not work elsewhere.
Damn, JAG, of people who profess a faith they are 94% Lutherans in Sweden. Lot’s of potluck dinners in church basements.
Those figures were from a Swedish demo website, info collected in 2004.
JAG, Sweden is 89.3% Swedes!! That’s pretty blonde haired/blue eyed in my book. The US is MUCH more diverse. So, you can disagree w/ DBQ on other points, but 90% Swede is quite homogeneous by any standard. And the next largest group is Finns. Toe Head nation!
Environmentalism Is The New Collectivism – A Political Movement
Sweden is faux symbolism designed to mislead. Its population is 9 million.
China, the mega, wanton polluter, is the 800 lb. gorilla in the room that is conspicuously absent from this missive. China, rightly or wrongly, has completely ignored pollution to raise its economic activity, wealth and lifestyle. That might be a more appropriate place to target recriminations.
Electric cars are decoys for pollution control. Their pollution is done elsewhere. Their energy is provided by many petroleum fueled generators at electric utilities as nuclear is dangerous and solar is inefficient and insufficient.
All manufacturers and power generators are aware of their contribution to components in the atmosphere and they minimize them as much as is practical while maintaining a standard of living.
Toyota has set a near-term goal for hydrogen powered vehicles.
The implication here is malice on the part of American industry.
When not interfered with by collectivist zealots and anarchists, American industry has a reasonable record of providing products that people need and want to buy, addressing problems deriving from manufacturing processes and implementing solutions.
Much of the blame for “pollution” must be placed on various natural sources such as volcanoes, forest fires, sea vents, lightning strikes, biological decay and oceans.
If it is natural, is it “pollution?”
Is this movement about cleaning up a mess or rallying the zealot-comrades?
** Enviropedia –
“Natural sources of sulphur dioxide include release from volcanoes, biological decay and forest fires.”
“The United Nations Environment Programme estimated a figure of between 80 million and 288 million tonnes of sulphur oxides per year (compared to around 69 million tonnes from human sources world-wide).
Estimates range between 20 million and 90 million tonnes per year nitrogen oxides released from natural sources (compared to around 24 million tonnes from human sources worldwide).”
Although human pollution, through the burning of fossil fuels, has contributed to acid deposition, rainwater is naturally acidic as a result of carbon dioxide in the air dissolving in the water. In addition, natural sources of sulphur and nitrogen emissions can contribute further to the acidity of rainwater.”
That was supposed to read… people of COLOR… NOT people of course…. Darn auto-correct….
Annie
It is refreshing to know that not all the courts have been paid off…
Dust Bunny Queen
YOU failed to also post the Racial DEMOGRAPHICS to back your CLAIM……
You claimed that Sweden is a homogenous country….. LOL
That is HOW I knew YOU have NEVER been here…
I lived in Seattle for 40 years and now in Sweden for 8…. 😀
hehehehehe… Yeah.. and being that it isn’t homogenous, as you claim….
What do you people THINK, that people of course are UNABLE to Re-Cycle ????
Do you think that only white people with blue eyes and blonde hair, know how to recycle ?????
That’s pretty amazing Max.
http://youtu.be/VsvEaSj_q1I
Germany’s economy will take a big hit if Obama imposes sanctions on Russian
energy exports.
While I don’t agree with everything Issac states, I’m 100% on the oligarchy analysis. I think almost all of the discussions we have here are useless until controlling interests in government can be ended. Just like the guarantee we gave to Estonia. We are supposed to fight WWIII if that tiny spot is invaded. There’s only one group who benefits from that insanity. Defense contractors are living it up. Ask Germany how well those war guarantees worked for them in September 1914. Like I said, I’ll be very interested to see if there is a crackdown on the solar panels, or if the law from ’77 or so that requires companies to buy back the energy created by the customers is rewritten.
Darren, it’s not only a tax on the panels that they want, but an ongoing fee as well.
Maxcat–independent company is what I would be interested in hearing about. Mandates from government in the best interest of all eventually turn into the best interests of the government only and the people who directly get the contracts from the government.
Main problems:
Guilt, “I don’t care if I pollute more than any other country, I want my SUV and bottled water.”
Greed, “The smell of pollution is just the smell of success.”
Stupidity, “The world heats up and cools down on its own, it has nothing to do with what man does.”
Status Quo, “There are untold trillions of new dollars to be made in the development of proper and responsible waste management, elimination of fossil fuels, and over all efficiency but those that are elected are bought and paid for by the opponents of new technologies, i.e. the status quo or those that make trillions from oil and gas, coal, etc.”
We live in a country ruled by an oligarchy. Until we fix our political system with its leaders bought and paid for or afraid of being removed by lobbyists, is short private contributions to political campaigns, we will remain backward.
http://www.mnn.com/sites/default/files/German_roofs.jpg
Klug…ja est ist.
It’s a shame that in the 21st century we still depend on a mineral slime for our power needs. Many other ways to go now, but none of them will be able to get a foothold until every last chunk of coal and drop of oil is squeezed out of the earth. And you can bet the government, in the end, will be complicit with this, because that is how it works. I have been looking into solar as well and it will be interesting to see if a tax does happen.
Well, despite the analogy of the “Jews for the liberal storm troopers”, this liberal will weigh in. I live in a large town/small city that has instituted single stream recycling which captures most paper, metal and plastic items. There is also an independent company that has started a composting pickup, where they will take your table scraps, dog hair and even dryer lint and will return compost to you every several months. We are smaller than Sweden, but able to accomplish this, and I believe other municipalities/towns/cities/states could do the same. To say that we’re too big, or that we’re not Sweden is missing the point, as this is most definitely a local issue. As for “resources to recycle”, those are provided by the government entity, not the individual. Yes, the “NANNY STATE” once again, to the delight, I’m certain, of a certain individual who posts here.
As for alternate energy, many states here have begun experiments with different forms of such. One of the funniest things, I believe, is that the largest wind turbine farm, I believe, is in Texas. I don’t know if they use the energy or sell it elsewhere.
All of this can be at least started, if not done on the scale of Sweden. Perhaps it takes a little more realism, a word liberals on this site aren’t credited with, and
a lot less sarcasm. That, however, will be the difficult part, as one-upsmanship
seems to be the rule here.
Len, I had a similar worry about tax. But our state (which certainly is not good when it comes to taxes {Taxington State}) does not charge sales tax on residential solar panels up to a certain limit. I don’t remember the limit but it is beyond what most would use.
The power company here also gives rebates on installation of household renewable energy. I hope the sellers of the solar panels don’t factor this into their price and it becomes a zero sum gain.
I’m glad to see others here looking into solar for their situation.
Len,
Regarding ALEC and the Kochs:
The Koch Attack on Solar Energy
4/26/14
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/27/opinion/sunday/the-koch-attack-on-solar-energy.html?_r=0
Excerpt:
At long last, the Koch brothers and their conservative allies in state government have found a new tax they can support. Naturally it’s a tax on something the country needs: solar energy panels.
For the last few months, the Kochs and other big polluters have been spending heavily to fight incentives for renewable energy, which have been adopted by most states. They particularly dislike state laws that allow homeowners with solar panels to sell power they don’t need back to electric utilities. So they’ve been pushing legislatures to impose a surtax on this increasingly popular practice, hoping to make installing solar panels on houses less attractive.