T. O. Fuller State Park in Memphis, Tennessee, has been loved for generations and has always been a ground where community has come first. Back in 1938, it was the first park east of the Mississippi river to open for African American visitors. Over 80 years later, the park is continuing its forward-thinking tradition, this time, through a pioneering sustainability project.

A new walking and biking trail has been built through this historic park. Illegally dumped (被丢弃的) tires are not only unpleasant to see, but they’re a dangerous addition to the environment. Rubber, like plastic, is a material that won’t naturally decompose. In a place as hot as Tennessee, these dumped tires often begin to melt and release these harmful gasses into the air. Fortunately, the old tires were sent to Patriot Tire Recycling in Bristol, TN, the only facility in the area that can break down tires in an environmentally sound way. There, the collected tires were safely broken down into the crumble (碎屑) rubber that was eventually used to pave the new trail.

TN State Parks explained how the trail’s construction, which has been in development since 2019, was a joint effort. Officials from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, the Tennessee Department of Transportation, the City of Memphis, Shelby County, and Memphis City Beautiful were all involved in funding this recycling project.

These officials named their initiative the “Tires to Trails” project. Workers from these departments, alongside some 450 volunteers, came together to collect over 24, 000 tires that had been illegally dumped in the area around the park to be recycled.

“This is a perfect example of recycling in full circle, collecting dumped material, then converting it into positive use,” David, a leader of the project, said in a statement.

Waste to Energy—JUST BURN IT!

WHY BURN WASTE?

Waste-to-energy plants generate (产生) enough electricity to supply 2.4 million households in the US. But, providing electricity is not the major advantage of waste-to-energy plants. In fact, it costs more to generate electricity at a waste-to-energy plant than it does at a coal, nuclear, or hydropower plant.

The major advantage of burning waste is that it considerably reduces the amount of trash going to landfills. The average American produces more than 1,600 pounds of waste a year. If all this waste were landfilled, it would take more than two cubic yards of landfill space. That’s the volume of a box three feet long, three feet wide, and six feet high. If that waste were burned, the ashes would fit into a box three feet long, three feet wide, but only nine inches high!

Some communities in the Northeast may be running out of land for new landfills. And, since most people don’t want landfills in their backyards, it has become more difficult to obtain permits to build new landfills. Taking the country as a whole, the United States has plenty of open space, of course, but it is expensive to transport garbage a long distance to put it into a landfill.

TO BURN OR NOT TO BURN?

Some people are concerned that burning garbage may harm the environment. Like coal plants, waste-to-energy plants produce air pollution when the fuel is burned to produce steam or electricity. Burning garbage releases the chemicals and substances found in the waste. Some chemicals can be a threat to people, the environment, or both, if they are not properly controlled.

Some critics of waste-to-energy plants are afraid that burning waste will hamper (妨碍，阻碍) recycling programs. If everyone sends their trash to a waste-to-energy plant, they say, there will be little motive to recycle. Several states have considered or are considering banning waste-to-energy plants unless recycling programs are in place. Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York City have delayed new waste-to-energy plants, hoping to increase the level of recycling first.

So, what’s the real story? Can recycling and burning waste coexist? At first glance, recycling and waste-to-energy seem to be at odds (不一致), but they can actually complement (弥补) each other. That’s because it makes good sense to recycle some materials, and better sense to burn others.

Let’s look at aluminum, for example. Aluminum mineral is so expensive to mine that recycling aluminum more than pays for itself. Burning it produces no energy. So clearly, aluminum is valuable to recycle and not useful to burn.

Paper, on the other hand, can either be burned or recycled—it all depends on the price the used paper will bring.

Plastics are another matter. Because plastics are made from petroleum and natural gas, they are excellent sources of energy for waste-to-energy plants. This is especially true since plastics are not as easy to recycle as steel, aluminum, or paper. Plastics almost always have to be hand sorted and making a product from recycled plastics may cost more than making it from new materials.

To burn or not to burn is not really the question. We should use both recycling and waste-to-energy as alternatives to landfilling.

Waste to Energy—JUST BURN IT!

Plants: we eat them, juice them-and now it seems we can mine them too!

After a successful experiment on the island of Borneo, the botany professor Alan Baker and a group of researchers want to introduce phytomining (harvesting minerals from plants) as a better, partial substitute for traditional mining.

Phytomining, also known as agromining, means collecting metals from live plants. However, this can only be done with a group of plants known as "hyperaccumulators". There are around 700 identified types worldwide, and what makes these hyperaccumulators special is that they naturally attract and absorb minerals through their roots-metals poisonous to other plants-and then store huge, pure concentrations of these minerals in their bodies. The metals can then be extracted from the plants' sap(汁;液), oil, or sometimes even live tissue.

Baker and his colleagues see a lot of potential in phytomining. Not only can it help meet the growing global demand for metals, but is a way of undoing some of that damage to the environment by traditional mining.

One of the biggest problems with traditional mining is that it pollutes the surrounding area. Phytomining can extract metal waste, plus planting the hyperaccumulators would regrow the deforested areas caused by mining operations. Aside from this, if phytomining is able to replace part of traditional mining, then there would be fewer instances of bad mining practices like abandoned mines, which pollute the nearby waters. Also, since phytomining provides metals that are already naturally pure, there is no need to use huge amounts of energy to purify the ore(矿石).

Phytomining has its drawbacks. Harvesting plants on a large scale is expensive today, compared to traditional mining. Besides, plants can be wiped out by diseases or unexpected weather conditions.

However, there are many reasons to consider phytomining. After all, we need to make sure that our planet can keep up and sustainable practices like phytomining give us the hope that our advancement doesn't mean sacrificing Mother Earth.