Search

Abstract: The organic fraction of municipal solid waste (MSW), such as plastics and paper, is commonly recycled in Japan, but a considerable room for improvement still remains. Energy intensive industries, such as steel, cement, paper, and power plants, have great capacities to accept waste plastics and paper to substitute their fossil resource consumption and to reduce carbon emissions. We propose a “smart recycling system” that utilizes existing industrial facilities that have high energy efficiency, for establishing a cost-effective and robust recycling system. The core of the smart recycling system is the smart recycling center (SRC) that establishes a new recycling pathway connecting spatially diffuse municipal sources to facilities in energy intensive industries. This paper discusses the design and function of an SRC and estimates the CO2 emissions and costs related to the operation and construction of the SRC. We also evaluated the cost effectiveness of the smart recycling system, taking into account sorted collection, incineration, processes in the SRC, and processes in industrial facilities. We estimated that the system could result in a reduction of approximately 100kg of CO2 emissions per capita per year without a significant increase in cost. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Paper passes through many hands. In the present paper, key parts of this cycle in Japan were examined, using questionnaire surveys of households and paper makers. The study aimed to examine the paper makers' strategy for paper production and their attitude to recycling, in comparison with those of the consumers. The study especially focused on toilet paper because consumers have a lot of freedom in purchasing toilet paper. A total of 1242 consumers and 60 paper makers responded. The major findings were as follows. First, we compared the criteriaof consumers for purchasing toilet paper with the conjectures of paper makers. Brand, advertisements and the appearance of shopping displays received 60% support from paper makers, but less than 12% of consumers selected these criteria even if we exclude those who do not buytoilet paper or do not have any particular criteria. On the other hand, multiple plies and benefit to the earth were selected by moderatenumbers (between 20 and 25%) of consumers, while only 16.77 and 5.69%, respectively of paper makers marked these criteria. Paper makers strongly believe that many retailers sell toilet paper as a loss-leader. By comparing those matters considered important for recycling by consumers with those considered important by makers, it was shown thatmany makers have a clear awareness of the particular problem, the lack of used paper consumption, in the current paper recycling situation in Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]