One thing that greatly concerns me with waste-to-fuel, and other ideas for reusing "unwanted stuff" (kudzu, veggie oil, cow gas, etc) is what happens when we rely on it for energy and income. Waste-to-fuel sounds like a great way to get rid of the waste, but if that process generated electricity for a county, do we then need to continue creating enough trash to keep homes powered?
It's the same in my mind with all these wastes. Sure, cow pie digestion can make some power, but do we really want to rely on concentrated animal farming to make our power? It's great that the waste can be turned into something more useful, but overall it requires producing the waste and using the energy. I guess my question is which is a better use of $100 million? Building a facility with long-term maintenance and staffing costs to handle our waste, or educating the public on how to produce less waste while helping the companies producing it to use other methods or materials for their products. -Andy Jan Quarles wrote: > Now a proposal for a pilot waste-to-fuel program at the Ontario County > Landfill could pave the way for a $100 million facility. Supporters say the > proposal could put the county on the map. > > Opponents warn that the county would be creating a chronic source of > environmental problems. _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins Questions about the list? ask [email protected] free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
