• Don’t throw that shoe (out)!
     | April 21,2014

    ĎMy goodness, I didnít know that solid waste management was so controversial!Ē said Hillary Clinton, after ducking the black and orange Puma cleat thrown at her by the obviously non-recycler Alison Ernst at the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries convention in Las Vegas last week. Hillaryís off-the-cuff remark, made while recovering from the surprise shoe-fling, has rocked the recycling world. Maybe itís because someone with as much air-time as Clinton enjoys used the phrase ďsolid waste managementĒ and got quoted, I donít know. But thank you, Hillary!

    I suspect that Ernst didnít know ó surrounded by the recycling community though she was ó that shoes are recyclable. She must have been so desperate to find a non-trash alternative for the resources found in the shoe, that, out of sheer frustration, she threw the thing. If I were there, I could have brought those cleats to CVSWMDís Additional Recyclables Collection Center here in Barre for her, or even directed her to a Salvation Army somewhere in Vegas, which gratefully accepts usable shoe donations. I hope that if readers of this column find themselves with spare shoes, theyíll consider similar reuse or recycling alternatives before resorting to throwing them at other people (though I canít pretend not to understand the impulse).

    But kidding aside, in consideration of Hillaryís off-the-cuff remarks, is solid waste really controversial? I hate to bring up a subject that may still be fresh in Barreís collective mind, but anyone who has tried to site a landfill ó or worse, a toxics belching incinerator ó might say resoundingly Ďyes, solid waste is controversial.í

    But what about the alternative to landfills and incinerators ó reducing waste and recovering the value of the resources we currently throw out? Is that controversial? It is my fervent hope that actions like composting and recycling are so ordinary as to remain controversy-less, but Iím not that naÔve.

    To me, the notion of waste itself is controversial. We, as a citizenry, seem to expect to be able to accumulate stuff, but not have to pay much, nor worry about what happens to it when weíve finished with it. But it doesnít disappear. Be it a broken cassette player from the 1980s, or an upgraded iPod, a ripped pair of jeans, or a book that got left out in the rain, when discarded, objects fill up increasingly scarce landfill space, leach toxics into groundwater, and contribute to the creation of damaging gasses such as methane. Incinerated, even when filtered to the nth degree, dioxins and other damaging nanoparticles saturate the surrounding environment and cause unending damage to humans, soil, and life in general. Also, it costs money to pay people to haul garbage from here to there, in expensive machinery, relying on multi-million dollar facilities to handle it.

    So why do we, in our culture, seem to have a sense of entitlement about throwing stuff out?

    It would be easy, and maybe a little bit fun, to postulate on that point for a few paragraphs, but Iíd like to skip to this: we arenít entitled to get rid of stuff for free ó particularly without regard to how it affects the environment when it degrades ó just because at some point we made a bad (or even good) buying decision. We have as much responsibility to make sure the stuff we acquire goes to the right place when we finish with it as we do to not dump our septic tanks into the river.

    Thankfully in Vermont ó and increasingly across the US and the world ó lots of options are available for reuse, recycling, composting, and food recovery for people and animals, which makes it pretty easy to keep our trash bags small.

    With the help of legislation that ultimately bans recyclables from the landfill by next summer, and bans food scraps and yard waste from the landfill by 2020, Vermont is poised as a leader in solid waste management in the northeast, and potentially across the nation. We are being watched by other states and cities. I know this, because sometimes they call me and ask about our Universal Recycling law (Act 148), or the CVSWMDís 10-year old organics collection program, which helps businesses put their food scraps back into Vermontís soil by composting it (and cutting their trash in half at the same time).

    In fact, more and more, leaders in the solid waste world are recognizing that ó with or without a shoe thrown at them ó solid waste IS controversial. Because waste itself is controversial. But materials management ó the managing of resources that have financial and environmental value ó is not. Thatís why CVSWMD commits all its programing to working toward Zero Waste.

    For questions about reducing, reusing, recycling, or composting, visit the Central Vermont Solid Waste Management website at www.cvswmd.org ó and please, donate your shoes. Donít throw them ó and certainly donít throw them out.

    Cassandra Hemenway is the zero waste outreach coordinator at the Central Vermont Solid Waste Management District.

    MORE IN This Just In
    NEW YORK ó While Hollywood continued to wrestle with the fallout of the Sony hacking scandal, the... Full Story
    In this season of hope and joy, it was sobering to me last night to see on the evening news a... Full Story
    After years of steadfast promises, Gov. Full Story
    More Articles
    • VIDEOS
    • PHOTOS