garbage

Wednesday May 2, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday May 2, 2018

Hamilton’s blue box blues: recycling ban looms for coffee lids, Styrofoam

The city no longer wants you to put coffee cup lids, black plastic or Styrofoam in the blue box — despite spending years encouraging residents to recycle those items.

April 24, 2018

The low-grade plastics are technically recyclable, but virtually no one wants to buy the collected material anymore — especially since market giant China cracked down on imported plastics in January, said city recycling manager Emil Prpic.

The city is increasingly forced to trash those lids and containers, or risk having would-be buyers reject entire loads of “contaminated” plastic sorted at its Burlington Street recycling facility.

It’s a “market-driven” eco-dilemma, said Prpic. “Two years ago there was still a market for black plastic … it’s here today, gone tomorrow.”

For now, that means it may be better for the environment for you to directly trash those lids, meat trays and takeout containers, said Prpic, after updating councillors Monday on the blue box blues.

He said such recycling rejects have contributed to a spike in the blue box “contamination rate” from seven to 14 per cent over the last five years. Contamination includes nonrecyclable items like coffee pods, bread tabs and bottle caps, but also ruined recyclables covered in food waste, for example.

On the up side, it could be worse — Toronto is struggling with a contamination rate closer to 25 per cent. Coun. Sam Merulla asked staff to bring back a comparison report on how Hamilton stacks up against other cities in keeping compost and recyclables out of the dump. (Source: Hamilton Spectator) https://www.thespec.com/news-story/8579370-hamilton-s-blue-box-blues-recycling-ban-looms-for-coffee-lids-styrofoam/

 

SaveSave

Tuesday April 24, 2018

 

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday April 24, 2018

‘We need to rethink the entire plastics industry’: Why banning plastic straws isn’t enough

Britain announced this week that it plans to ban the sale of single-use plastic straws, as support for similar bans grows in Canada and around the world.

March 6, 2015

Advocates say such straw bans should help reduce plastic pollution that harms wildlife and ecosystems, but we need to monitor the effects of such policies. And they say bans may not be feasible for most of the plastics in our lives, so broader changes to the way we produce, consume and dispose of plastics are needed to make a real difference.

Jennifer Provencher, a postdoctoral researcher at Acadia University who studies the ingestion of plastic pollution by wildlife, said Britain’s ban is “an incredibly important step towards minimizing and using plastics more responsibly.”

She noted that single-use plastic items like straws and stir sticks are generally used only for a few minutes before they’re discarded, but can persist in the environment for centuries because plastics don’t typically decompose within a human lifetime.

Scientists estimate we’ve made 8.3 billion tonnes of plastic since the 1950s and 6.3 billion tonnes have already become waste.

More than 330,000 pieces of plastic and foam waste were picked off 2,800 kilometres of Canada’s shoreline by volunteers during beach cleanup events last year, including 17,654 straws — the ninth most common item found during cleanups supported by Ocean Wise and WWF-Canada. Worldwide, 409,087 straws and stirrers were picked up in beach cleanups around the world in 2017, the Ocean Conservancy reports.

Because of their small size, disposable straws are rarely recycled and often end up in the environment.

There, they can cause serious injuries to animals, as shown in a 2015 video that shows a straw being pulled out of a sea turtle’s nostril — the graphic, viral video has been viewed more than 21 million times. (Source: CBC) 

 

Saturday April 4, 2015

Saturday April 4, 2015Editorial cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday April 4, 2015

City trashes Good Samaritan for downtown parking lot cleanup

Ted Pundey didn’t expect to be paid for his volunteer cleanup — but he certainly didn’t expect to be fined.

Tired of looking out his downtown condo window at a parking lot full of trash (one the city says has been identified as an illegal dumping “hot spot”), he decided on Tuesday to clean up the mess near King William and John streets himself.

But the intended good deed cost him $125 after he was slapped with a fine by bylaw officers who had witnessed the cleanup — one they alternatively call “illegal dumping.”

“They caught me cleaning,” Pudney — a CBC video editor in Toronto — said Wednesday. When three officers had showed up he was pleased, assuming they were there to help.

But when they handed him a ticket, he was baffled — for one, this wasn’t even his garbage. And he’d stacked the boxes just metres from where he’d collected the trash. In doing so, the city says, he crossed an invisible line in the lot, from private property to a public alleyway portion.

“We have no issues with anybody helping to clean up a property, but if someone is disposing what they’re cleaning up off that property onto city property … then the taxpayer ends up paying for that,” the city’s municipal law enforcement manager Kim Coombs says.

Pudney — who moved from Toronto three months ago — didn’t realize the distinction: “I was doing this strictly to be a good guy. I had no agenda, other than that the area needs some attention.”

He’d purposely stacked the boxes against a posted sign in the alley, advertising designated pick-up times between 10 a.m. and noon on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. (Source: Hamilton Spectator)

 

Wednesday September 19, 2012

By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator, Wednesday September 19, 2012

Flag back in storage as Parti Québécois era begin

Before premier-designate Pauline Marois was again sworn in as an MNA Monday, the Parti Québécois stripped the Canadian flag from the upper chamber of the National Assembly.

And the sovereigntist party removed the Maple Leaf that adorned outgoing premier Jean Charest’s office for the past nine years. This is not the first time a PQ government has put the flag in storage. While the move may inflame passions among Quebec federalists and across the country, this time the symbolic gesture may be a particularly hollow one.

Ms. Marois led the PQ to a minority victory earlier this month with barely a third of the popular vote. She made no mention of sovereignty in her brief swearing-in speech. Nor did her election campaign place great emphasis on sovereignty, desire for which is at historic lows among Quebeckers.

Ms. Marois, who will be sworn in as premier Wednesday, said nothing about the flag removal in her remarks after the swearing-in ceremony. “Quebeckers chose change and they chose to do it with a Parti Québécois government,” Ms. Marois said.

“One of the changes is to put an end to the politics of division. What I wish is for Quebec to get back on course and reclaim its pride and confidence. When a people reclaims its pride and confidence, nothing, absolutely nothing, becomes impossible.”

Asked to respond to the removal of the Maple Leaf by the PQ government, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s office responded with a blunt “no comment.”

The swearing-in ceremony has always been an awkward affair for PQ members. They must pledge allegiance to the Queen as part of the mandatory official ritual of taking office. (Source: Globe & Mail) 

 

Thursday February 23, 2012

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator, Thursday February 23, 2012

Council dumps biweekly garbage

Hamilton city councillors have officially disposes of the idea of biweekly garbage pickup in favour of a new program that’s both more expensive and less effective at diverting waste from landfill.

After hours of debate Tuesday, councillors approved weekly garbage pickup with a one-bag limit, but introduced 26 free tags to put out extra bags. That system, brokered by councillors Russ Powers and Chad Collins behind closed doors before Tuesday’s meeting, will be implemented in April 2013 when the city’s existing waste collection contracts run out.

However, the councillors’ chosen option will cost $1.4 million more each year than the biweekly alternative staff suggested. And, staff warned that unlike biweekly garbage collection — which would force people to increase their diversion — the new one-bag plus tags option will drag down the city’s 49 per cent waste diversion rate.

“As an environmentalist, I want to see long-term thinking about sustainability and doing the right thing for future generations,” said Lynda Lukasik, president of Environment Hamilton. “As a taxpayer, I want to see councillors stepping back, weighing it out and saying, ‘What’s the most fiscally responsible thing to do for the municipality — not just now, but into the future?’ Sadly, I think the numbers suggest that a different decision was made.”

Tuesday’s debate was the fourth time council dealt with garbage pickup this year. In the three previous debates, councillors couldn’t come to an agreement about whether to adopt a biweekly option.

Before Tuesday’s meeting, half of council was prepared to move ahead with biweekly pickup, while the other half wanted to increase the weekly bag limit to two bags. (Source: Hamilton Spectator)