Conference 7.286::digital

    The janitors in LTN2 have been throwing the paper from the recycle
    bins away with the rest of the trash for quite some time.
    
    	- Jerry

    The VRO maintenance staff were quite faithfully using the recycle
    bins and passing them on to the recycle center (wherever that is).
    However, all these bins disappeared two weeks ago.  So apparently
    the same policy is in effect here.

    I never thought recycling was to make money, I always thought it
    was to take a little time and a small expense to do our part to
    reduce the number of trees that have to be cut down in Maine every
    day.

    Wait a minute...    Listings can't be disposed of by carting them
    to the local dump.   There is confidential information on most computer
    paper produced around this corporation.   I thought the recycle
    bin was as much to protect our proprietary information as it was
    to save a few trees.   Now we know where Charlie Matco gets the
    info for his "Rumor Roundup".

    RE .4
    
    Wrong!  If you've got confidential information to protect
    (for example, the DTN directory), you must dispose of it in
    one of the "Confidential Materials to be Destroyed" bins.
    I've never heard anyone claim before that the recycling bins
    had anything to do with confidentiality.
    
    MATT

My understanding was that the money made from recycling went to Employee 
Activities. I hope the end to rycling doesn't cut back on the EA funds.

Jim

    Re: .5:
    
    I was seeing one thing and reading another...   You're right...
    But, how many people do you know who use them?   Maybe generic
    recycling is a thing of the past because every piece of paper that
    is a candidate for recycling has instead been placed in the
    confidential waste bins?   (It's a comforting thought, unlikely
    as it is.)   Hint:   Place listings in them - our group does so
    exclusively.

    As of last August (when I moved across the pond), recycling seemed
    to be going strong at ZKO.  In the TL&E corner of the building,
    the 3' x 3' x 4' recycling container was regularly filled by TL&E
    people and emptied (each night?) by the cleaning crew.
    
    The bins would occasionally peak at 200% of capacity when (1) the
    new release of VMS manuals arrived or (2) the cluster was down for
    several hours and people cleaned their offices.
    
    I would hate to see recycling be discontinued, even if it COST a
    few $$$ to keep it going.
    
    -- Ward

    If "official" recycling stopped, why don't you start your own
    "inofficial"! I remember having done this in a small plant over
    here in France (around 60 employees) and at the end of the year
    there was enough money generated for some worthwile donations to
    the needy! It just took some initiative from a responsible individual
    (Hi Heinz, if you read this!) and some discipline from the employees
    to neatly pile up the listings in a designated cornrer of the
    print-room.
    Keep saving those trees!
    Fred
    

While I agree that paper recycling is a noble idea, we really can't lose sight
of the security issues.  I know that at least 95% of the paper that I generate
contains information which would be beneficial to our competitors (and therefore
harmful to Digital) if they got a hold of it.  How do you compare the cost of
a few trees harvested� for paper vs. the competitiveness of the corporation?

Maybe what we should do is investigate the possibility of in-house recycling.
Rather than giving boxcar loads of paper to outside companies, we could collect,
shred, and sell boxcar loads of confetti.  Maybe it would be more profitable to
sell boxcar loads of pulp, or even finished paper.  Maybe we could even become
relatively self-sufficient...

	("This VMS documentation has been printed on 100% recycled paper")

-cw

� I used the word "harvested" rather than "cut down", because paper is for the
most part agriculture.  You plant trees to be cut down for paper, you grow them,
and when they are mature you cut them down and flatten them into boxes of paper.
Don't let images of virgin forests being squeezed into orange binders confuse
the issue!

    Actually, about 2 weeks ago, many towns in the Commonwealth of Mass.
    shut down their dumps to outsiders, since they were almost full.
    The remaining dumps are filling up faster, and the govt. has no
    idea what to do next.
    
    So whever is behind this move is really hacking somebody in government
    by exacerbating a garbage problem.

The recycling program was discontinued at LMO2/LMO4 about a year
ago. There was no announcement, but I noticed that people were 
putting non-paper items in the recycle paper baskets and nobody
complained, so I asked. Fortunately, they didn't remove the re-
cycle baskets. If they had, the test floor would be knee deep in
paper.
  The management here said they weren't making enough money on
recycling to pay for the extra in-house labor. I think part of
the problem might have been that people were careless about what
they threw in the recycle paper baskets and the recycler paid us
less because the paper was impure. I agree with some of the pre-
vious noters that we should recycle even if we don't make money
on it. Conservation of paper is a good cause. It's true that most
paper comes from commercial forests that are planted and harvested
in a closed loop, but there are other environmental problems in-
volved in the forest products industry. If you have ever spent time
in a paper mill town or drove on a road that is heavily used by
logging trucks, you know what I mean.
   The security issue is something to consider, but paper is ac-
cessible to far more people in the town dump than at a recycling
center. Outsiders can't rummage through a recycling center as they
can through some town dumps, and it is unlikely a recycling em-
ployee would have the time or expertise to rummage through paper
looking for secrets. The existing confidential disposal boxes couldn't
begin to handle the volume if we had to dispose of all computer
printouts there. If DEC is concerned about the security of re-
cycled paper, the idea of putting it through a high-volume shredder
is an excellent one. It would cost us money but eliminate one step
in the recycler's process and therefore make the paper more valuable.

Large listings can be recycled inhouse (no security problem) by
putting them blank side up into the console terminals of nearby VAXes,
or perahps into certain line printers under controlled circumstances.
This is an extremely efficient form of recycling because the "recycled"
paper is produced with 0 energy input and is "repurchased" at 0 cost
to DEC.

Hmmm . . . that sounds good.  Seems to me that console listings should be used
 on both sides as a matter of course.

I strongly support recycling.  I don't even toss papers into my cubicle waste-
 basket; I put them in a box and periodically empty the box into the recycling
  bin.

I think DEC should encourage recycling more.  Periodic reminders to put papers
 into the recycling bin would be nice.  There should also be some thought put
  into placement of the bins.  A lot of people here (ZKO1 2nd Floor) toss papers
   into a garbage receptacle because it's close at hand.
    <_Jym_>

    It would be more helpful, perhaps, to find ways to NOT
    USE paper, than to be obsessively concerned about recycling.
    Paper, even paper from recycling bins, is frequently *burned*,
    to heat water to warm DEC facilities.  (At least this is still
    a form of conservation.)  Whether paper gets recycled or not
    is always going to be, at best, purely an economic decision,
    not an ethical one.

    This last week, several sales and software people in SEO had to
    pack up to move to another building.
    
    When the smoke cleared, there was one wall piled high with garbage
    paper.  One turkey even had the nerve to through away many perfectly
    good Pendaflex folders (which are designed to be reusable).
    
    Although we have a container set-up for recycling aluminum cans
    in out lunch room, there are not paper recycling bins anywhere in
    two of these buildings (at least that I know of).
    
    Two questions come to mind: are there any corporate policies on
    recycling; and who is the best person to talk to in a district office
    to implement a recycling program?
    
    Doug

        If there are corporate policies on recycling, they probably
        fall into the broad area of "facilities management".  Since
        this often translates into local rules, you probably want to
        start by finding out who manages your facility.  This may be
        done through a contract facilities manager in most offices
        in the field, since Digital often rents or leases space, and
        doesn't directly manage the facility.
        
        While I concur that Pendaflex (TM) folders are designed to
        be reusable, it may be the case that it's actually cheaper
        to discard them than to empty them out, sort them out, and
        re-use them.  So it may not be appropriate to characterize
        the person who discarded them as a "turkey"; it may have been
        the micro-economically smart thing to do.  (Of course, since
        the folders have metal supports at the top, having them mixed
        in with paper makes it hard to recycle the paper.)
        
        Tom

<RE:  Note 221.17 by DR::BLINN "Mind if we call you Bruce?" >

>        While I concur that Pendaflex (TM) folders are designed to
>        be reusable, it may be the case that it's actually cheaper
>        to discard them than to empty them out, sort them out, and
>        re-use them.  So it may not be appropriate to characterize
>        the person who discarded them as a "turkey"; it may have been
>        the micro-economically smart thing to do. 

	MICRO-ECONOMICALLY THE SMART THING TO DO! This is a problem
	with our society; we do what makes the most sense to our 
	wallets w/o regard to our environment. 

	I have a spot in both my office and my home where I collect
	paper products for recycling... I wish more people would do
	the same. 

/Ted

    Re: .18
    
    >  I have a spot in both my office and my home where I collect
    >  paper products for recycling...
    
    Me too!  I call it the home one the "garbage can" and the work one
    "wastebasket".  These are, of course, pet names.
    
    But then again, I believe that man's purpose on earth is to return
    to the biosphere the immense volumes of organic chemicals lost to
    diastrophism.  In simple terms, suck out and burn up all the coal
    and oil!
    
    Don't complain about "micro-economically the smart thing to do"
    when your context is the selfish current (and therefore, time-wise
    "micro-") ecology.
    
    :^)
    

          I have  been  asked  to  explain  the last paragraph of .19,
          so...
          
          The  author  of  .18 suggested that the micro-economic view-
          point of those who throw out rather than spend [waste?] time
          and money to  recycle  was incorrect.  This would be because
          in doing the narrow  focus  'good  thing',  one is, in fact,
          doing a wider focus 'bad thing'.   
          
          My  suggestion  is that the author of .18  has,  himself,  a
          narrow focus.  His 'big picture' assumes the current ecology
          of the earth is a good thing and perhaps assumes it to be an
          ideal  end  result.  In fact there can be a larger  view  of
          ecological issues,  taken over a much larger time span which
          might suggest that the current situation, including mankind,
          is merely a phase  on  the  road to something else, and that
          MAYBE, our manipulation and modification  of  the ecology is
          an  expected  and  appropriate  evolutionary  step  for  the
          planet.  (This is almost worthy of  it's own topic, probably
          somewhere else.)
          
          Essentially I guess I mean:    "People  who  live  in  glass
          houses  shouldn't throw stones." But why be clear  when  you
          can be cloudy.  (There's no saw:  "Every  clear  sky  has  a
          silver lining" now, is there?)
          

< Re: Note 221.20 by CGOA01::DTHOMPSON >

>          The  author  of  .18 suggested that the micro-economic view-
>          point of those who throw out rather than spend [waste?] time
>          and money to  recycle  was incorrect.  This would be because
>          in doing the narrow  focus  'good  thing',  one is, in fact,
>          doing a wider focus 'bad thing'.   

	I said that people & corporations often do what costs them less
	money (or what may more convienant)

	My focus is not narrow it is quite broad:

		Digital - Boxes of Paper thrown away when a group 
		          moves from plant to plant. More Trash.

		Canoeing on the Saco in ME, and finding the shores
			  lined with Beer cans tossed aside.

		Skiing in the West (USA) and finding Beer cans and
			  trash on the Ski Slopes.

		Driving down Route 190 (in MASS) and seeing 30 
			  large trash bags full of collected litter
			  which has been tossed from passing cars.

	TRASH it is everywhere. 

	Yes, Maybe I could adopt your broader vision that once we
	fill the earth with dumpsites, it may be a better place, but
	I doubt it. 

	Both Corporations and people should do more about the growing
	problem of TRASH. 

	In our disposable society, we would rather throw things away
	than re-use or recycle them... I for one, would rather Digital
	recycle than throw away paper... But then again, I am so narrow
	sighted that I don't like dumpsites... 

/Ted

          <<< HUMAN::DISK$HUMAN_WRKD:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 758.0                    Paper Recycling Help                    No replies
TAMARI::MCGOVERN "Szechuan Vanilla"                  11 lines  16-MAR-1989 14:12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


      We're trying to find out how to set up paper recycling at our facility.
      Does anyone known who we should contact to get started recycling?

      Please respond by phone to Michael McGovern DTN 296-5360 or
      Michael Broderick at DTN 296-5092, or send mail to: 

                 SPICES::MCGOVERN or TSG::BRODERICK

Thanks.

We recently started recycling paper at DSG in Westford MA.  I'd like to share
a little about our experience, and ask for help on possible next steps.

Paper recycling at Digital seems to operate on a facility by facility basis.
In the New England area, there is a Digital approved recycling vendor that
ensures the security of the paper we dispose of.

The key to starting recycling is local interest, and a willingness to work
with facilities to arrange logistics for paper collection and pickup.  It's
important to make people aware of what you are doing, and include them in
the process.

We've been recycling for a few months now and it seems to be working
smoothly.  The main problems I've seen are:

  Not enough recycling bins.  The nearest bin is too far away,
  or people don't know where it is.  Having a way to handle special
  pickup requests is a good idea.

  A number of people are still unaware we're recycling and don't
  notice the recycling signs on the bins.  We use two signs:
  one on the recycling bins explaining what can go in and who to
  call with questions; another at some of our printers and public
  trash bins that tell where the nearest recycling bin is located.

We don't actually see the money paid by the recycling vendor for our
used paper (it goes to a corporate account), but we are saving real dollars
on trash hauling and tipping fees.

----

One problem with paper recycling that has received some recent media attention
is the lack of demand for the recycled product.  My question is:

  How can we get Digital to buy recycled paper for our copiers and printers?
  Who actually buys the paper?  How are the specifications determined?

If anyone has experience or ideas on this, I'd appreciate hearing from you.

- Peter