Zero waste is a new pillar of sustainability, and an important part of reducing our ecological footprint. The idea of zero waste appears to be catching on, with Metro Vancouver promoting the idea through conferences and its Zero Waste Challenge to households.
But citizens should read the fine print carefully. Up close, Metro Vancouver is prioritizing something very different - a massive increase in incineration capacity that would take the region away from zero waste goals.
Metro already has one major incinerator in Burnaby, which processes about 280,000 tonnes of waste per year (about 28 per cent of waste disposed). A new incineration facility is in the planning stages that could handle another 370,000 tonnes of waste per year.
Rebranded as "waste-to-energy," incineration gives the perception of making waste disappear, and is promoted as a way of generating heat and electricity.
In truth, incineration only transforms materials into different forms, releasing greenhouse gases and other toxic compounds like dioxins and furans. And after incineration, at least one-fifth of the materials remain in the form of (mostly toxic) ash that must still be landfilled.
Incineration advocates see one tonne of garbage as the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil. The catch is it takes eight to 10 barrels of oil to make the products resulting in a tonne of garbage. Huge amounts of energy in a product come from resource extraction and processing, product manufacturing and transportation - before it ever ends up in a store.
It is time to rethink this plan.
A big part of the problem is that local governments must manage waste, while the companies that produce it do not.
Recycling and composting are positive improvements to this system, but they do not address the core problem of a wasteful economic system.
We have to stop focusing on the "end of the pipe" and pay more attention to reducing the amount of waste produced in the first place. That is the essence of zero waste policies.
A role model for our story is the lowly beer bottle, which is reused 15 times, on average, before it is recycled. Plastic bottles, in contrast, may be recycled after a single use, but may also end up in a landfill or burned up in an incinerator.
By building new incineration capacity, we actually create the wrong incentive: we will need to ensure a feedstock of burnable materials for decades into the future. This is especially true for plastics, as they are petroleum products that have much higher energy content than other wasted materials.
Over time, a decrease in waste flow would lead to energy shortages for customers and financial repercussions. Such is the case in Sweden, which now has to import garbage to feed its incinerators.
Instead, beer bottle economics need to be applied to all beverage containers, from pop bottles to milk.
Similar deposit-and-return systems could be applied to plates and cutlery for fast food, containers from the grocery store, and packaging from consumer electronics. These moves would help eliminate the single-use plastics that comprise half of all the plastic produced.
Other strategies can be deployed to go beyond recycling by displacing the need for new energy-intensive manufacturing and transportation. Digital music, video, books and magazines are the most obvious examples of a pure reduction in materials to support the same consumption.
Preventing those moments we all have when it is cheaper to buy new than get a broken product fixed is also needed. Extended warranties on durables and consumer electronics (from dryers to iPods) would push manufacturers to ensure products can be repaired and maintained, and upgraded as needed.
Collaborative consumption or sharing has been around for a long time, with public libraries being a good example. Some communities are building on this idea with shared garden equipment sheds, toy or tool "libraries."
Well-designed policies in these areas can support local economic development and the creation of new green jobs by increasing local capacity to manage and add value to materials that are recovered. The B.C. government could help build this capacity through its procurement policies and by setting minimum recycled content standards for the marketplace.
Zero waste policies aim for dramatic reductions in the volume of materials that flow through the economy, and therefore the amount of energy used and greenhouse gases emitted. They are also a driver for local economic development that supports a high standard of living.
Marc Lee is a senior economist with the B.C. office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
Sue Maxwell is principal of EcoInspire. They are coauthors of Closing the Loop: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Creating Green Jobs through Zero Waste in B.C.
