The Benefits of Recycling

By John Nolan

Recycling has become commonplace in our lives. We dutifully sort our trash at home, seek out recycling receptacles in public places, and re-use our grocery store plastic bags. In the back of our minds, we understand that taking these steps is “good” for the environment. However, we probably do not give much thought to what happens to the recyclable materials after they leave our hands, or to the exact nature of the benefits. As it turns out, the process of recycling is rather long, but the benefits are far-reaching.

According to Dori Lasorsa of the Haverford Township Public Works Department, recycling became mandatory in Pennsylvania with the passing of Act 101 of 1988, “The Municipal Waste Planning, Recycling and Waste Reduction Act.” Since that time, Haverford Township has been a highly successful participant in the state’s recycling program, ranking number two among townships in terms of the amount of materials recycled. (Exact figures were not available.) This is especially impressive, noted Lasorsa, considering that Haverford Township’s residents are expected to participate under the honor system. Other than inspecting every bag of trash placed outside for collection, which would be costly and impractical, there is no way to monitor every resident’s participation.

What happens to recyclables?

The recycling process begins with the sorting of trash. In Haverford Township, bins are provided to residents for sorting paper, plastic, clear and colored glass, and cans. Residents are expected to sort their trash into the appropriate bins and leave those bins for collection according to the Township’s schedule. Not all recyclable materials are collected each week, and residents can call a hotline for updated information regarding what is being collected that week.

After the recyclables are collected, Accurate Recycling in Lansdowne, PA purchases them. In spite of its name, Accurate Recycling does not actually recycle the materials. Rather, they sort the materials and sell them to various clients who then recycle the materials for various uses. For example, Accurate sells the collected paper to the Jefferson Smurfit Mill, in the Manayunk section of Philadelphia. At the Mill, the paper is sorted by grade (e.g. newsprint versus glossy stock), fed into a pulper, and processed into paperboard. The paperboard is then sold to local companies that use the paperboard to make boxes and other packaging. (Nancy, a representative of Accurate Recycling, was unable to provide information regarding the purchasers of other materials.)

In addition to selling collected paper to Accurate Recycling, Haverford Township also sells paper to farmers in Lancaster County, where the paper is shredded and used as bedding for livestock.

Who benefits from recycling?

The benefits of recycling are surprisingly widespread. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, recycling not only benefits the environment and helps to conserve resources, but also benefits the economy and helps to conserve energy. By recycling used materials, the need for new materials is reduced. The PDEP estimates that 7 million trees have been saved through the recycling of paper products. They also point out that recycled products are often of higher quality than new products, as the recycling process further refines those materials, making them more valuable.

Reduction of energy usage is another major benefit of recycling. Because used materials have already undergone an initial processing, they require less processing and refinement when they are recycled. As stated on the PDEP website, “the steps in supplying recycled materials to industry (including collection, processing and transportation) typically use less energy than the steps in supplying virgin materials to industry (including extraction, refining, transportation and processing).”

This reduction in energy usage, in turn, has positive effects on the environment, as it results in a reduction in the use of fossil fuels. Reduced fossil fuel use results in fewer emissions released into the atmosphere, as well as a conservation of fossil fuels in general.

As an industry, recycling can produce great economic benefits for the community. According to statistics on the PDEP website, there are 3,247 recycling and reuse establishments in Pennsylvania, which provide 81,322 jobs and generate an annual payroll of $2.9 billion. In the case of Haverford Township, newspaper recycling alone generates income for three separate business entities. The Township makes money by selling the newspaper to Accurate Recycling, who sells it to Jefferson Smurfit, who, in turn, reprocesses it and sells the final product to local companies.

As for the costs of implementing a recycling program, according to Act 101, the “program contributes approximately five dollars in state taxes for each dollar expended.” While the estimated $50 - $60 million invested in the program each year is certainly a significant amount of money, the $305 million that is earned in tax revenue is an impressive return on investment. In fact, Act 101 stresses the economic benefits of a statewide recycling program over the environmental benefits, demonstrating the practicality of such a program and, perhaps, launching a preemptive strike against those who might otherwise dismiss recycling programs as environmentalist propaganda.

Today, we live in a disposable society. As a result, we are burdened with more trash than ever. Recycling helps to relieve that burden by reducing the disposability of items. Today’s Philadelphia Inquirer can become tomorrow’s New York Times, which can become next week’s Washington Post. In addition to giving new life to old items, recycling helps to conserve energy and resources, reduce pollution, and create jobs. In short, recycling has the potential to benefit many people in many ways.

Who’s Looking Out in Northern Liberties?

By Amanda Gonzalez

The latest break-in for Rob Matthews, occurred the evening of December 6, 2004. This would be the second time in 9 months that his truck had been the target of a break-in. The robber smashed the passenger side window and rummaged through everything. Matthews assumes they were looking for money; luckily he does not keep any in the truck so the robber got away with nothing. But Matthews was left without a car window.

Both times Matthews were parked on American Street south of Poplar, near the old Ortliebs Factory.

“There have been a lot of break-ins along American lately. I see a lot of smashed glass on the ground and cars with smashed windows in the morning,” explained Mattews in an e-mail correspondence. He has been a resident of the Northern Liberties area for four years and feels that opportunistic crimes like this have increased instead of getting better over the passed for years. “I think there is just more stuff to steal, more cars to break into.”

Northern Liberties is the area of Philadelphia extending from Vine Street to Girard Avenue between Delaware Avenue and 6th Street. Many people talk of the Northern Liberties area as up and coming; over the years its population has diversified becoming home to artists, young professionals and families. Northern Liberties has gone through many phases since it’s development - it has been described by Neal Pollack as a farming community, an industrial area, a commercial and wholesale produce center, a marketplace, and an abandoned district.

As developers purchased plots of land for housing and restaurant development the areas population has increased considerably – over 4,000 people live in Northern Liberties.

Along with the development boom was the creation of Northern Liberties Neighbors (NLN), a community organization that has helped the neighborhood keep its integrity as it has developed. This organization also developed a town watch program to help keep residents informed about crime, accidents and other problems in the area.

Joseph Morrin, co chairman of the town watch committee, host’s monthly open houses where residents get together and discuss the incidents that have occurred in the area. Morris gets his information from residents that contact the NLN when an incident occurs and from his contacts with the 26th and 6th police districts that patrol the area. They are then able to keep a crime map that tracks all incidents that occur in Northern Liberties.

“Overall Northern Liberties seems like a safe place to live but just like many other areas of the city there are certain places that are better than others. My car was parked on the corner of St. John Neumann Way and 4th Street. It was 10:30 in the morning on a Sunday, I came back to my car about an hour later and my stereo had been stolen. In broad daylight!” said Anthony Petrucci. “I asked around to see if anyone saw anything but no one did.”
Rosie, secretary of Northern Liberties Neighbors, brought something to my attention that newer residents may not know. “The area of 4th Street around Poplar has been a target. We think 1 or 2 homeless people keep going back to that area. I would get an alarm on your house and be careful coming in and out.”

This news is very startling to someone whose friends just happened to move into that area.

Last year residents of the area were victims of a series of muggings. The Muggers would attack people from behind and hit them over the head with a brick. Residents hung signs warning neighbors to be careful. Eventually the muggers were caught but after 9 people had been assaulted.

Crime Statistic Reports from the 6th District, provided by Joseph Mallin, show that the crimes committed most often where thefts from automobiles and vandalism/criminal mischief. Here is a break down of incidents from the 6th district for the months of January – March and June – July.

1/30 – 3/4/2004 3/5 – 3/11/2004
Theft from Auto 7 Theft From Auto 1
Vandalism/Criminal mischief 9 Vandalism/criminal mischief 4
Stolen Vehicles 5 Stolen Vehicles 2
Robberies 1

6/11-7/8/2004
Theft from Auto 11
Vandalism/Criminal mischief 7
Stolen Vehicles 5
Robberies 4

This fact that these incidents occurred in this community can be shocking to many residents.

Donald Phillips, a 16 year resident, feels, “Police response time has improved dramatically over the last 10 years.” Like many other long time residents’ things have definitely gotten better in the area.

“There are anywhere between 2 – 15 police officers patrolling the whole district which is a 2 ½ mile radius,” explained Officer Fabrizio of the 26th district. About 7 cars patrol this area at any given time. Unfortunately, I was not able to get the patrol numbers for the 6th district, which patrols the other half of Northern Liberties. In any case, both 6th and 26th district have increased police presence in the area. During the spring and summer months there is also a bike patrol that covers the area.

Police presence has helped to keep Northern Liberties moving in the right direction but crimes like break-ins and auto thefts still occur. Many times police officers come after a crime has occurred but who is around while these incidents are happening? Your Neighbors.

Rob Carcione has lived in Northern Liberties a little less than a year and has been the victim of robbery 3 times. “I don’t feel a sense of community. No one knows each other; they just stay in their houses. We should look out for each other and be aware of anything-suspicious going on. Maybe if thieves knew someone was looking out, they’d be less likely to break into someone’s car.”

The incidents described in this article are only a few residents’ stories and there are many more residents that feel the neighborhood is well on its way and getting better. Knowing that these types of crimes still occur can be beneficial to new residents of the area. Similar to what Rob Matthews had said earlier - as more residents move to the area there just is more opportunity for thieves to steal.

The NLN is doing its job and trying to inform residents about crime and development but others need to pitch in too. Help keep Northern Liberties a strong community and get out and meet your neighbors. Older residents can chat with newer members of the community about the area - Keep your neighbors informed of any suspicious activity you may have seen. If residents are not aware of what areas are most effected by crime they will not be able to protect themselves from it.

A strong community is what has helped Northern Liberties rise from its’ previous states. Help it continue to grow by strengthening the community around you.

Continuing Resolutions

by Lisa Poe

For Labor Day weekend, I went with a friend to Montreal. We had no trouble at the border and very short waits, despite what we had heard and read about crossing the border post-9/11. However, on the return trip, about an hour from the Canadian border in upstate New York, two state troopers were stopping both southbound lanes of traffic. We were at least 15 miles from any town, and could not see any reason for the traffic stop.

When we reached the trooper in our lane, he asked, “Are you United States citizens?” When we both said yes, he then asked, “Where were you born?” After we gave the names of our hometowns, we were allowed to proceed. The officer did not ask us for identification or search our vehicle, but the questions made me feel very uncomfortable. Considering that we had just answered similar questions to re-enter the country, the traffic stop did not seem to have a reasonable purpose. Why were state troopers stopping only southbound traffic in the middle of nowhere? I mentioned to my friend that if either of us had not been white, we probably would have had to prove our citizenship.

In May 2002, the Philadelphia City Council passed a resolution, sponsored by then councilman Angel Ortiz, that “Opposes federal policy giving local and state law enforcement agencies the authority to investigate the citizenship and residency status of any person, unless required by court decision or statute." The purpose of the resolution is to prevent, for example, a police officer from interrogating you about your citizenship for no apparent reason during a traffic stop.

This resolution was a first step leading to the nonbinding resolution against the USA PATRIOT Act passed a year later. When Philadelphia City Council passed the resolution in May 2003, we were the largest city to do so, and 117th over all. The resolution was again sponsored by Angel Ortiz and passed 13-3. Mr. Ortiz said at the time, "What could be more patriotic than standing up for the rights of citizens and taxpayers? And what could be more unpatriotic than to happily watch those rights trampled upon?" None of the three council members who voted against the resolution spoke against it, although Councilman Frank Rizzo said, "I believe the Patriot Act is a good act." Today, more than a year later, my district’s councilwoman, Jannie Blackwell, stands by her vote in favor of the resolution, asserting, “We can't arrest our way out of problems.” She believes we have to be careful and think seriously before we take away civil liberties in the name of fighting terror.

My favorite part of the resolution is the third clause: “the Declaration of Independence of the United States, which was written in Philadelphia, holds as self-evident that all people are created equal and are endowed with the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” That being the case, the City Council expressed “its support of the United States government in its campaign against global terrorism, but also reaffirm[ed] that any efforts to end terrorism not be waged at the expense of the fundamental civil liberties of the people of Philadelphia, and all citizens of the United States." The text of the entire resolution can be summarized as an expression of support for the government and recognition that the attacks on September 11, 2001, were terrible, but that the City Council believes infringement of civil liberties in the name of stopping terrorists goes too far.

The Bill of Rights Defense Committee, based in Massachusetts, has been largely responsible for the growing number of resolutions being passed against the USA PATRIOT Act. The Committee offers a template for communities to pass their own resolution. On the third anniversary of the PATRIOT Act, October 26, 2004, the Committee sent President Bush a full set of the resolutions opposing it. Their website states, “the collection of resolutions and ordinances is 400 pages long, more than triple the size of the USA PATRIOT Act."

The first of these was passed in January 2002. It was a short resolution “in Support of Due Process for All Members of the Ann Arbor Community” passed by the Ann Arbor, Michigan, City Council. The text of the resolution includes a reminder that due process is a right of all citizens under law, and that “a balance between national security and the prevention of discrimination based on race, religion or nationality” is an important matter to our country. Much like Philadelphia, Ann Arbor felt that the first resolution didn’t go far enough. In July 2003, they passed a further resolution “to protest the eroding of civil liberties under the USA PATRIOT Act.” The most recent resolution was passed by the County Commission of Multnomah County, Oregon. I was unable to reach County Chair Diane Linn for comment, but when the Commission passed the resolution on December 9, 2004, “Expressing Commitment to Protect Civil Rights in the Era of the USA Patriot Act,” the number of resolutions grew to 363.

The snowball effect of the large number of resolutions being passed does add up to something important. According to Julia Richardson of the Philadelphia chapter of the ACLU “the numerous USA-PATRIOT Act resolutions being adopted across the country are being used to influence congress to modify the act in the future.” When asked if she was aware of any problems as a result of the City Council’s passage of the resolution, Richardson said, “we haven't seen any negative effects in Philadelphia.”

In an attempt to counter the arguments against the USA PATRIOT Act, the Justice Department maintains a website called LifeandLiberty.gov as a marketing tool for the PATRIOT Act. Based on the growing number of resolutions against the Act, the marketing doesn’t appear to be working that well. The website claims that the Act "arm[s] law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism". It also includes a page of what the website calls myths about the USA PATRIOT Act which is entirely made up of statements made by the ACLU against the Act.

When I contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Philadelphia, I discovered that Special Agent Jerria Williams was unaware that the City Council resolution existed. She seemed surprised, and asked, “How can they pass a resolution against a Federal act?” I explained to her that the resolution was nonbinding and was more of a public statement against the excesses of the Act than an item of legislation. She said she “was going to Google it” to find out more after we spoke.

Special Agent Williams made it clear to me that relations between local and Federal law enforcement were very cordial. As proof, she described how the Terrorism Task Force made up of FBI agents and Philadelphia police detectives is based out of the FBI offices. She reiterated that the resolution has not caused any tensions and that there has been, “no effect on local police or law enforcement effectiveness.” Of course, she didn’t know the resolution existed, so her authority to speak on law enforcement problems that result from the resolution is weak. It would seem to indicate, however, that the FBI does not consider these resolutions to be a problem in getting their jobs done.

Jessie Baugher, Organizer for the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, said that she was unaware of any actions taken by the Federal government or law enforcement in retaliation for any of these resolutions, although she noted those arguments are often raised against passing such resolutions. She did say, however, that the groups that have come together to get the resolutions passed have created a “national network of folks” committed to civil rights. Ms. Baugher believes that the effect of these resolutions is tangible; when a minority group is harassed or a community feels that someone’s rights have been violated, they can hold up their resolution as a statement that “we have certain values in this country” which include “democratic community support of civil liberties.”

General opinion seems to lean toward repeal of the original Act, rather than passage of PATRIOT Act II. The government cannot justify erosion of civil liberties when they have proven so ineffective in fighting the War on Terror. As Ryan Janda, former Special Agent in the State Department’s Foreign Service commented, “If anything, the PATRIOT Act and our foreign policy approach are earning us an increasing likelihood of terrorist attack.” As with many items of law, the groundswell of public opinion seems set to overturn the more egregious segments of the USA PATRIOT Act, if not the entire thing, and each resolution shifts the balance toward the tipping point.

Environmental Groups Fight for Mercury Regulation

By Romilda Perfidio

One third of all mercury pollution in the United Sates is a direct result of coal-fired power plants, according to the Environmental Protection Agency’s informational web site. Mercury causes serious health problems for children and pregnant women who eat too much fish.

When coal is burned at power plants, it releases mercury into the atmosphere, which returns to the earth in the form of rain, entering lakes, rivers, and streams. Bacteria in the water transforms mercury to its toxic form known as methyl-mercury, according to Kyle Kinner, Legislature Director of the Physicians of Social Responsibility, a public policy organization. Fish are contaminated when they consume this bacterium and in turn contaminate humans when they ingest fish with high levels of methyl-mercury.

Kinner says the power plants must “install the best available pollution control technology.” He states the EPA is required to pursue the Clean Air Act, which proposed to significantly reduce power plant emissions by 90% by 2008. However, according to Kinner, the EPA “has decided to wait until 2018 –2025,” which would reduce emissions significantly less, 30-40%, over a longer period of time. The EPA was asked to comment on this issue but did not. Kinner was adamant when describing his feeling on this matter in a telephone interview and stated, “uncontrolled mercury should not be breathed by us or our children.”

Women who are pregnant or nursing and children are most affected by exposure to high levels of contaminated fish. According to a spokesperson for the Food and Drug Administration, high concentrations of mercury in fish consumption can “adversely affect the development of a fetus.” Studies conducted by the World Health Organization, a major player in the research of mercury effects, show “differences” in the developing nervous system of young children. Reductions in their neuro-motor performance, such as their reaction times and ability to concentrate, which will in turn affect their ability to learn can occur, according to Arnold Kuzmack, a mercury analyst from the EPA.

However, a spokesperson for the FDA states “consumers can get the benefits of seafood while keeping mercury levels low.” Fish is an important part of a healthy diet according to the FDA and eating 12 ounces a week of a variety of fish lower in mercury [such as shrimp, canned light tuna, salmon pollock & catfish], is recommended.

Consumption advisories are posted on the EPA and FDA web site to inform consumers of bodies of water and fish that have higher levels of mercury. Types of fish that should be consumed at a minimal or not at all are shark, swordfish and king mackerel. A spokesperson for the FDA compared the fish advisory to a football field by suggesting following the advisory will put individuals in the 92% “safe end zone.” Meaning 8% of individuals in a group tested for mercury have levels above the reference dose.

The EPA has what they call a body burden assessment, which states the levels of mercury in the body should not exceed 12-16% of the general blood supply, according to Kinner. Mercury can remain in the system for up to six months but can be flushed from the body by practicing abstinence. Several attempts were made to contact the EPA, however only a few inquiries were answered via email by Kuzmack.

Marico Sayoc, an environmental analyst specializing in mercury, with the National Resource Defense Council claims the FDA is “weak” in its advisory toward children. One of Sayoc’s claims is the web site in “no way quantifies how much a child should eat of canned tuna.” However she does agree with the premise of eating fish as part of a healthy diet. She claims there are no mandatory or regulated channels of information the FDA or EPA must use to inform consumers about the health risks.

Once neurological damage has occurred in children it is irreversible. There is also some evidence that babies exposed in the womb will have continuing impacts on their cardiovascular systems, according to Kuzmack. Women who are nursing can pass mercury to their children through breast milk.

Sayoc claims the NRDC is “trying to eliminate the problem at the source” by taking more of an active role in informing women of the health risks by issuing articles in women and parenting magazines. Brochures and flyers are sent to OBGYN offices and women clinics to educate medical professionals on the risks of mercury. However Sayoc took little comfort in this notion as she described her own experience with pregnancy over a telephone interview. When she first learned of the joyous news, Sayoc asked the OBGYN nurse at her clinic to test her mercury levels, but the nurse had no idea “what to do or why.”

Although the threat of tainted fish affects women and children mostly, male adults have shown signs of health problems as well. The World Health Organization conducted studies with men and found exposure to high levels of mercury can result in heart problems and tinkling sensation in the body, according to Sayoc.

Arnold Kuzmack from the EPA states, “there is developing evidence that mercury in fish increases the likelihood of heart attacks and other cardiovascular disease in adults, although this is less well documented than the effects on neurological development in babies. These include some Native Americans, some other ethnic groups, and upper-middle-class people who eat large amounts of fish. Some of the latter actually suffer acute effects of mercury intoxication, such as tremors and numbness of the extremities,” according to Kuzmack.

The NRDC, along with other environmental groups are facing “tremendous obstacles” with the current administration, according to Sayoc. The most controversial issue is the Clean Air Act, which the EPA under the Bush administration, is trying to delay emission regulation by the power plants, Sayoc says. The Bush administration’s political appointees at the EPA, refused to allow experts to analyze more regulated options than the rule proposed according to Physicians of Social Responsibility.

The EPA is reviewing letters opposing the new regulations (600,000) sent by consumers. A decision on whether or not the rule will be amended to the Clean Air Act will be decided within the next 60 days. Environmental groups are not optimistic about the results and feel the rule will be passed.

Kyle Kinner, legislative director of the Physicians for Social Responsibility and NRDC’s Sayoc both claim their organizations, along with other environmental groups, plan to sue the government if they decide to finalize the rule. Kinner says the EPA is worried “more about getting the rule taken care of without energy companies paying.” However, installing maximum achievable control technology would cost the power plant industry less then 1% annual revenue, according to PSR. The utility and coal industries want lesser cuts stretched over a longer period of time.

The decision regarding the rule to the Clean Air Act will be finalized by February. Environmental groups will file suit shortly there after to appeal the amendment and request the government for stringer regulations on mercury pollution. At the same time the United Nations Environment Network will hold conferences to “look at mercury internationally” according to Sayoc. She claims there are progressive things to do internationally as well as in the United States, as this issue continues to grow in concern.

Paper or Plastic Bags? Is One Really Better for the Environment Than the Other?

by James N. Katsaounis

You cannot leave a grocery store after shopping without making one last decision – paper or plastic. Since plastic bags were first introduced in 1977, consumers, environmentalists, and manufacturers of paper and plastic grocery bags have been debating if one is better for the environment than the other.

Plastics bags are light, compact, can be reused and take up less place in landfills. On the other hand, they are made from nonrenewable petroleum resources and are not easily biodegradable. Paper bags are made from renewable resources, can be easily reused or recycled and are more easily biodegradable. Yet there is a cost factor to be considered. Paper bags cost three times what plastic bags cost grocery stores.

“It cost us approximately six cents per paper bag and two cents per plastic bag,” said Tom, a manager at Super Fresh located on Columbus Boulevard in Philadelphia. “We don’t have a written policy on what types of bags we should use, but of course we prefer that our employees use plastic unless the customer requests paper,” he added.

It only makes business sense that a grocery store would prefer that plastic be used over paper when it is a third of the cost. But are companies making it policy to use plastic over paper, and what are they doing to encourage recycling of paper and plastic bags, if anything?

I contacted seven grocery stores in the Philadelphia region representing four different grocery store chains. Of the seven stores contacted, I visited three to see what type of bag, paper or plastic, was most commonly being offered.

Of the four grocery stores contacted, only ACME Markets had admitted to having a policy for employees to use plastic over paper. “It’s a verbal policy to use plastic and might be mentioned in a training video, but I don’t know of it being written anywhere,” said Tim, a grocery clerk at ACME on Roosevelt Boulevard. “We have recycling barrels in the store so people can drop their bags off…it gets filled all the time and has to be emptied at least twice a week,” Tim added.

The Fresh Grocer, Super Fresh, and Whole Foods Market, all prefer their employees use plastic as well, but managers at these stores say they do not have verbal or written policies on which type of bags should be used, that the choice is the customers.
All four of the grocery chains contacted for this story say they offer their customers the ability to have their paper or plastic bags recycled, but only Whole Foods Markets has a program that encourages recycling by offering a five cent discount per bag reused at the counter, whether paper, plastic or cloth and it does not even have to be one of their own bags.

“We are probably the most environmentally-conscious supermarket,” claims Denise a Whole Foods Market supervisor at the Pennsylvania Avenue location. This is a terrific program to encourage recycling as long as the customers are educated about it, and more specifically, all Whole Foods Market employees. Tanya, a cashier at the same location knew nothing about the program when asked, nor was it mentioned by the South Street location manager, Byron, when asked about what Whole Foods Markets does to encourage recycling.

None of the grocery stores were able to say what happens to the bags that are returned to be recycled, other than that the bags are sent back to their distribution centers to be handled. The closest idea of what may happen with recycled plastic bags came from Calvin, a manager at Super Fresh on South Street and an employee with the company for 25 years. “Ten years ago I remember learning something about the plastic being used to make park benches, but that was years ago.”

There are many factors to take into consideration when weighing whether plastic or paper is better. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) website reports that plastic grocery bags consume 40 percent less energy to produce and generate 80 percent less solid waste than paper bags. However, plastic bags can take 5-10 years to decompose whereas paper bags take about a month given the right environment conditions.

The EPA further claims that paper bags generate 70 percent more air and 50 times more water pollutants than plastics. And, it takes 91 percent less energy to recycle plastic than paper and four times as much energy to manufacture a paper bag than it does for a plastic bag. Landfills today also do not have the right conditions to degrade paper at a faster rate than plastic because modern landfills lack the water, light, oxygen and other elements necessary for decomposition to fully occur.

The GrassRoots Recycling Network (GRRN) whose mission is “to eliminate the waste of natural and human resources and utilize classic activist strategies to achieve corporate accountability for and public policies to eliminate waste, and to build sustainable communities,” seems to agree with the EPA. An article they quoted from “The Consumer’s Guide to Effective Environmental Choices – Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists,” and published on their website, says that plastic bags are environmentally a superior choice. However, paper bags are reused and recycled at a higher rate. That there is “no reason for consumers to feel obliged to use paper sacks or feel guilty if they choose plastic.”

The Sierra Club, another activist organization that has as part of its mission to preserve the environment, agrees with the GRRN. “The energy and other environmental impacts embodied in a plastic bag is somewhat less than in a grocery bag. But paper is easier to recycle, being accepted in most recycling programs. The recycling rate for plastic bags is very low,” according to the Sierra Club website.

Still, plastic bags are a growing problem especially if they are not being recycled. Reusablebags.com, a company that manufactures environmentally friendly fiber tote reusable bags, estimates that 500 billion to 1 trillion plastic bags are consumed annually worldwide and the U.S. according to The Wall Street Journal consumes one fifth of that. Four out of five grocery bags in the U.S. are plastic.

Plastic bags have also become such a major litter problem for some countries that Ireland, Taiwan, South Africa, Australia, and Bangladesh have created heavy taxes, approximately 20 cents U.S. per bag, or banned the choice of plastic grocery bags altogether. The tax in Ireland, however, did not force people to choose the paper bags, but has caused consumers to switch to the reusable cloth totes according to Joan Roach who reports for National Geographic News.

Ireland used 1.2 billion disposable plastic bags, or 316 per person in 2001, according to Reusablebags.com website. The plastic bag tax introduced in that country in 2002 reduced consumption by 90 percent. Several U.S. cities have considered similar taxes, such as Los Angeles and in some rural areas of Alaska plastic bags have been banned completely.

The Anchorage Daily News reported in 2003 that 30 communities statewide had banned stores from using plastics bags. The plastic bags were becoming such a nuisance that they were commonly spotted snagged in trees or found tangled around salmon and seals.

So will it be paper or plastic? Neither! Studies have shown that neither paper nor plastic is better than the other despite peoples’ disbeliefs. The important thing is to reuse the paper or plastic bags over and over again until they can no longer be used. Better yet, buy yourself a strong cloth tote bag to take with you to the store and forgo having to choose between paper and plastic.

Can I get a Price Check? Anyone?

King Pharmaceuticals prides itself in the thyroid hormone replacement drug Levoxyl, one of the less expensive thyroid hormones available on the market today. Jones Pharmaceuticals, which is now a wholly owned subsidiary of King Pharmaceuticals, created the drug. The company says the “low average wholesale price makes Levoxyl affordable.” My mother has been taking hormone replacement drugs for about 25 years and during that time she has had prescription drug coverage. With her insurance the cost of a 90-day supply of Levoxyl is $15. This price is relatively inexpensive – a whole year will only cost $60. However, she has run into some problems with the pharmacy that fills her prescriptions a couple of times. One time the pharmacist charged her $10 for a 30-day supply of Levoxyl; she would end up paying $30 for a prescription that usually cost $15. After bringing this incident to the pharmacist’s attention he returned to the usual 90-day supply. If she had not addressed the issue with the pharmacists would she still be paying twice as much for her prescription? The pharmacists never fully explained why he had given her the smaller supply in the first place.

I contacted the Emerson Pharmacy, located in Emerson, New Jersey, to check the cost of Levoxyl for someone that does not have prescription drug coverage. For a 30-day supply a person would pay $19. This is very inexpensive compared to other types of prescription drugs but this person will still end up paying $228 for a year; where someone with coverage pays only $60. If my mother had not had coverage she would have spent $5,700.00 over the passed 25 years instead of $1,500. This is a considerable difference between prescription coverage and non-prescription coverage price. Someone who needs to take thyroid hormones will be taking them for the rest of their lives – overtime this is quite an expense.

My next step was to contact King Pharmaceuticals and ask them Levoxyl and wholesale prices. It was very easy to get through to Wendy, customer service representative. Unfortunately, she would not be able to help me with that information. Instead she transferred me to the legal department, they should be able to handle my questions. As soon as she said legal department I knew this was not going to be easy. But I did not have to worry about asking the right questions or introducing myself the best way to get information because no one answered my line. I let the phone ring for five minutes with no answer, not even a voicemail pick up. I wonder if Wendy just sent me to a mystery line that no one answers.

My second call was to the vendor inquiries number, there was an option for pricing questions so I thought I was on my way to finding answers. Again I was wrong, unless I had an account with King Pharmaceuticals they would not be able to give me any pricing information. My representative suggested I contact a wholesaler and ask them how much they pay for the drug, although she did not think they would give me that answer either.

Having no luck at finding what King pharmaceuticals charges a vendor for Levoxyl I have come to the conclusion that pharmaceuticals companies are just as secretive as government agencies; they do not want to give out any information. It is almost as if the public was aware of exactly how these drugs are developed, researched and priced they would be able to develop complaints that they could justify. Then companies would be forced to find ways to lower their costs and the retail costs of these prescriptions. As we have seen recently price is something pharmaceutical companies rarely justify with specific figures – they explain it as the high cost for research and development. If the public had more insight and understanding of the processes of this industry then we may be able to defend ourselves against these industry giants.

The Mystery of the High-Priced Pharmaceuticals

By John C. Nolan

My journey into the world of prescription drug costs began with an accounting of the medications taken by my father. While he takes three medications regularly, he was able to provide me with the pre-insurance cost of only one. Actimmune, which he takes to treat a lung condition, is prescribed as a thrice-weekly injection. Each injection costs $850, for an annual total of $132,600. His insurance covers most of the cost, leaving him responsible for a monthly co-pay of $40. I also totaled up the pre-insurance cost of my own medication (Prevacid), which costs $162.99 per month.

Prevacid is manufactured by TAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc. I contacted their Customer Service department and asked “Scott” for information regarding the determining of the cost of Prevacid. He responded that such information could be found on TAP’s website. I reviewed the website, but I found nothing regarding the cost of Prevacid.

I followed up my search with a call to TAP’s main telephone number. The operator transferred me to the Contracts and Pricing department, where I spoke to “Maria,” who informed that I needed to speak to someone in Medical Services. She transferred me, and I spoke to a Medical Services representative who told me that I needed to speak to one of TAP’s pharmacists.

“Ina,” a TAP pharmacist, explained that she did not have any information about pharmaceutical pricing, and that I should call either the “Insurance Hotline” or the “Reimbursement Hotline” for answers to my questions. Calls to both telephone numbers failed to yield any information about the cost of Prevacid.

Feeling frustrated, I decided to investigate the cost of Actimmune, which is manufactured by Intermune, Inc. My first telephone call was to the “Actimmune Access Hotline.” A Hotline representative explained that she did not have that information and that I would have to contact Intermune directly. I called Intermune’s headquarters and was transferred to the “Information Line,” where I spoke with “Karen.” “Karen” explained that she did not have the information I requested, and referred me back to the “Actimmune Access Hotline.” By this time, my head was spinning…

My experiences indicate that pharmaceutical companies do not want to discuss the cost of their products. Considering the high cost of pharmaceuticals, their withholding of information is both frustrating and suspicious. However, I worked for a pharmaceutical company (Wyeth, Inc.) for several years, so I can shed some light on this issue. One factor affecting cost is the significant failure rate within pharmaceutical research and development. Wyeth estimates that for every twelve drugs they attempt to develop, only two will end up being marketable. The high costs of those drugs that are marketed reflect the lack of return on investment in those that are not marketed.

A second factor is the twenty-year period of exclusivity granted to pharmaceutical companies for each drug, after which any company can market a generic version. While twenty years seems to be a long time, the period of exclusivity begins with the date of discovery of a compound and not with the initial marketing date. It is not uncommon for a drug to spend ten or more years in development. A long period of development results in a shorter period during which the company has exclusive rights to market the drug.

A final factor to consider is the issue of medical necessity. If the FDA determines a drug to be medically necessary, then pharmaceutical companies are required to manufacture it, regardless of how small the market might be. Rather than making the unprofitable but medically necessary drug prohibitively expensive, pharmaceutical companies will increase prices across the board to absorb their losses.

Of course, these factors do not account fully for the high cost of prescriptions drugs, but they do provide some insight into the reasons that costs are as high as they are. Nor do they excuse the “pass the buck” responses to questions about the high costs of their products. Perhaps, if pharmaceutical companies were more forthcoming with the reasons behind their pricing decisions, they would not be treated with such suspicion and skepticism by the public and by the media.