I heard Stacie's Toews interview on CBC this AM and was impressed by the commitment to being ecologically friendly.
One point that struck me as rather odd though is that in order to achieve zero landfill status, Level Ground is in fact burning their coffee bags to recover energy.
The primary bi-product product of burning plastic to produce energy is CO2. One might argue that CO2 emissions are a bigger problem than landfill capacity. It would seem to me that the Carbon in the bags is perhaps best kept in that form. Burying it might be regarded as a form of sequestration, which some are proposing as a technical solution to somewhat mitigate Greenhouse gas emissions.
In addition, plastics as a landfill item, degrade very slowly and produce little or no leachates.
This is a similar argument to use against the use of biofuels. Once the carbon is captured by plants, wouldn't it be best to keep it that way?
I'm not arguing whether landfile or CO2 is the greater issue, however I was wondering if Level ground had made a conscious choice to add to the CO2 problem for the sake of landfill capacity, or whether perhaps that thought had not occurred to them.