TV, computer makers gear up for recycling in NJ

Under a law passed earlier this year, manufacturers of televisions and computers sold in New Jersey must develop plans for the recycling of those electronic products when they reach the end of their useful lives.

Until now, owners of worn-out TVs and computers have stored the clunkers in their basements and garages, put them out with other trash at the curb, or participated in special recycling days held by some towns and counties.

The new law puts the responsibility on manufacturers to implement a statewide system for the collection and recycling of their products, either as individual companies or in partnerships.

Bowing, however, to complaints that the law does not provide adequate lead time, the state Senate is preparing to vote on S-2144, an amendatory bill giving manufactures additional time to comply.

Under the bill, television-makers would have until Jan. 1, 2011 to commence their recycling programs, while computer manufacturers would have until Feb. 15, 2012.

Getting a jump on those deadlines, a group of major electronics manufacturers yesterday announced they're joining to provide consumer recycling in New Jersey and other states.

The Electronic Manufacturers Recycling Management Co. (MRM) announced it will commence its program on Nov. 1 with 160 drop-off locations in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York and seven other states. The company, which was created by Panasonic Corp. of North America, Sharp Electronics Corp. and Toshiba America Consumer Products LLC., says it plans to expand its services eventually to cover all 50 states.

“MRM is focused on enhancing the sustainability of individual company brands and product offerings through convenient, environmentally sound and efficient recycling,” says its President David Thompson. “This type of collaborative effort is essential to providing consumers with convenient recycling opportunities and to achieving practical, long-term solutions.”

Mr. Thompson is no stranger to recycling in New Jersey. He was instrumental in developing, for the rechargeable battery industry, a recycling plan required by state law a decade ago.

Another manufacturer, New Jersey-based Samsung Electronics America, Inc., announced on Oct 1 that it had launched SAMSUNG RECYCLING DIRECT SM, a take-back and recycling program for consumer electronics across all of its product lines. Consumers can bring their Samsung-branded consumer electronics sold in the United States to 174 fixed drop-off locations across all 50 states for no fee. Drop-off locations can be found at: www.samsung.com/recyclingdirect

Hopes and concerns

New Jersey's fledgling e-scrap recycling law--and the current bill to refine it -- have raised both hopes and concerns. Environmentalists have praised the effort, but a representative of a small company providing e-scrap recycling services in Middlesex County said, at a recent Senate committee hearing, that national manufacturer plans could leave businesses like his out in the cold.

County and municipal recycling coordinators said they fear the law will raise an expectation among consumers that local governments would be forced to shoulder should the manufacturers be permitted to fold their recycling operations in the future.

Senate sponsor Bob Smith said the law leaves many operational details to the state Department of Environmental Protection which will be drafting regulations to implement and enforce it.

"It's not going to be a perfect program at the start, but we can revisit it later, " he said. " The important thing for the environment is that we get an e-waste program up and operating in New Jersey."

Jersey enviros look to topple power line proposal

Like fellow-activists in New York state (Catskill Mountainkeeper rallying opposition to NYRI power line), New Jersey environmental organizations have come out swinging against a proposed high-power line through a section of the state's northern tier.

The state's largest power utility, PSE&G, is expected to asked the state Board of Public Utilities to approve the 45-mile, 500-kilovolt power line that the company wants to build at a cost of $650 million. It would run from the town of Hardwick in Warren County, through Sussex and Morris counties to Roseland in Essex County.

PSE&G says the line is necessary to prevent overloads and blackouts on the power grid.

“No one disputes that North Jersey’s electricity highways are congested and need relief to avoid price spikes and blackouts in the future. But New Jersey’s energy future should not be tied to dirty coal plants in Ohio and Pennsylvania, when home grown renewable energy and energy efficiency can provide the solution,” said Dena Mottola Jaborska, the executive director of Environment New Jersey, at a media event held with regional municipal leaders yesterday in Montville, Morris County.

“We cannot support or oppose this project without answers to our concerns,” stated Byram Township councilman Scott Olson, speaking on behalf of six municipalities who have formed a coalition to address this proposal.

“We do not feel that PSE&G has shown a proven need for this expansion, or that all other options have been exhausted and this is the only viable alternative to address their needs. And they have yet to prove the potential for health effects are lessened or that the economic impact to our municipalities and our residents will be addressed,” Olson said.

Feel free to add your opinion by clicking on the "comments" line below.

MORE:
State asked to reject power project
PSE&G proposes routes for new power line
Stop the Lines!

PSEG video on its Susquehanna-Roseland project

Catskill Mountainkeeper rallying opposition to NYRI power line

The Catskill Mountainkeeper is urging its members and friends to attend scheduled public hearing and speak out against the New York Regional Interconnect (NYRI), a proposed 190-mile, high voltage, direct current transmission line. It would run through seven New York counties and 38 municipalities.

The Mountainkeeper claims the project:

* Does not result from a regional or statewide planning process;

* Is not required to address electric system reliability concerns, and

* Fails to consider new programs designed to reduce energy demands through conservation.

The environmental organization has posted a list of talking points for opponents to use in arguing against the project and a schedule of public hearings that are under way and will end on Nov. 6.

Have an opinion on the NYRI? To share it with fellow readers of this blog, just click on the "comments" line below and have at it!

Energy bills light up New Jersey Legislature today

Today, at its final voting session before Election Day, the New Jersey Assembly will consider the following four environmental bills encouraging alternative energy development and energy conservation:

A-843 Chivukula, U.J. (D-17)
Provides for equal opportunity for businesses to apply for certain energy-related incentives and funding.

A-849 Chivukula, U.J. (D-17) and Voss, J.M. (D-38)
Directs the BPU to establish certain energy-conservation programs.

A-1558 Greenstein, L.R. (D-14) and Watson Coleman, B. (D-15)
Requires developers to offer solar energy systems in certain new home construction.

A-2550 Lampitt, P.R. (D-6); Chivukula, U.J. (D-17); Wagner, C. (D-38)
Permits location of certain wind and solar facilities in industrial zones.

Last Thursday, the Senate Economic Growth Committee amended and released one of two energy bills on its meeting agenda.

That measure, S-1066, Smith, B. (D-17), permits developers to qualify for low-interest loans from the NJ Economic Development Authority when building a high performance green building.

It was amended by removing a requirement that the building have at least a 15,000-square-feet in total floor area and by adding alternative rating systems to establish standards for environmental sustainability.

A second energy bill, S-1065, Smith, B. (D-17), which would permit electric public utilities, electric power suppliers and basic generation service providers to enter into certain agreements with building owners for use of solar energy systems for such buildings, was held at the sponsor's request.

Following today's session, the Legislature will be in recess until November 13 when both houses return to a full day of committee meetings.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics, tracks all environmental legislation in New Jersey and Pennsylvania--from introduction, through committee and floor amendments and votes,--all the way to enactment.
For a free, 30-day trial subscription, Click here

Two NJ bills would help green-minded builders

Dozens of bills have been introduced in the New Jersey Legislature this session designed to encourage builders and developers to incorporate environmentally friendly construction standards, materials--and even alternative energy systems--in all new buildings.

On Thursday, Oct 23, the Senate Economic Growth Committee will consider two such bills.


S-1065 Permits electric public utilities to enter into agreements with building owners under which the utility would install or provide for the installation of solar systems to generate some or all of the building's energy needs, including heating and cooling systems.



S-1066 Permits a developer to qualify for low-interest state loans when building a high performance green building. What's a high-performance green building? The legislation defines it as "a building having at least 15,000 square feet in total floor area that is designed and constructed in a manner that achieves at least a silver rating according to the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System as adopted by the United States Green Building Council.

[Editor's note: Click here to learn more about LEED rating systems]


The sponsor of both bills is Senator Bob Smith, D-Middlesex County, who is chairman of the Senate Environment Committee.

Congress also bails out wind and solar industries

Tucked inside the $700 billion federal bailout bill for the nation's financial sector is a lifesaver for the renewable energy industry.

For more than a year, the nation's solar and wind lobbies have been fretting that Congress might not extend renewable energy credits before they expire on Dec. 31.

Locally, solar installers have testified before environmental committees in the New Jersey legislature that the industry would collapse without the credit extensions.

Congressional supporters of alternative energy spotted their opportunity when financial markets signaled that a meltdown was approaching and President Bush urged quick action on the bailout bill.

They managed to slip the renewable energy extension provisions, worth an estimated $17 billion, into the bailout bill and Bush, responding to the economic emergency, had no choice but to sign it.

The new law contains:

- An 8-year extension of the residential and business Investment Tax Credit (ITC) for solar, small-wind and geothermal systems

- The elimination of the US $2,000 cap on the residential ITC

- The elimination of the prohibition on utilities from obtaining the ITC

- Authorization of US $800 million for clean energy bonds for renewable energy generating facilities

- A 1-year extension of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind projects

- A 2-year extension of the PTC for geothermal facilities

- A 2 year ITC for marine energy technologies (tidal, wave, current, ocean thermal)

Is Honda's new Prius-fighter the one for me?

Much to my surprise, at 110,000 miles, my 1997 Dodge Intrepid is still humming along. But winter is approaching. I need four new tires, the front windshield has a crack on the lower right passenger side and the brakes occasionally send back funereal tones.

It could be time for a new--or at last newer car--and I need advice on which way to go.

As one who wishes to limit his own personal contribution to the oil companies' excess profits, the idea of driving a hybrid is appealing. One that's caught my attention is the Insight (pictured above), which Honda unveiled last week at the 2008 Paris International Auto Show.

The C-Questor blog posted an interesting piece today on the five-door hatchback which will go on sale here in the spring at prices that may be $2,000 less than the Prius's MSRP.

These days, I spend much more time in front of the computer screen than behind the wheel. Last year, I probably didn't drive more than 7,000 miles. So I wonder how much gas I'd actually be saving with a hybrid and whether that savings in gas would offset the added cost of a hybrid vehicle.

What do you think? Does a new hybrid, like the Insight, make sense? With my limited driving needs, would buying a used hybrid be a better move? Maybe I should be looking for a standard car that gets better than average gas mileage?

Or, with the GM Volt and other all-electric vehicles only a year or so away from production, should I turn my 18-mpg Intrepid over to a good mechanic, make the necessary repairs, buy new tires, and hope to coax another year or more out of it?

Let us know by clicking on the tiny "comments" link below. Tell us what vehicle you're driving (or would like to be driving) and why.

And thanks for your help!

Timing so bad it's downright nuclear

Talk about bad timing!

While outraged taxpayers across the nation on Monday watched Congress tie itself up in knots over the Bush Administration's proposed $700 billion banking industry bailout, a giant energy company in Pennsylvania was asking Uncle Sam for a multi-million-dollar loan guarantee so it can build another nuclear plant on the Susquehanna River.

Hard to believe--and basically unreported in the mainstream media--but true.

PPL Corporation on Monday submitted a loan guarantee application to the U.S. Department of Energy. The company also is preparing an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a combined license to build and operate Bell Bend. That's the name PPL has given the new nuclear plant it proposes to build on a site near the company's existing two-unit Susquehanna nuclear power facility.

In a news release reporting on its application, PPL fails to mention the size of the guarantee it is seeking. But you know the number can't be a small one, because the company adds:

"Without federal loan guarantees companies like PPL will not be able to secure financing for the substantial cost of building new, advanced-design nuclear energy plants that will help this country achieve challenging limits on carbon dioxide emissions, as well as energy independence."

PPL notes that, in authorizing the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress appropriated $18.5 billion for the federal loan guarantee program "to support projects that avoid greenhouse gas emissions and employ new technologies" and that Congress "intended that all costs of the program be paid by the industry at no cost to taxpayers."

The last six days of near chaos in Congress raises the question, however, of whether any such appropriation can now be counted upon, as the nation's spending priorities shift under the crushing burden of the anticipated banking bailout, a continuing economic slowdown and the war in Iraq for which $600 billion has been appropriated through FY 2008--and which could total as much as $1 trillion by the time it ends, according to Congressional estimates.

As ill-timed as the loan guarantee application might be, PPL probably had no choice as the second part of the loan guarantee application faces a Dec. 19 deadline.

Duke Energy also filed on Sep. 29 for a federal loan guarantee for the William States Lee III Nuclear Station which it proposes to build in Cherokee County, S.C.

What do you think of this development? Click on the comment link below and let us know.

MORE:

Nuclear power revival - real or just talk?

Nuclear plant developer suing enviros over 'slur'

PA nuclear plant builder's future is glowing

Is NJ facing an expanded nuclear future?