Re: (All) Waste Prevention Technology

[rpojasek@sprynet.com]

Response to Michael Keefe,

If we persisted in the belief that people could not fly, our world would be 
quite different today.  I know it is hard to move to a new paradigm.  Some 
people are no longer accepting that substitution of "safe" chemicals and 
creeping efficiency (tweeking the process) are the only two things that P2 
practitioners can do.  Some people actually want to make money in this field - 
companies like Printron, Polaroid, Kodak, etc.  I think the problem with the 
incrementalists is that they focus on the wastes not on the conditions and 
circumstances that give rise to the wastes.  They are still infected with low 
grade end-of-pipe fever.  Why do you accept waste?  Can we make things with no 
net waste?  Industrial ecology may help us find suitable uses for our waste.  
Technology may help in this regard.  Changing the way we make things (design for 
environment) can be used to eliminate wastes.  There is a paper mill in South 
Africa that uses less water than any paper mill in the world.  It was designed 
to be that way.  It did not get there incrementally.  Many vendors made money 
putting no-waste and low-waste technology into that paper mill.  I had a client 
that sells a product in Home Depot.  One day they found a competing Korean 
product at nearly one half the cost.  It was a better product quality-wise.  
They had to completely re-engineer their process to stay in the market.  They 
did so and the wastes were dramatically reduced in a single week.  They have now 
designed a new automated manufacturing line with almost no waste.  Same product. 
 They had tried incrementalism and it nearly killed them.  I am still looking 
for other examples or people who study technology change (no-waste and low-waste 
process technology) even though this may be unsettling to some of the people on 
the list server.