WTO, EU And WMI

The 1999 Seattle protests have placed the World Trade Organization (WTO) on the agenda of the people. Much the WTO has done is now known as its bureaucratic officials rule on controversies between trading nations without any accountability except to corporations. One issue that has surfaced of great interest to waste management and recycling adherents is the proposed European Union (EU) regulations for waste for electronic and electrical equipment. The EU is proposing a ban on lead in such equipment and the placing of responsibility for end-of-life management upon the manufacturers. Such responsibility would greatly increase the self-interest of manufacturers to manufacture recyclable products. Xerox has already done so with its latest 97% recyclable product. If the EU passes these proposed laws American manufacturers will have incentive to change their products so they can be recyled. If this happens such change will mean less need for Waste Management's (WMI) landfills.

But the American Electronics Association (AEA)and the United State government oppose the EU proposals. The AEA claims to support the intent of the legislation for sustainable development and minimization of adverse environmental impacts. It just doesn't like the EU strong proposals! Even though Superfund sites place responsibility for waste on the manufacturer of past hazardous waste, the AEA doesn't want the entire responsibility. They say let the consumer, the municipality and others share final disposal responsibility! If the EU passes these laws the US will undoubtedly claim the law hampers world trade, impedes technological innovation and fails to benefit the environment. Some unelected bureaucrats will decide the case and the sovereign rights of Europeans through their European Union will be overturned - another blow for democracy, This potential WTO case surfaced through Public Citizen's book, WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION? (1999), p. 30-31.

It would appear that the EU is trying to follow the ideas of Natural Step, initiated by Swedish scientist Dr. Karl-Henrik Robert. The four system condition necessary for life are "1) Substances mined from the Earth must not systematically increase in air, water, soil, or living things. 2) Substances produced by society must not be allowed to systematically increase in air, water, soil, or living things. 3) The physical basis of productivity and the diversity of nature must not be systematically diminished. 4) We must be fair and efficient in meeting basic human needs." For more information on this system see Rachel's # 668.

Another example of change in the marketplace is the recent announcements by Bach-Hauser (B-H) (see Business Wire, 9/8/99) of their Total Recycling System. The system claims to reduce landfill usage by up to 80%. The Solid Waste Association honored B-H with its award for the highest waste diversion rate in the industry. The B-H equipment is in use in Canada and has just landed contracts in the Phillipines (AOL News, 11/23/99). The EU and B-H examples of continued pressure toward better waste management are hopeful. So too is the state of California which has passed laws requiring 50% recycling. Even the recent Pennsylvania 21st Century Environmental Commission predicted near zero waste during the 21st century. Even though their commission members were primarily the Governor's employees and the Governor was under great pressure from citizens, the commission made such a prediction knowing that it was possible. Sure,one Pennsylvania environmentalist resp[onds, "Don't fall for any of that propaganda commission stuff. That was an election year ploy to make an extremely anti-environmental governor look green. ... Waste Management Inc has a serious monopoly in Pennsylvania and the (Governor) Ridge administration is totally owned by them. There is no intent to phase out WMI."

Nevertheless, pressure continues to mount to stop the torrent of 460 billion lbs of trash from 270 million Americans. Maybe the evolving crisis around the closing of Fresh Kills landfill in New York City and the repercussions in Pennsylvania and Virginia will force a radical change in recycling. About 25% is now recycled. If we move to 50% the waste giants, WMI and Allied, will really be hurt.

Perhaps, investors decisions to reduce their valuing of WMI from its recent $56 to $15 is not just based on all the shenanigans within the company. Sure, WMI now has its sixth CEO in two years. Sure, its top executives sold 1,036,547 shares of stock for $57,391,212. After the stock dropped to $15 they would have received only $15,548,205. They got an unethical $42 million windfall with their inside information and were all fired when it became public! Yes, perhaps, there is no great future for WMI and Allied Waste in the 21st Century.

Return to Home Page / Debate Page