DEBRIS.COMgood for a laugh, or possibly an aneurysm

Following up on Office Depot’s semi-recent refusal to accept Epson brand inkjet cartridges for recycling, I contacted Epson directly.

Epson is not interested in the ecological impact of their products, apparently; they refuse to accept their own cartridges for re-use or recycling. Here is the official response:

Thank you for your interest in recycling used Epson inkjet cartridges. Due to the design of our inkjet cartridges, we do not refill or remanufacture them. Neither of these alternatives is cost effective. Nor do we have a program set up to receive them for recycling at this time. We are continuing to search for the most cost effective, consumer friendly and environmentally sound program available for disposal.

In the meantime, we recommend that you contact your local City Government and participate in their recycling and e-waste efforts whenever possible.

It’s disappointing and somewhat unbelievable that a company with Epson’s resources can simultaneously claim to be searching for a disposal program and fail to name a single such program.

Update 2007-02-15: Dave F. pointed me to CartridgeWorld, which accepts Epson inkjet cartridges for recycling. (Actually, they refill and sell the cartridges.) Thanks, Dave!

Tags: recycling, inkjet, cartridge, epson
posted to channel: Recycling
updated: 2007-02-15 23:40:55

I’ve pimped Office Depot’s inkjet-cartridge recycling program three times in this space, most breathlessly in last September’s entry Never buy printer paper again!, for hosting what was the best inkjet cartridge recycling program in the world. Today I am sad to report that Office Depot has since eviscerated the program.

It happened just one month after that September endorsement, according to Wikipedia. Instead of a cashless exchange, cartridge for paper, now the stores offer a coupon with two significant usage limitations:

1. You can redeem one coupon per day, max.
2. You have to make a purchase greater than $3 to redeem the coupon.

Worse still, they don’t accept Epson cartridges any longer. The official rule is that only cartridges with print heads are eligible; this includes most HP and Lexmark cartridges, but apparently not most Epson or Canon.

So, whereas I used to bring 1-2 cartridges to the store, and leave with 1-2 reams of paper, now I have to buy something too — but actually, because my printer is an Epson, I’m not eligible to participate at all.

It’s easy to find alternative means of recycling inkjet cartridges; for example, Sonoma County residents can search the database at recyclenow.org for multiple local drop-off points (e.g. Whole Foods and Radio Shack). Numerous national programs can be found via google.

Tags: recycling, inkjet, officedepot, cartridge
posted to channel: Recycling
updated: 2007-02-13 22:15:12

Here’s the electricity consumption of a powered, 50 watt, 8'' subwoofer, as measured with my Kill-a-Watt:

The subwoofer in question is the baby Polk Audio sub from a couple years ago, now discontinued. It claims continuous output of 50 watts, with peaks at 100 watts. In practice, the Kill-A-Watt showed it drawing about 8 watts of power when playing loud enough to rattle stuff on my desk, and possibly my fillings. (It is sitting in a corner of the office, though, which would tend to artificially boost the volume at a given power level.)

It’s disappointing that the unit draws five watts even when switched off. The eternally glowing LED on the back panel is a giveaway, I suppose. At 9¢ per kWh, it costs about $4 a year just to plug this subwoofer in. And it’s been sitting here plugged in for the better part of three years. Argh.

Tags: kill-a-watt, polk audio, phantom load
posted to channel: Conservation
updated: 2007-02-06 05:56:11

Michael Pollan wrote the best 10,000 words I’ve read about food since Fast Food Nation. The article appeared in last weekend’s New York Times Magazine, and can be read online at Pollan’s site (no registration required): Unhappy Meals

It would be a ridiculous conceit to think that I could write a few more words anywhere near as eye-opening, foundation-shaking, or truthful about dietary science, nutrition, and food culture than Pollan has. I mean, I’m going to do it anyway, but please just go and read Pollan’s essay right now. This feeble tribute will still be here when you’re finished.

(But, do be sure to come back here afterwards because there’s a surprise gift below.)

Now, on with the conceit:

If you’ve been frustrated by conflicting recommendations about healthy food choices (Margarine! No, wait, butter! No, wait —!), you’ll appreciate Pollan’s explanation of “nutritionism” — an ideology that attempts to reduce the complexities of healthy eating to a few slightly mysterious compounds that can be avoided (trans fats!) or embraced (omega 3 fatty acids!).

If you’re a student of history, you’ll love hearing the origin of so much bad nutritional advice — a 1977 report from a Senate committee on nutrition, whose clear recommendation “reduce consumption of meat” was quickly replaced, following a “firestorm” of pressure from the beef and dairy industries, by a misleading and arguably fatal compromise: “choose meats, poultry and fish that will reduce saturated-fat intake.” Pollan points out the gulf between the simple directive “eat less” and the gutless “reduce saturated-fat intake.” Consider which one leads to better health, and which leads to a supermarket full of superlative health claims in boldface type on the labels of processed food (or, more accurately, food-like substances).

A couple more examples of literary double-takes from Unhappy Meals:

It was in the 1980s that food began disappearing from the American supermarket, gradually to be replaced by “nutrients,” which are not the same thing.
…
You might think that a national fixation on nutrients would lead to measurable improvements in the public health. But for that to happen, the underlying nutritional science … would have to be sound. This has seldom been the case.
…
No one likes to admit that his or her best efforts at understanding and solving a problem have actually made the problem worse, but that’s exactly what has happened in the case of nutritionism.

Maybe the most quotable line is the first sentence of the essay, which I won’t repeat because you’ve surely gone and read it by now. It is a phenomenal achievement to summarize a life- and planet-saving dietary plan in seven words, and it is illustrative of my point that Pollan spent about 9993 more words explaining the first seven. But it’s surely the best dietary advice you’ve seen in years.

I’ve commemorated Pollan’s advice in a poster. Hang it in your kitchen where you will be sure to see it often, hopefully as you’re reaching past the all-natural whole-grain low-fat anti-oxidant energy bar for an apple, ideally one that grew up within 100 miles of your home. Click the image to download a print-at-home poster [PDF, ~140k] or click here for the high-res version [PDF, ~1016k].

Tags: pollan, nutritionism, saturated fats
posted to channel: Food & Cooking
updated: 2011-07-03 20:23:18

I believe we’ve fixed the shading problem reported last Fall — which practically zeroes my PV array’s output at 5:00 PM, with one hour of valuable peak-period sunlight remaining in the day.

The photo from September is difficult to make sense of. The trees on the left side of the image are tall Eucalyptus on the edge of the property, a few hundred feet from the roof. The lighter green foliage on the right 60% of the picture is attached to three birch trees planted adjacent to the house. It’s impossible to tell from the picture, but the sun is behind both.

The arborist returned this week to execute the plan from last Fall: trim the tops of the distant Eucalyptus and the nearby birch trees. We didn’t have to take any trees down, and fortunately for my breakeven date we only had to trim one Eucalyptus — those trees are tall.

The lower image shows what looks like success — a great big hole in the treeline for the sun to shine through. We’ll know next Fall whether we’re still generating electricity after 5:00 PM.

Tags: solar, pv, shading
posted to channel: Solar Blog
updated: 2007-02-05 14:51:01