USA Today reports that by (could it be? Yes, it is!) 2010, half of GM’s 181 manufacturing sites around the world will be “zero landfill.” In other words, The General’s factories won’t send most their industrial waste to the dump. Instead, GM’s plant trash will be recycled, sold for scrap or incinerated. “Ten GM plants, including an engine plant in Flint, Mich., already are landfill-free, and GM will have about 80 more producing little or no waste within 20 months, according to a source who would not be named because the announcement has not been made. GM had no comment.” Well, in fact, GM issued a press release on this, but I guess the whole Watergate meme is better when it comes time for that USA Today reporters’ pay review. Anyway, the EPA and GM are tighterthanthis, apparently. “The Environmental Protection Agency has worked for more than a decade with GM and other companies to cut waste through its WasteWise program. ‘The success of General Motors in creating zero-landfill facilities shows that zero-waste goals can be a powerful impetus for manufacturers to reduce their waste and carbon footprint,’ says Latisha Petteway, a spokesperson for the EPA.” And it sure won’t hurt GM’s PR campaign for their share of that $50b pot of gold at the end of the low-interest federal loans for re-tooling rainbow…
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Does “Zero Landfill” mean they’re closing the plants?
A difficult to read intro..
How come Brits always uses plurals for car companies?
Cammy: Please learn to give credit where it is due.
As the SUV / pick-up debacle continues, GM will have even more opportunity to be “zero landfill” as they shut down these plants which will then stop them filling up landfills with vehicles no one wants.
As it stands right now, GM is paying for a LOT of landfill space every month so that they can park their excessive production on it. I wonder if this landfill cost is greater than their interest cost on their debt?
Eh, doesn’t matter I guess. Without income, debt is just another four-letter word.
Reports of dealers having to dump excess inventory into Landfill are completely unfounded, though, a good idea.
I’m suddenly reminded of Atari burying millions of unsold Atari 2600 systems and cartridges for the system (especially ET) in a New Mexico landfill in the mid-1980’s.
Incinerators _can_ generate energy as a byproduct. I don’t know how efficient it is, but it’s certainly in production use in several places in the world today. It is not exactly the most environmentally safe option, though.
Most of us Americans do not do nearly as much as large corporations do to be “Green”. Do you buy bottled water? Larger carbon footprint and just as healthy as most tap water. Don’t try to justify your choice because it won’t hold water.
This is commendable although it may just be more smoke and mirrors to get federal money and many of those plants will be closed, therby achieving zero landfill
Well now, I too would like to know how any manufacturing firm can have “zero landfill waste.”
It’s impossible to do, I say. Every time we make something, there will ALWAYS be a certain amount of waste that simply cannot be recycled or reused.
Whether it’s the actual manufacturing process, or the leftover plastic and foil wrappers from the employee break rooms, SOME PART OF THAT FACTORY WILL ALWAYS PRODUCE THINGS THAT CANNOT BE RECYCLED.
Unless somehow GM has figured out how to shunt landfill waste to the books of its suppliers. Or maybe they sell/donate/ unusable byproducts to another company, who’s service is to “quietly dispose” of it in a landfill? Don’t ask, don’t tell, anybody?
It’s admirable to try, but I don’t think we can ever get there 100%.
I say it’s impossible without cheating on the spirit of it, so even if it’s Toyota or Honda making the claim, I hereby call bullshit on this whole notion of “zero landfill waste.”
A defunct company produces no garbage.
honfatboy: How come Brits always uses plurals for car companies?
Read more than you ever wanted to know about differences in formal and notional agreement between American and British English. Basically, Brits think of collective nouns as plural, and Yanks think of them as singular.
This is the feel-good story of the day. Even more feel-good than, oh, I don’t know, hearing that GM had invested that money into creating a competitive product?
Since cars are basically screwed together at modern car companies, most suppliers do the dirty work. With re-usable cartons, its really not that hard to get about 96% recycled for one single plant.
megnted :
September 5th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Most of us Americans do not do nearly as much as large corporations do to be “Green”.
Reminds me of the Penn and Teller show (Bull****!) on recycling (google it). As a joke, they gave several homeowners about ten different colored trash cans to separate their trash into. One woman who couldn’t even figure out what went in which trash can was actually okay with it. LOL
Being green these days has become an elitist buzz word that you care more and therefore are a better person then your non-recycling neighbor. I see it in my own neighborhood in fact.
Oh man… there are just way too many jokes with this one.
(1) Perhaps they are sneaking out the garbage in the trunks of the new cars? When you buy a car, you have to promise not to open the trunk for 30 days. Gosh, they could cram trash in the doors, under the seats, all sorts of places.
(2) Perhaps their cars ARE the junk! :-)
(3) And 3rd, this might be the ultimate spin control on closing 50% of their plants. A closed factory makes no waste.
I am curious about this word “elitist”. My dictionary defines “elite” as being at the top. As in the “green berets are an elite force”. I wonder why being part of the best is considered a put down. I am an old man, nearing retirement age. When I worked for others, I wanted to be at the top. In my business, I want my employees to want to be the best. Is there some problem with people wanting to be their best. Is this a generational thing? Or do some people just cry elitism when they can’t compete? Could someone please answer that for me?
Why not bypass the middlemen and send them (GM’s cars) directly to the recycler? The profit may be higher and there certainly wouldn’t be any warranty claims.
Now the plants are “Green” too?
Along with the landfill news, there is the Consumer reports news about Hybrids and which ones are more cost effective than others. The Tahoe is actually more cost effective than a Toyota Pious??!??
Saturn Vue tops the list with $4550 in 5 year savings.
GM has three in the top 6.
Doing something right…
Cammy:
Will we be seeing more of your input from across the pond? If so, I look forward to a review or two.
charliej5:
Just my $.02, but I think the term elitest took on a negative connotation implying that elitests this they are better human beings than others. The ‘Elite’ have become synonomous with the ruling class in an oligarchy.
Most of my more, particular, friends consider being an elitest a positive description. The non-elite dislike being described as the pedestrian public they are.
That said, I’m with you, when there’s a “best”, there’s a “rest”. The rest will consider those that like the best elitest. It is what it is, I guess.
I am curious about this word “elitist”. My dictionary defines “elite” as being at the top. As in the “green berets are an elite force”. I wonder why being part of the best is considered a put down. I am an old man, nearing retirement age. When I worked for others, I wanted to be at the top. In my business, I want my employees to want to be the best. Is there some problem with people wanting to be their best. Is this a generational thing? Or do some people just cry elitism when they can’t compete? Could someone please answer that for me?
My American Heritage Dictionary defines Elitist as, “The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.” The favored treatment often results in these certain persons looking down on anybody who is not in this area of exclusivity.
There is a difference between being the best at what you do based upon your body of work, and being in an exclusive group who sees everybody else as not worthy of even breathing the same air as them. This is the kind of elitism that people find distasteful.
Green Berets are an elite group, but to my knowledge, they don’t look down upon fellow soldiers who aren’t one of them.
Geotpf: “I’m suddenly reminded of Atari burying millions of unsold Atari 2600 systems and cartridges for the system (especially ET) in a New Mexico landfill in the mid-1980’s.”Or the same fate which befell remaining, unsold Apple Lisa computers in a Utah landfill in 1989.
Question:
What kind of comments would an objective commentary on land-fill free plants from, oh lets just say Toyota or Honda, generate from the best and brightest?
Hmmmmmmmmmmm……………….
People, chinar is right, give credit when it is due. Don’t when its not.
Credit is due in this case, unless of course, you’re a fan of overflowing, stinking, rat-infested landfills.
What happens to retired employees, Soylent Green ?.
“SOME PART OF THAT FACTORY WILL ALWAYS PRODUCE THINGS THAT CANNOT BE RECYCLED.”
And those will be burned for energy production.
As the original blog entry said:
“GM’s plant trash will be recycled, sold for scrap or incinerated.”
Were we allowed to burn our small amounts of non-recyclable waste products; our household could skip the weekly trash pickup as well.
As far as the use of the term “elitist” as a political pejorative, what can I say. Anyone who is well educated and/or thoughtful in their views, choices and behaviors is being called an elitist. If you question the societal value of globalization and it’s effect on the blue collar working class then you are likely to be tarred and feathered as an elitist … by said same blue collar workers. If you ask what the logic is in burning excessive fuel to commute in monster trucks instead of reasonable sized vehicles … watch out, you may be an elitist! In fact, any appeal to reason over the raw emotion of “faith” is a sure sign of elitist tenancies.
All that said, I’m glad that GM and other manufacturers are pushing toward zero waste product production. It makes sense economically and environmentally. I hope they are making as large an effort in the new GM China factories.
The idea of creating zero, or close to it, waste is not “elite”, “liberal” or foolish. It is good common sense and an intelligent thing to do. It makes good business sense and environmental sense. Why somebody would take issue with it is beyond me. Yeah, GM should be working hard to improve its product lineup, but a program like this still should be implemented as a matter of course.
Regarding incineration: While burning for energy generation is better than a landfill, more overall energy is saved by recycling the waste into new products than is created by the burning/electrical generation.
The only garbage at GM comes off the assembly line.
golden2husky:
The idea of creating zero, or close to it, waste is not “elite”, “liberal” or foolish. It is good common sense and an intelligent thing to do. It makes good business sense and environmental sense. Why somebody would take issue with it is beyond me.
If it doesn’t add to the bottom line, it’s foolish. In most factory environments, it makes sense to recycle, due to appropriate volumes.
For individuals sorting home waste, it doesn’t make sense to surrendervalue your labor so cheaply (for most people – unless your municipality has effective civil & criminal sanctions).
Individual recycling is like a 30MPH national speed limit. Landfill space is cheap in North America. Your weekly minutes spent sorting trash is effort better spent growing the economy. In ~100 years, smart, cheap robots will sort trash.
“Your weekly minutes spent sorting trash is effort better spent growing the economy.”
There is more to life than money, something those who focus on growing the economy do not understand.
If I check a book out from the library, read it and return it; I have gotten the full value of the experience. However, if I instead buy the same book, never read it and then throw it away, I’ve gained nothing. Scenario 1 doesn’t “grow the economy” nearly as much as scenario 2 does. That doesn’t, however, make scenario 2 superior.
Maximizing the number of dollars changing hands does not ipso facto maximize the quality of life. If it did, there would be no satisfaction in voluntarily helping out family, friends, neighbors or even strangers … yet those activities are typically reported by honest people as being far more rewarding than a day spent at most jobs.
Raskolnikov :
I think the obvious difference between GM pursuing this and Toyota and Honda pursuing it, is that the latter two are not losing billions of dollars every quarter. They have competitive products that are outselling or threatening to outsell GM’s best efforts, and they show no signs of slowing their competitive gains on the American auto industry.
I’ll give credit were credit is due, but I also admire a company that recognizes where its weak areas are and where it needs to focus its increasingly spare resources in order to strengthen itself. I’m not sure that converting existing factories to zero landfill is going to help GM recover from its current situation. Is this where they would determine their share of the $50b Government technology investment should go? Or would they use it for product development to strengthen their bottom line?
GM should be an automotive engineering and manufacturing company first, and an environmental engineering company second. Bottom line is that overflowing, stinking, rat-infested landfills really shouldn’t be GM’s concern at the moment.
But kudos anyway.
ZoomZoom :
September 5th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Well now, I too would like to know how any manufacturing firm can have “zero landfill waste.”
They can do it because a manufacturing facility is pretty much a closed system with identified waste streams. My guess is that the only waste stream that’s tough to recycle is the food waste from the employee lunch rooms.
I hate to use the argument from authority, but I actually have some credentials in the field of waste management, having been the waste mgmt coordinator for a large DuPont paint lab. As I said, the waste streams are identified, and if they can’t be recycled, they can be disposed of in an environmentally benign way.
Landfills are pretty much for solid waste. At the lab where I worked, we recycled paper, cardboard, steel, aluminum, plastic (we went through lots of paint can’s, and spray test panels, both metal and plastic), and wash solvent (we had a large industrial still on site). Solventborne paint waste went to incinerators where its BTU content could be used to generate energy. Waterborne paint waste was incinerated in cement kilns, about the only thing that gets hot enough to burn what is essentially water. The only stuff that ended up in the dumpsters was solid waste like wipers and paper cups and break room trash. Most of the solid waste was compacted to reduce landfill use. If we’d wanted to spend the money, we could have had it incinerated too and said we were landfill free.
Whether it’s the actual manufacturing process, or the leftover plastic and foil wrappers from the employee break rooms, SOME PART OF THAT FACTORY WILL ALWAYS PRODUCE THINGS THAT CANNOT BE RECYCLED.
“leftover plastic”? Sprues, flash or cuttings from molded parts can be reground and remolded, depending on the polymer involved. What can’t be reground can be reprocessed into other chemicals. Global Resource Corp. makes microwave based reactors that recycle a wide variety of waste streams into natural gas and petrochemicals.
Like I said, what can’t be recycled can usually be incinerated or deep well injected.
Joe Horner: Well put. “Me, Myself, and I” is a terrible attitude. Everything has direct and indirect costs, both economic and social. Dumping the social costs of a company on the surrounding areas is morally bankrupt. Ben and Jerry’s had the right idea with the concept of “caring capitalism.” Return something to the community that helps you make your money.
Conversion of trash into energy by plasma is the latest technology. Pilot plant in operation. Enviros oppose.