DOCSLIB.ORG

Extended Producer Responsibility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Extended Producer Responsibility EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY Awaste management strategy that cuts waste, creates a cleaner environment and saves taxpayers money EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY 3 A Waste Management Strategy that Cuts Waste, Creates a Cleaner Environment and Saves Taxpayers Money Table of contents A new waste management policy is the ground in North America for a variety We wrote this manual to explain and promote Extended Producer gaining popularity because it saves of reasons, yet Producer Takeback for pri- Responsibility as a policy tool for product waste, at a time when taxpayers money and is significantly ority waste streams in the United States is Extended Producer Responsibility 3 this term is being misused and misunderstood. We show how better for the environment and now an urgent priority. corporations are shouldering their responsibility to take back public health than current waste The Waste Problem in North America 4 discarded products in other countries. We demonstrate how management practices. Americans generate a full 50 percent of Extended Producer Responsibility goes beyond traditional forms of the world’s solid waste though we make The Solution: Going Beyond Recycling 8 recycling and is encouraging producers to design safer products by Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) up only 5 percent of the world’s popula- phasing out hazardous chemicals and reduce material use. (also called “Producer Takeback”) is a tion.1 We are a dangerous model for the Producer Takeback Advantages 10 product and waste management system in rest of the world. Our landfills are leaking We believe the public needs to understand and get involved in which manufacturers – not the consumer hazardous chemicals into surrounding soil What to Include in an EPR Program 13 the current debate round product waste recycling in the USA and or government – take responsibility for and water while our incinerators continue Canada, since they are currently paying for inefficient and often the environmentally safe management of to emit dioxins and other toxic compounds Implementing an EPR Program 16 costly recycling programs. In both countries the increasing their product when it is no longer useful into the air and into ash. problem of hazardous waste from electronic products, not to or discarded. Promoting Producer Takeback 22 mention waste from automobiles and other priority waste streams, Recycling programs, as they currently is forcing government officials to realize something must be done. When manufacturers take responsibility for exist, can handle only a part of our waste EPR Programs Working Abroad 25 Hopefully this booklet and the attached CD will support those the recycling of their own products they: streams and will never reverse our grow- campaigners working to advance EPR in North America and chart the ing consumption of materials nor will they EPR Endnotes 28 • Use environmentally safer materials in way forward for waste managers and state government officials. ever be able to solve the problem of the production process waste from hazardous products. • Consume fewer materials in the This publication is made possible by the generous support of the production process Overbrook Foundation, the New York Community Trust, and the We need a radical new direction in waste • Design the product to last longer and Mott Foundation. management and we need to put the be more useful focus on products and producers. Only • Create safer recycling systems We would also like to thank INFORM for the factsheets on the producers can clean up the products they • Are motivated to keep waste costs down European legislation on electronic waste. Much of our research has manufacture and design them for recycling • No longer pass the cost of disposal to been drawn from the published work of Naoko Tojo and Thomas and reuse. the government and the taxpayer Lindqvist at University of Lund, Sweden and Gary Davis, University of Tennessee. The opinions expressed in this document are solely Many industries have embraced Producer those of the authors. Takeback and are lobbying for direct responsibility of their own brand name Written by Beverley Thorpe, Iza Kruszewska and Alexandra products including Sony, Hewlett Packard, McPherson of Clean Production Action. 2004. For more information Braun and Electrolux who have set up visit www.cleanproduction.org. their own individual recycling group in Europe. Some countries have also Design by Patt Kelly Graphic Design implemented Producer Takeback programs. Communication support by Valerie Denny Associates. Japan and Europe have passed compre- hensive EPR legislation for both electronic This document was printed on process chlorine-free paper with soy inks. and electrical equipment waste and auto- mobiles. EPR has been slower to get off 4 THE WASTE PROBLEM IN NORTH AMERICA EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY 5 IN NORTH AMERICA, WE HAVE OUR TRASH IS BECOMING MORE DANGEROUS Americans generate half of the world’s solid waste TVS AND COMPUTERS TRADITIONALLY RELIED ON LANDFILLS EXEMPLIFY THE NEED Waste generation in North America is out of control and is costing us dearly in terms of even though we make up only 5 percent of the AND INCINERATORS FOR WASTE tax dollars and health costs. North Americans throw out more garbage than any other FOR EPR DISPOSAL AND, MORE RECENTLY, people on earth.2 The products we buy become obsolete quicker and our recycling pro- world’s population. RECYCLING. EVIDENCE IS MOUNTING grams are not keeping up with the problem. As a result, the tonnage of product waste With the rapid advancement in technology, landfilled and incinerated has grown by 19.2 million tons since 1980.3 THAT LANDFILLS AND INCINERATORS obsolete electronic products are one of the ARE CREATING ADVERSE HEALTH North America still has a lot of space in which to dump garbage, but our landfills are fill- largest growing sources of municipal and hazardous waste. According to the EFFECTS, AND AS WASTE STREAMS ing up rapidly and there is evidence that our waste is becoming more hazardous. NOT ENOUGH DEMAND FOR RECYCLED MATERIALS Environmental Protection Agency, in 2002, INCREASE AND GROW MORE Landfills leak toxic liquids into surrounding water and landfills that contain household discarded computers and television cathode COSTLY, RECYCLING IS PROVING waste produce the same kind of toxic leachate (liquid) as found in hazardous waste So what is the answer to this rising waste dilemma? Traditionally, cities have used recy- ray tubes outnumbered those sold. Between landfills.4 A study conducted by the New York State Department of Health reports that cling to offset landfill fees and some cities have set high recycling targets. The majority INADEQUATE TO THE TASK. 1997 and 2006 nearly 500 million comput- women living near landfills have a four-fold increased probability of developing leukemia of material collected in cities with high recycling rates is composed of organic matter, or bladder cancer.5 And this is only the latest in a number of studies that show a correla- paper, some plastics and tins although some communities will also collect white goods ers will become obsolete. In 2006 TVs will tion between cancer rates and living near waste dumps.6 (refrigerators, washing machines and other large appliances), steel, other plastics, ferrous move to digital transmission and it will be metals and materials not traditionally collected. the most dramatic change for consumer Incineration of household and hazardous waste, a technology that came into vogue in products since the switch from radio to the 1980s as a way of dealing with waste, is now recognized as the leading source of But recycling only pays if there is a market for the collected discards. Composted materi- television. Consumers will have to buy a dioxins and other hazardous chemicals into the environment.7 This is why incinerator als can be a money generator for communities, as can mixed paper waste, but finding a ‘conversion box’ or they will simply throw proposals face stiff public opposition when new facilities are proposed as waste manage- market for other materials can be problematic. Many types of plastics, polycoated paper ment technologies. Incinerators also do not make waste disappear; they simply transform and electronic waste, particularly brown goods to name just a few, have proven difficult out their old TV adding to the increasing household waste into hazardous air emissions and contaminated ash residues, which to recycle and markets are often hard to locate. electronic waste stream. Since many must then be landfilled. computer components are not designed for Communities wishing to recover these materials often must ship them to distant markets economical reuse or recycling in the United 11 and deal with fluctuating prices. Often communities contract with a private recycler who States, a large percentage of the electro- LOW-INCOME PEOPLE AND OTHER COUNTRIES AFFECTED THE MOST takes the collected discards off their hands but it is usually unknown where the waste scrap ends up in landfills and incinerators ends up, what happens to it and who gets exposed. Many studies have shown low-income communities are disproportionately affected by or is shipped overseas for so-called “dirty waste handling facilities.8 We sometimes pay to have our garbage trucked to other states, According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the rate of recycling has recycling”--contaminating people, water but this practice is also facing rising public opposition. We even truck our waste from stagnated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hazardous Waste Minimization Guide
    Waste Minimization Guide Environmental Health & Safety 4202 E. Fowler Ave. OPM 100 Tampa, FL 33620 (813) 974-4036 h ttp://www.usf.edu/ehs/ June 1, 2020 Table of Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Methods for Waste Minimization ............................................................................................................. 2 Source Reduction .................................................................................................................................. 2 Environmentally Sound Recycling (ESR) .................................................................................................... 4 Treatment ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Managing Waste Efficiently ...................................................................................................................... 4 Flammable Liquids and Solids ............................................................................................................... 5 Halogenated Solvents ........................................................................................................................... 5 Solvent Contaminated Towels and Rags ............................................................................................... 6 Paint related Wastes ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Five Principles of Waste Product Redesign Under the Upcycling Concept
    International Forum on Energy, Environment Science and Materials (IFEESM 2015) Five Principles of Waste Product Redesign under the Upcycling Concept Jiang XU1 & Ping GU1 1School of Design, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China KEYWORD: Upcycling; Redesign principle; Green design; Industrial design; Product design ABSTRACT: It explores and constructs the principles of waste product redesign which are based on the concept of upcycling. It clarifies the basic concept of upcycling, briefly describes its current development, deeply discusses its value and significance, combines with the idea of upcycling which behinds regeneration design principle from the concept of “4R” of green design, and takes real-life case as example to analyze the principles of waste product redesign. It puts forward five principles of waste product redesign: value enhancement, make the most use of waste, durable and environmental protection, cost control and populace's aesthetic. INTRODUCTION Recently, environmental problems was becoming worse and worse, while as a developing country, China is facing dual pressures that economical development and environmental protection. However, large numbers of goods become waste every day all over the world, but the traditional recycling ways, such as melting down and restructuring, not only produce much CO2, but also those restruc- tured parts or products cannot mention in the same breath with raw ones. As a result, the western countries started to center their attention to the concept of “upcycling” of green design, which can transfer the old and waste things into more valuable products to vigorously develop the green econ- omy. Nevertheless, this new concept hasn’t been well known and the old notion of traditionally inef- ficient reuse still predominant in China, so it should be beneficial for our social development to con- struct the principles of waste products’ redesign which are based on the concept of upcycling.
    [Show full text]
  • Redesign. Rethink. Reduce. Reuse. Go Beyond Recycling
    REDESIGN. RETHINK. REDUCE. REUSE. GO BEYOND RECYCLING. WHAT IS ZERO WASTE? the entire lifecycle of products used within a facility. With TRUE, your facility can demonstrate to the world what you’re doing to minimize Zero waste is a philosophy that encourages the redesign of resource your waste output. life cycles so that all products are reused; a process that is very similar to the way that resources are reused in nature. Although recycling is HOW DOES CERTIFICATION WORK? the first step in the journey, achieving zero waste goes far beyond. By focusing on the larger picture, facilities and organizations can reap The TRUE Zero Waste certification program is an Assessor-based financial benefits while becoming more resource efficient. program that rates how well facilities perform in minimizing their non-hazardous, solid wastes and maximizing their efficient in the use According to the EPA, the average American generates 4.4 pounds of of resources. A TRUE project’s goal is to divert 90 percent or greater trash each day, and according to the World Bank, global solid waste overall diversion from the landfill, incineration (waste-to-energy) and generation is on pace to increase 70 percent by 2025. For every can of the environment for solid, non-hazardous wastes for the most recent garbage at the curb, for instance, there are 87 cans worth of materials 12 months. that come from extraction industries that manufacture natural resources into finished products—like timber, agricultural, mining and Certification is available for any physical facility and their operations, petroleum. This means that while recycling is important, it doesn’t including facilities owned by: companies, property managers, address the real problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduce, Reuse and Recycle (The 3Rs) and Resource Efficiency As the Basis for Sustainable Waste Management
    CSD-19 Learning Centre “Synergizing Resource Efficiency with Informal Sector towards Sustainable Waste Management” 9 May 2011, New York Co-organized by: UNCRD and UN HABITAT Reduce, Reuse and Recycle (the 3Rs) and Resource Efficiency as the basis for Sustainable Waste Management C. R. C. Mohanty UNCRD 3Rs offer an environmentally friendly alternatives to deal with growing generation of wastes and its related impact on human health, eco nomy and natural ecosystem Natural Resources First : Reduction Input Reduce waste, by-products, etc. Production (Manufacturing, Distribution, etc.) Second : Reuse Third : Material Recycling Use items repeatedly. Recycle items which cannot be reused as raw materials. Consumption Fourth : Thermal Recycling Recover heat from items which have no alternatives but incineration and which cannot Discarding be recycled materially. Treatment (Recycling, Incineration, etc.) Fifth : Proper Disposal Dispose of items which cannot be used by any means. (Source: Adapted from MoE-Japan) Landfill disposal Stages in Product Life Cycle • Extraction of natural resources • Processing of resources • Design of products and selection of inputs • Production of goods and services • Distribution • Consumption • Reuse of wastes from production or consumption • Recycling of wastes from consumption or production • Disposal of residual wastes Source: ADB, IGES, 2008 Resource efficiency refers to amount of resource (materials, energy, and water) consumed in producing a unit of product or services. It involves using smaller amount of physical
    [Show full text]
  • Sector N: Scrap and Waste Recycling
    Industrial Stormwater Fact Sheet Series Sector N: Scrap Recycling and Waste Recycling Facilities U.S. EPA Office of Water EPA-833-F-06-029 February 2021 What is the NPDES stormwater program for industrial activity? Activities, such as material handling and storage, equipment maintenance and cleaning, industrial processing or other operations that occur at industrial facilities are often exposed to stormwater. The runoff from these areas may discharge pollutants directly into nearby waterbodies or indirectly via storm sewer systems, thereby degrading water quality. In 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed permitting regulations under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to control stormwater discharges associated with eleven categories of industrial activity. As a result, NPDES permitting authorities, which may be either EPA or a state environmental agency, issue stormwater permits to control runoff from these industrial facilities. What types of industrial facilities are required to obtain permit coverage? This fact sheet specifically discusses stormwater discharges various industries including scrap recycling and waste recycling facilities as defined by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Major Group Code 50 (5093). Facilities and products in this group fall under the following categories, all of which require coverage under an industrial stormwater permit: ◆ Scrap and waste recycling facilities (non-source separated, non-liquid recyclable materials) engaged in processing, reclaiming, and wholesale distribution of scrap and waste materials such as ferrous and nonferrous metals, paper, plastic, cardboard, glass, and animal hides. ◆ Waste recycling facilities (liquid recyclable materials) engaged in reclaiming and recycling liquid wastes such as used oil, antifreeze, mineral spirits, and industrial solvents.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 Material Recovery Facility (MRF) Assessment
    Waste Monitoring Program 2006 Material Recovery Facility (MRF) Assessment November 2006 PREPARED BY: Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. In cooperation with WIH Resource Group Acknowledgments This study would not have been possible without the cooperation and assistance of the management and operators of the four Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) who generously agreed to participate. Studies of this kind are an imposition on their time and their cooperation is greatly appreciated. Special thanks are given to the following MRFs which hosted and assisted sampling activities in addition to providing tonnage data and market information. Allied Waste, Rabanco Recycling Center (Third & Lander) in Seattle, Waste Management, Cascade Recycling Center in Woodinville, Smurfit-Stone, Renton Reclamation Plant, in Renton, and Waste Connection, Recycling Center in Tacoma. Market information and quantity and composition data resulting from the collection and sorting of material samples at each of the MRFs was obtained under confidentiality agreements and is not presented within this report. Instead, the data from individual facilities was aggregated. Thanks to the numerous material brokers, end-users, and industry experts for their time, insight, and information on recycled commodity markets and specifications. And finally, thank you King County and City of Seattle staff for assistance in identifying a separate sorting location. Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................i
    [Show full text]
  • Media Coverage Supporting Bottled Water on College Campuses
    College Campus Toolkit Third Party Letters to the Editor Letters to the Editor & Articles Supporting Bottled Water The articles and letters below present arguments and positions in support of bottled water. They were published in newspapers and magazines and were not written by IBWA. These articles and letters provide some good examples of potential talking points and arguments, including the importance of consumer choice and the availability of healthy beverage options. College Campus Ban Related Campus Times: “Questioning the bottle ban” February 21, 2013 http://www.campustimes.org/2013/02/21/questioning-the-bottle-ban/ Roughly 16 universities across the United States and Canada have banned the sale of bottled water on their campuses, according to the “Ban the Bottle” campaign website. Team Green is hoping to add UR to that list. The on-campus discussion has focused mainly on whether bottled or tap water is better, with Team Green conducting taste tests and some student surveys. Unfortunately, that is not the real issue at hand. The real debate is about whether or not banning all bottled water sales is the right decision for this campus. It’s not. Environmentally, it would seem that banning all bottled water would reduce waste, but there are unseen consequences. First, it takes much more energy to make reusable water bottles than it does to make recyclable plastic water bottles. A 1994 article in “Environmental Management” demonstrated that you would need to use a standard, reusable plastic cup over 200 times in order for its energy impact — including dish washing — to be less than that of foam cups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Business Case for Zero Waste GM Blueprint Summarizes Waste-Reduction Strategies and Global Landfill-Free Program Updated: Feb
    The Business Case for Zero Waste GM blueprint summarizes waste-reduction strategies and global landfill-free program Updated: Feb. 28, 2018 DETROIT – Industrial facilities in the United States generate and manage about 7.6 billion tons of nonhazardous industrial waste in land disposal units annually, according the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. General Motors, however, reuses, recycles or composts 84 percent of its worldwide manufacturing waste and has 142 landfill-free facilities. The landfill-free program allows GM to reduce its waste footprint, while creating greater environmental awareness among employees and communities where it makes and sells cars and trucks. The GM workforce is consistently encouraged to find new ways to operate leaner and more efficiently. The following summarizes GM’s blueprint for attaining landfill-free leadership. It is intended to help companies of all sizes and industries reduce waste and create efficiencies. GM Program Overview GM achieved its first landfill-free site at our Flint Engine operations in 2005. The continued progress to 142 global sites has inspired an aspirational goal to have all manufacturing sites send zero waste to landfill. GM has more landfill-free facilities and recycles more waste from its worldwide facilities than any other automaker. GM uses a number of strategies to achieve corporate sustainability goals, but the underlying philosophy is thinking of waste as a resource out of place. The company’s zero-landfill facilities demonstrate this. Waste reduction also often enhances productivity, quality, efficiency and throughput. This is why GM merged its environmental efforts with its manufacturing sustainability goals. The result is a more sustainable company poised to provide products to global customers well into the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Electronic Waste Recycling & Disposal
    Electronics... We are surrounded by electronics – You buy them. at home, at work and at school. Almost everything we do involves electronic devices. You break them. Unfortunately, when they break it is often Now do the right thing. cheaper to buy new ones than to have them repaired. Plus, technology changes so Recycle them! rapidly they become obsolete in no time. Old Electronics? Recycle Them! Electronic waste is the fastest growing Almost four million pounds of electronic municipal waste in the U.S.* It is 2% of waste are discarded annually with less than America’s trash but 70% of our toxic waste! 30% being recycled (U.S.EPA 2012 data). Old tube TVs and computer monitors, LCD and plasma monitors contain lead, mercury and other toxic materials. Cell phones contain varying levels of lead, mercury, cadmium, and bromine.** For safe disposal, bring all electronics to a community collection center near you. Find one near you inside! White River Regional Solid Waste Management District P.O. Box 2396 | Batesville, AR 72503 Safe Disposal of Electronic Waste Phone: (870) 793-5233 | Fax: (870) 793-4035 [email protected] | WhiteRiverSWMD.org Community Drop-Off Centers Serving Cleburne, Fulton, Independence, Izard, in North Central Arkansas *US EPA, Common Wastes & Materials – eCycling. Jackson, Sharp, Stone, Van Buren, White and ** e-Cycle.com Woodruff counties in north central Arkansas. Why Not Landfill Recycle These Electronics: White River District Electronics? TVs, VCRs, DVD Players, Cell Phones Collection Centers All Computers, Components & Accessories Lead, mercury, cadmium and bromine are Cleburne County iPads, iPods, MP3s, Tablets, E-Readers Heber Springs Sanitation Department present in many electronics.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing out Waste: a Design Team Guide for Buildings
    Uniclass A42: N462 CI/SfB (Ajp) (T6) Designing out Waste: A design team guide for buildings LESS WASTE, SHARPER DESIGN Halving Waste to Landfill “ Clients are making construction waste reduction a priority and design teams must respond. This stimulating guide to designing out construction waste clearly illustrates how design decisions can make a significant and positive difference, not only through reducing environmental impact but also making the most of resources. It’s a promising new opportunity for design teams, which I urge them to take up.” Sunand Prasad, RIBA President 1.0 Introduction 6 Contents 2.0 The case for action 8 2.1 Materials resource efficiency 10 2.2 Drivers for reducing waste 13 3.0 The five principles of Designing out Waste 14 3.1 Design for Reuse and Recovery 18 3.2 Design for Off Site Construction 20 3.3 Design for Materials Optimisation 23 3.4 Design for Waste Efficient Procurement 24 3.5 Design for Deconstruction and Flexibility 27 4.0 Project application of the five Designing out Waste principles 28 4.1 Client brief and designers’ appointments 31 4.2 RIBA Stage A/B: Appraisal and strategic brief 32 4.3 RIBA Stage C: Outline proposal 34 4.4 RIBA Stage D: Detailed proposals 38 4.5 RIBA Stage E: Technical design 40 5.0 Design review process 42 6.0 Suggested waste reduction initiatives 46 6.1 Design for Reuse and Recovery 48 6.2 Design for Off Site Construction 50 6.3 Design for Materials Optimisation 51 6.4 Design for Waste Efficient Procurement 52 6.5 Design for Deconstruction and Flexibility 53 Appendix A - The Construction Commitments: Halving Waste to Landfill 56 Appendix B - Drivers for reducing waste 57 Written by: Davis Langdon LLP ◀ Return to Contents This document provides information on the key principles that designers can use during the design process and how these Section 2.0 principles can be applied to projects to maximise opportunities Case for action – Presents to the construction industry the to Design out Waste.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduce Reuse Recycle Compost
    Loyola is committed to waste reduction as part of our sustainability efforts. For more information on how you can help reduce waste on campus, please review this summary of available programs. Reduce • Eliminate Disposables – Get out of the habit of single-use-items. With a set of reusable products (cutlery, mug, water bottle, bag), you can cut down on plastics and save money. • Sustainable Purchasing - Take time to implement thoughtful purchasing practices to conserve resources and save the university money. o Life-Cycle Considerations – Before you bring something to campus, think about the full impact of its use. How much energy or water will it consume? Is there a way to recycle it when it’s not needed? o Third-Party Certified – Considering purchasing equipment or materials that meet reputable certifications. o Change Your Use – Always print double-sided. Avoid purchasing what you don’t need. Eliminate packaging materials where you can. • Green Move-In – Consider what you bring to campus. Don’t bring ‘one-off’ or delicate items that become someone’s problem to dispose of. For more information on Sustainable Purchasing use the ‘Guide to Green Purchasing at Loyola’ or talk to Loyola’s Purchasing Department. Reuse • In Your Department – Many times we have materials that others can use. Set up a re-use center to share office supplies, conference left-overs, or other common materials. • Think Green and Give – At the end of each school year, Loyola student donate tons of clothes and household goods through this program in the Residence Halls. LUC.edu/thinkgreenandgive • Biodiesel Program – Loyola ‘upcycles’ waste vegetable oil into vehicle fuel, biosoap, and other products.
    [Show full text]
  • Urbanization of the Salt Plains: Early Industry and Material Culture of the Kauffman Neighborhood
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Anthropology Department Theses and Dissertations Anthropology, Department of Summer 6-2021 Urbanization of the Salt Plains: Early Industry and Material Culture of the Kauffman Neighborhood June Weber University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/anthrotheses Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Weber, June, "Urbanization of the Salt Plains: Early Industry and Material Culture of the Kauffman Neighborhood" (2021). Anthropology Department Theses and Dissertations. 68. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/anthrotheses/68 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Department Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Urbanization of the Salt Plains: Early Industry and Material Culture of the Kauffman Neighborhood By June Weber A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts Major: Anthropology Under Supervision of Professor Effie Athanassopoulos Lincoln, Nebraska June 2021 Urbanization of the Salt Plains: Early Industry and Material Culture of the Kauffman Neighborhood June F. Weber, M.A. University of Nebraska, 2021 Advisor: Effie Athanassopoulos Up until now there has been limited analysis and interpretation of the archaeological collections from excavations conducted on the UNL campus. Similarly, the historic development of this area of Lincoln has not been addressed fully in previous works. Overall, we lack a greater understanding of the historic material culture of the Great Plains region.
    [Show full text]