NCPI Workmark
Articles in regional publications that pertain to a wide range of North Carolina-related topics.

Search Results


15 results for Refuse and refuse disposal
Currently viewing results 1 - 15
PAGE OF 1
Record #:
238
Author(s):
Abstract:
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission voted to send to public hearing a proposed modification of rules that govern waste disposal systems that do not discharge to surface waters.
Record #:
310
Abstract:
By 1993, 25% of waste is supposed to be diverted from the state's landfills. This may prove to be too much for local governments to handle, so a longer-lasting waste treatment program is needed.
Source:
Full Text:
Record #:
327
Author(s):
Abstract:
North Carolina cities and counties are facing an urgent problem that exists nationwide: how to dispose of waste safely and economically. The state is considering incineration and recycling, and forecasting the environmental impact of continued landfill use.
Source:
Full Text:
Record #:
1519
Author(s):
Abstract:
Compliance with waste reduction goals (set by SB 111 in 1989), private court challenges that erode local control, and concerns about long-term liability have combined to make garbage disposal a complex issue for local governments.
Source:
Southern City (NoCar Oversize JS 39 S6), Vol. 44 Issue 4, April 1994, p1,10-12, il, por
Record #:
2226
Author(s):
Abstract:
North Carolina's Solid Waste Management Act gave local governments flexibility in selecting their strategies for accomplishing the legislation's goals. Jenks analyzes the ways in which local governments implemented the mandate.
Source:
Popular Government (NoCar JK 4101 P6), Vol. 60 Issue 3, Winter 1995, p24-33, f
Record #:
2349
Author(s):
Abstract:
With the state's goal of a 40 percent reduction in waste entering landfills and incinerators by the year 2001, residents are learning to precycle, recycle, and compost.
Source:
Coastwatch (NoCar QH 91 A1 N62x), Vol. Issue , Mar/Apr 1995, p10-16, il Periodical Website
Record #:
2462
Author(s):
Abstract:
With solid waste increasing and landfills bulging, the state's counties and municipalities face hard choices in choosing types of disposal and recycling technologies, deciding on landfill locations, and finding money to pay for the programs.
Source:
Record #:
2718
Abstract:
Lonnie Poole is the CEO of Waste Management Industries in Raleigh, a $74 million company that is the largest of its kind in the state and one of the largest independents nationwide.
Record #:
3606
Author(s):
Abstract:
By January 1, 1998, all unlined landfills were mandated closed. This left local governments, including the cities of Elkin and Raleigh, seeking new places for solid waste disposal. Alternatives included shipping trash to regional landfills.
Source:
Southern City (NoCar Oversize JS 39 S6), Vol. 48 Issue 2, Feb 1998, p8, il
Record #:
5274
Author(s):
Abstract:
North Carolina has made progress in recycling waste; however, waste reduction varies among the state's one hundred counties, ranging from a high of 491.1 pounds per person in Montgomery County to a low of 4.17 in Robeson County. Coe and Hickman discuss reasons for this and practices municipalities and counties can use for waste reduction.
Source:
Popular Government (NoCar JK 4101 P6), Vol. 67 Issue 2, Winter 2002, p19-27, il, f
Full Text:
Record #:
6396
Author(s):
Abstract:
Trash disposal has become a major problem in many North Carolina cities and towns. A number of options exist, such as incineration, recycling, composting, and converting waste to energy; however, these options are often expensive and difficult to implement. O'Conner examines cities and counties, including Charlotte/Mecklenburg and New Hanover County, to assess their handling of trash disposal.
Source:
Southern City (NoCar Oversize JS 39 S6), Vol. 39 Issue 4, Apr 1989, p1,8-9, il
Record #:
16906
Author(s):
Abstract:
In this second in a series examining the state's trash, Ney discusses the problem with plastic bags. First introduced in grocery stores in the 1970s, now 90 percent of the shopping bags used worldwide are plastic and less than five percent are returned for recycling. Those thrown away endanger wildlife, emit toxic fumes if burned, contaminate soil, and pollute waterways. Ney discusses possible solutions.
Source:
Carolina Country (NoCar HD 9688 N8 C38x), Vol. 44 Issue 7, July 2012, p20, il
Full Text:
Record #:
16904
Author(s):
Abstract:
Ney begins a new series on waste that will examine some of the common items that are environmentally harmful, but are still tossed into landfills, and what can be done about them. North Carolinians throw away nine times more than they recycle. Ney discusses reasons why paper should be recycled.
Source:
Carolina Country (NoCar HD 9688 N8 C38x), Vol. 44 Issue 6, June 2012, p24, il
Full Text:
Record #:
22032
Abstract:
In 1991, the Environmental Protection Agency issued strict regulations concerning the design, location, operation, and closing of municipal solid waste landfills; and requiring that landfill sites be monitored for thirty years after their closing. The bulletin discusses estimating the costs of closure and post-closure care, analyzes the six mechanisms an operator may use to provide financial assurance for those costs, analyzes the probable impact of the financial assurance regulations on North Carolina local government operators of municipal solid waste landfills, and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the various mechanisms.
Source:
Local Finance Bulletin (NoCar KFN 7888 .L62), Vol. Issue 30, 1994, p1-9
Full Text:
Record #:
30161
Author(s):
Abstract:
One of the burdens of cities and urban areas is the collection of refuse and waste. In the choices for refuse disposal and management, North Carolina municipalities may see economic benefit and effective methodology in using the sanitary fill operation.