The Waste Manifesto

Victor Margolin

University of Illinois, Chicago | [e-mail]

July + August 2009

interactions

Waste is part of life. Human and animal bodies produce natural waste, whereas societies produce synthetic waste. While we cannot control the level of natural waste as its production is an organic part of biological survival, we can drastically reduce the production of synthetic waste. Natural and synthetic waste come in two varieties—reusable and nonreusable. The aim of a sustainable waste economy is to reuse as much waste as possible, even to the point of reducing waste surplus to zero.

To accomplish this, we would need to create a flow-through society in which all waste— natural and synthetic—is reused. The opposite of a flow-through society is a cul-de-sac society, in which waste flows into dead-end spaces where it cannot be reused. Nonreusable waste is the equivalent of fat in the human body; in excess, it produces social obesity. Because the waste economy is so complicated and so little is known about it, we can best approach the subject initially through metaphors that will help us to envision the consequences of an unsustainable waste economy.

Obesity is a useful metaphor because of its connotations: excessive and sluggish. The image of a cul-de-sac is also helpful because it brings to mind dead ends and useless collections. “Trash” and “ garbage” are two terms that we

apply to cul-de-sac waste. Both have negative connotations and prevent us from imagining the transformation of waste into new forms. Conversely, the image of a flow-through society helps us imagine a place of movement and transformation, where waste is constantly converted into new, usable forms. Such a society results from an efficient waste economy.

The consequences of an unsustainable waste economy are not only obesity, but also toxicity. Dumping chemicals into public waterways, burying metals in landfills, and improperly sealing and storing refuse from nuclear reactors all pollute the water we drink and the air we breathe. Such actions also poison the food we eat, as we have seen with mercury contaminated fish. Likewise, excessive carbon dioxide through motor vehicle exhaust has contributed to global warming.

To offset these dangerous consequences, we need to construct a sustainable waste economy. This is a daunting task, but it is essential to the long-term survival of human life. Such an economy would counteract the following destructive tendencies:

1. The conversion of large
spaces into landfills, which in
reality are garbage cemeteries.

2. The high cost of disposing nonreusable waste.

3. The reduction of otherwise reusable waste that could be

converted to commoditized products.

4. The toxicity of improperly disposed of waste materials.

5. The medical costs of treating the impact of toxicity on human health.

6. The politics of landfill locations and nonreusable waste disposal.

7. The potential of reaching limits for disposing of nonreusable waste: limits of space, limits of money, and limits of political tolerance.

The simple recognition of an unsustainable waste economy’s consequences forces the conclusion that the disposal of nonreusable waste cannot continue forever. When limits are reached, the results of continued unsustainable waste-disposal practices will be widely evident and politically charged.

The first task toward creating a global sustainable waste economy is adopting some terms that make sense and that can be used with a shared understanding of their meaning. First is the term “waste.” Waste itself is not inherently negative, given that it is a necessary consequence of biological and social activity. Garbage and trash are its negative synonyms, but waste can have benefits. In the most positive sense, reusable waste can play an important commodity function in a sustainable waste economy. Disposing of waste,

Photograph by Frank Gruber