Burying our garbage in landfills is a waste of resources, but it’s also a convenient way to get rid of stuff we don’t need or want. If there were clear alternatives to trashing our resources, would we use them? The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) believes the answer is yes.

The DEP has finalized new rules that provide a permitting pathway for operations that process source separated materials – stuff like food waste or recyclable plastics that are not mixed with other wastes in the general trash stream. Source separated materials are distinguished from “waste”, so qualifying facilities will not be permitted as solid waste facilities. Previously a facility that sought to collect discarded material for recycling or some other reuse was considered a solid waste facility. This created barriers to the productive use of materials like food waste. The new regulations are a good step toward better management of our discarded materials.

Under the new rules, finalized November 23, DEP has created three size-based categories:

1. Small facilities (no permit required)
2. General permit facilities (certain activities permitted by-right)
3. Facilities that will require a new Recycling, Composting, and Conversion (RCC) permit

The good news is that these rules create a permitting pathway for anaerobic digestion (AD) facilities. AD is a process in which organic material, like food waste, is processed in an airtight container to create a gas similar to natural gas (high in methane). AD facilities can use the gas to fuel energy generators to create electricity and heat that can be used onsite or sold in the energy market.

AD facilities, if properly sited and appropriately operated, offer a win-win by managing food waste and generating a renewable gas for energy production. Rather than putting our food waste into a landfill where it does more harm than good, the energy in the food can be efficiency recovered for productive use.

“But what about composting?” you may be asking. DEP’s goals, as stated in the current draft Solid Waste Master Plan, include diverting 350,000 tons of organic waste per year from landfills. Some of this will be accomplished by AD facilities, but some diversion will be accomplished by composting. The new rules clarify which operations are permitted by DEP and which are permitted by the Department of Agricultural Resources (DAR).

Whether we create high quality fertilizers and soil amendments through composting, or energy and fertilizer through AD, we will be diverting organic material from landfill disposal. DEP’s new rules are a step in the right direction to better manage our resources for economic advantage and environmental gain.

With every innovation in the 20th century, one pattern stands out: where technology advances, a rise in public concern follows. From HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey to wireless devices, new technology gives rise to new questions and new concerns. This is certainly true of nanotechnology – a topic on which I’ve written extensively, and which has been the subject of vigorous debate.

Last month, at the first ever conference of the Sustainable Nanotechnology Organization in Washington DC, Michail Roco of the National Science Foundation, and architect of the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative provided a response. He said, “every industrial sector is unsustainable…and nanotechnology holds the promise of making every one of them sustainable.”

It’s my belief that that is true: nanotechnology, or the ability to manipulate matter at a scale of one billionth of a meter, has far-reaching implications for the improvement of sustainable technology, industry and society.

Already, it is being used widely to enable more sustainable practices. Safer manufacturing, less waste generation, reusable materials, more efficient energy technologies, better water purification, lower toxicity and environmental impacts from chemotherapy agents to marine paints are all current applications of nanotechnology. There is no reason for this technology to develop in an unsustainable manner.

In the past, a lack of foresight has resulted in costs to society – people, businesses, and governments, and— that could have been avoided by proactive efforts to manage risks. Today, the tools to develop safer technologies and less harmful products exist. Let us not miss this opportunity.

The opportunity for emerging technologies and cutting edge materials to improve our quality of life, and decrease our impact on the planet is compelling. However, we know from past experience that novel materials can have unforeseen impacts. Brominated flame retardants, for example, added to consumer products to reduce their flammability have been detected in household dust, and in people and polar bears. We now have to phase out these chemicals, and introduce new ones.

My just released book, Nanotechnology Health and Environmental Risks Second Edition explains how we can manage the risks while gaining the benefits of this exciting enabling technology with applications that sound so whiz bang they could be science fiction, not current technology. Through a combination of screening risk analysis, life cycle thinking, and iterative analysis, better decisions can be made early in the product life cycle. Chapters contributed by esteemed colleagues in fields of nanotoxicology (Richard Pleus), exposure assessment (Thomas Peters), environmental assessment (J. Michael Davis), and risk perception (Ann Bostrom and Ragnar Lofstedt) describe the cutting edge science and emerging approaches in the field. The developments in the field since the first edition, in 2008, are many and our understanding has improved significantly.

CLF Ventures is working with a variety of public and private organizations to guide their efforts to be proactive in addressing the risks of emerging nanoscale materials and nanotechnologies, while our understanding continues to grow, and our regulatory structures develop. As with all types of innovation, the need for confidence about the safety of the products and demonstration of the benefits is critical to adoption. The potential benefits of nanomaterials and nanotechnologies are transformative and mission-advancing; their impacts must be addressed in order to achieve their benefits.

In 2011, CLF Ventures, the strategy-consulting arm of CLF, received a grant from the EPA to help two New England fishing/whale watching vessels replace the aging, inefficient engines on their vessels with cleaner-burning, more efficient four-stroke diesel engines. In this video, Captain Brad Cook of the Atlantic Queen II and Captain Chris Charos of Captain’s Fishing Parties reveal how the EPA grant and CLF Ventures enabled them to update their vessels’ technology, reducing emissions and substantially cutting their fuel use:

The EPA’s National Clean Diesel Funding Assistance program is designed to reduce air pollution and exposure to diesel fumes by covering up to 75% of the cost of an engine upgrade or repower. Replacing an outdated engine with the clean-burning technology used by Captain Brad and Captain Chris reduces asthma-causing particulate matter emissions by 63 percent and smog-producing nitrogen oxide emissions by 40 percent.

The program also cuts down on greenhouse gas emissions by improving efficiency and reducing fuel use by up to 14 percent. Fuel use is a serious concern for the fishing industry. A 2005 report published in AMBIO revealed that in 2000, the industry consumed about 13 million gallons of fuel, or 1.2 percent of global consumption. If the fishing industry were a country, it would be the world’s 18^th-largest consumer of oil—on par with the Netherlands. Fishing is also one of the only industry sectors to consistently become less fuel-efficient in recent years. With declining stocks sending fishermen farther from shore, this problem will only become more severe without significant investments and improvements in technology. Programs like EPA’s Diesel Emissions Reduction Program play an important role in greening the fishing fleet and helping to make fishing more sustainable.

The program isn’t just good for the environment; it’s also good for fishermen. A more efficient engine can save a fisherman 9,500 gallons of fuel per year, cutting fuel costs and increasing profit margins. Crew aboard these vessels reduce their exposure to harmful diesel fumes, which were recently classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organization and placed in the same category as deadly toxins like asbestos and arsenic.  Consumers asking for sustainable options will appreciate the reductions in emissions and fuel use, too, and recreational fishermen and whale watchers aboard vessels with new engines can enjoy a quieter, cleaner ride.

Still, new engines can only go so far in cleaning up the fishing fleet. The industry is built on technology that made sense decades ago, when fuel was cheap, fish were more plentiful close to shore, and consumers weren’t demanding sustainable seafood choices. Down the line, greening the fleet will mean rebuilding it from the water up and introducing lighter, safer vessels that inherently use less fuel.

How does a community balance the potential costs of siting clean energy projects with the economic benefits they provide? What are the local economic realities of hosting distributed clean energy generation facilities and energy efficiency projects in a community? CLF Ventures explored these questions and others in a recent webinar we co-sponsored with the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) and the Massachusetts Municipal Association’s (MMA) Massachusetts Municipal Energy Group.

The first in a three-part series CLF Ventures is co-hosting this summer and fall, the August 15 webinar featured a presentation by James McGrath, Park and Open Space Program Manager for Pittsfield, a Massachusetts Green Community that has hosted several large-scale solar projects and implemented robust, community-wide energy efficiency programs. He spoke about how to initiate clean energy projects, the advantages of clean energy at the local level, and strategies to manage the most common roadblocks in implementation.

The webinar series is targeted to municipal officials and volunteers who are already engaged in clean energy and energy efficiency issues or interested in learning more about how to site and finance clean energy facilities and programs in their communities. Building on themes explored in CLF Ventures’ earlier work with MassCEC on siting land-based wind energy projects, the webinar series gives participants an opportunity to learn first-hand from municipal leaders and technical experts as they share their experiences implementing clean energy and energy efficiency projects across Massachusetts.

Upcoming webinars on September 12 and October 24 will explore how to engage the public when siting solar and wind energy projects and the ins and outs of financing clean energy through power purchase agreements. For more information or to register for upcoming webinars, email liz.carver@clf.org.

Warren (where I live) has become the first municipality in the state of Rhode Island to lease town-owned land to a farmer. The Warren Town Council unanimously agreed to lease two acres of land at the Community Farm and Gardens to Bleu Grijalva, founder and executive director of New Urban Farmers. The New Urban Farmers is a non-profit organization that works to preserve and restore the environment by creating sustainable agricultural systems by increasing healthy food access while nurturing minds in the cities of Pawtucket, Central Falls, and surrounding areas by eliminating barriers to healthy food and empowering low-income individuals, families, and at-risk-youth with education and collaboration. It believes that a community that grows together grows together.

Urban agriculture can play an important role in creating a more livable, carbon resilient, healthier, economically vibrant, and environmentally sustainable town — when smart policies are put in place — and this is just what CLF is doing now with the announcement of the Growing Green report. By addressing New England’s regional food system, CLF can begin to make New England more resilient to the impacts of climate change already underway. CLF and CLF Ventures are working together to shape and foster the development of a robust New England regional food system.

What exciting news for urban farmers! Mr. Grijalva will spend the next decade growing berries, setting up an orchard, making honey, and start growing mushrooms (a wooded, dark area is perfect). Part of the vision is to teach young children about local farming, sustainability, and organics.

This is real boon for urban agriculture in our state!

Urban agriculture holds great promise for Boston.

This post was coauthored by Melissa Hoffer & Jo Anne Shatkin.

We are excited to share with you the news that today CLF and CLF Ventures released a report that, for the first time, details the economic development potential for urban agriculture in Greater Boston, assesses its environmental and health co-benefits, and examines current market and policy barriers to expanded food production in Greater Boston. The report‘s findings confirm that urban agriculture can play an important role in creating a more livable, carbon resilient, healthier, economically vibrant, and environmentally sustainable city—if we put smart policies in place and encourage market development for Boston grown foods.

Download a free copy of the report here: http://clf.org/growing-green/

The City of Boston has taken important steps over the past two years to advance urban agriculture, and new businesses are taking root, including City Growers, a Mattapan-based farming business that is featured in this report. There is a palpable sense of excitement about the potential of this new urban vision for agriculture for communities; possibilities abound. But CLF and CLF Ventures believe it is more than possible— it is a necessity, and an urgent one at that as we face the challenges of climate change, an obesity epidemic, lack of availability of healthy foods in many communities, and a fragile economy.

The report found that converting as few as 50 acres of vacant or underutilized land around Boston into agricultural production would spur job creation, improve access to healthy, local, fresh food, and reduce environmental harms. Key findings of the report include:

• Land is available. 50 acres – an area the size of Boston Common – is a small portion of the vacant or underutilized land available in Boston.
• Urban farms would stimulate the economy by creating jobs. 50 acres of urban agriculture in Boston will likely generate at least 130 direct farming jobs and may generate over 200 jobs depending on actual business characteristics and revenue.
• Healthy, local and affordable food. 50 acres in agricultural production would provide enough fresh produce to feed over 3,600 people over a six-month retail season. If the produce is used to prepare healthy school lunches in Boston Public Schools, 50 acres could provide more than one serving of fresh produce for each lunch served to a student eligible for free or reduced school lunch over a six month period. If 800 acres of potentially available City-owned land were put into agricultural production, the food needs of approximately 10 percent of Boston’s total population could be fully satisfied during a six-month retail season.
• Significant environmental impacts. Urban agriculture in Boston will result in a net reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 50 acres of properly managed soils would sequester about 114 tons of cabon dioxide (CO2) per year and may result in an additional CO2 reduction of up to 4,700 tons per year.
• Community adaptation. No less than 6,000 new temperature records were set during the recent March 2012 heat wave, and more than 40,000 have been set for the year-to-date. Meanwhile, the July 2011-June 2012 period was the warmest 12-month period of any 12-months on record for the contiguous U.S., with the first half of 2012 being the hottest ever recorded. The International Energy Agency’s recent projection of a 10.8 degree F temperature increase over pre-industrial levels by the end of this century underscores the fact that a more decentralized food system will be necessary to enable our communities to better adapt to changing climate conditions, including the impacts of more frequent severe weather. Urban agriculture is a part of this solution.

As Jo Anne said in the press release announcing Growing Green, it’s clear that even 50 acres of sustainable agriculture on available land would be an economic stimulus and environmental resource for Boston. While we focused on a 50 acre test scenario, these conclusions are scalable across New England. Imagine how vibrant New England would be like with a robust and sustainable regional food system.

In addition to the potential benefits, the report also considers the policy and market barriers to fully realizing the potential of urban agriculture, examining the ways in which promoting urban agriculture will require city and state involvement and key needs for such involvement. Such barriers include the need for policies that provide affordable access to land, one of the key market barriers for both new and experienced farmers; strategies to reduce the risks associated with the Commonwealth’s hazardous material cleanup law; improved access to high quality compost; and better financing options to overcoming prohibitive capital and operating costs, amongst other findings.

Our ongoing work seeks to link urban agriculture to the larger regional food system, and focuses on how to overcome some of the barriers we have identified.

Boston is ideally positioned to play a lead role in coordinating with the Massachusetts Food Policy Council, other New England states, and cities around the region to build a vision for a New England regional food system and make it happen. Boston is emerging as a national leader in urban agriculture innovation, and can be a voice for the benefits of urban agriculture and as one of the region’s largest consumers, help to build the market for regionally grown food.

For more resources on this topic:

Find a copy of the report here: www.clf.org/growing-green/
Find an infographic detailing the report here: http://bit.ly/clfgrowinggreen
To read more about CLF’s Farm & Food Initiative, click here: http://www.clf.org/our-work/healthy-communities/food-and-farm-initiative/

Innovation – a word commonly used, and commonly associated with big money and big business. But as 15-year-old Jack Thomas Andraka, recent winner of an Intel prize for his cancer detection technology, demonstrated: innovation is unfolding in unlikely places. We should nurture these innovations, and we must do more to leverage these breakthroughs.

If you haven’t already, I suggest viewing this passionate and inspiring video of Jack Andraka winning the Intel Gordon E. Moore prize for medicine. It is a rare treat to experience the sheer joy of a 15 year old being recognized for an innovation some spend careers pursuing. In this case, Jack’s idea turned disruptive technology was for a simple, elegant, inexpensive and accurate cancer detection technology. By coating single walled nanotubes with antibodies and attaching them to a paper strip, Jack found he could accurately identify pancreatic cancer cells, enabling wide screening for deadly cancers.

Despite not knowing this young scientist, I am proud of him for his stellar accomplishment. He picked an important problem, and focused on an innovative technological solution. Society will undoubtedly benefit from the availability of a simple screening test that can be widely adopted.

He’s not the first to put nanotubes, a manufactured nanoscale material that is a rolled up tube of carbon, into paper, nor is he the first to coat them. But, he has succeeded in leveraging the benefits of nanotechnology for society’s benefit.  If the technology achieves its potential it will result in the widespread use of these strips in hospitals, doctor’s offices, and clinics.

Because of our name, CLF Ventures meets many entrepreneurs who have developed innovative ways to address society’s pressing problems. Through our networks, we are often able to help them gain market access, or make introductions. There is often resistance to adopting new approaches and technologies, particularly when adoption requires a shift in existing policies or infrastructure, as is often the case with clean or “green” technologies. It’s human nature to resist change and maintain the status quo: we like what is familiar. Yet, as Jack Andraka demonstrates, there are often great benefits associated with new technologies.

To that end, it is critical to support innovation, and to maintain openness to new ideas and options. Three things are critical to enabling this support.

1. There is a need to make adoption straightforward, to leverage the benefits for society and for the environment.
2. It is also important to balance the risks with the benefits, to consider the broader impacts of the inevitable disruption new technologies bring, and to manage those impacts to avoid adverse effects on health and the environment.
3. We need to ensure our resilience and ability to manage the unanticipated, and innovation enables our doing so.

Kudos to Andraka and to Intel for inspiring the changes.

CLF and CLF Ventures are proud to again co-sponsor the third annual Massachusetts Sustainable Economy Conference (SEC), April 30 at the Federal Reserve in Boston. I invite you to please come to the panel discussion I will moderate on the opportunities and barriers involved in cultivating Boston’s and the region’s urban agricultural sector, with some of the area’s leading entrepreneurs.

The brainchild of CLF Ventures Board Member Crystal Johnson, the Sustainable Economy Conference is an unparalleled opportunity to build bridges within and across Massachusetts’ government, business, academic, nonprofit, and community sectors to foster sustainable communities and a viable 21^st century economy. CLF and CLF Ventures are working to address barriers to the growth of urban and regional sustainable agriculture from market and policy perspectives. At CLF, we view sustainable agriculture in our cities and our region as a key component of a more carbon-resilient future for our region in the face of unprecedented climate change and its threats to our economy and way of life. We’ve met many compatriots at past Sustainable Economy Conferences and look forward to a great conversation about urban agriculture with panelists:

• Newly sworn in Agricultural Commissioner Greg Watson
• Head of Boston’s food initiative Edith Murnane
• Marketing coordinator of Holyoke’s Neustras Raices
• Entrepreneur Glynn Lloyd of City Growers

As a founding board member of the national Stewardship Action Council, I was fortunate to also participate in last week’s 25^th anniversary celebration of the Toxics Release Inventory and Environmental Conditions in Communities Conference, a gathering of national public and private leaders in sustainability. Before my panel discussion about building collaborative partnerships among state, non-governmental, and industry partners within the Stewardship Action Council, four members discussed how they interact with communities:

• Mike Wendt of 3M explained that “a crisis is a bad time to make new friends,” so at his Menomonie, Wisconsin facility, community engagement is embedded in the culture.
• Annette Russo of Johnson & Johnson described their new Procurement Sustainability Initiative to ensure their entire supply chain is focused on sustainable solutions for ingredients and packaging.
• West Liberty Foods HR Director Tara Lindsey linked that organization’s renovation of a neglected church into a day care facility as an initiative that both fostered employee retention within the company and benefited the community.

Stewardship Action Council members also had an opportunity to weigh in on EPA’s role in promoting sustainability leadership with Deputy Assistant Administrator in the Office of Policy Vicki Corman. It’s a sign of the changing times that industry, at least those leading organizations participating in SAC, are ahead of EPA in adopting measurement and reporting initiatives. EPA can provide national leadership and guidance to advance the practice of environmental stewardship, but would only confuse the marketplace if they were to develop their own standards in the already crowded voluntary sustainability standard realm. In our development of measurements for “Level 4” membership in the Stewardship Action Council, we identified over 200 “standards” under the umbrella of sustainability reporting.

The demand for sustainable solutions will be drivers for the 21^st century economy. The third annual Sustainable Economy Conference is designed to:

• Provide a platform to discuss new collaborations and partnerships for sustainable solutions within and across sectors
• Serve as a resource on cutting edge “sustainable thinking” through experiences, case studies, and showcases
• Promote diversity and inclusion to improve business performance in Massachusetts
• Provide effective tools and approaches for meeting the challenges of the changing global market and encouraging businesses to meet the new market expectations
• Promote an equitable and ecologically sustainable economy

I look forward to meeting you there.

Creative Commons image courtesy of BenandAsho on Flickr

We throw away a lot of food. Sometimes the scraps are inedible, like banana peels. Sometimes we forget about things in the refrigerator until we notice the smell. And sometimes our eyes are just bigger than our stomachs. Regardless of the reason, a lot of food scraps end up in our trash and ultimately the landfill. This is a wasted opportunity to realize environmental and economic benefits by using food scraps to improve soil health and generate renewable energy.

By diverting food scraps to other uses, such as generating energy and creating compost, we avoid the need to expand landfills in the state or transport waste long distances to out-of-state facilities. When food scraps and other organic matter decompose in landfills, they produce methane gas, a potent contributor to climate change. So diverting food scraps from landfills also helps us meet the state’s aggressive greenhouse-gas emission reduction goals.

To realize these benefits, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is supporting public and private investment in a new kind of infrastructure for managing organic materials. But for this new infrastructure to succeed, DEP and the project developers that will build and operate this infrastructure need to convince the public that food scraps are not garbage, but something else entirely.

The DEP is currently working on an action plan for managing Massachusetts’s organic waste. The state needs a plan, because it has set lofty goals to divert organic material from landfill disposal to be used in other processes. The state’s draft Solid Waste Master Plan calls for diverting 35% of food waste, estimated to be about 350,000 tons of material per year. This goal is echoed by the Clean Energy Results Program, which sets a further goal of 50 megawatts of installed capacity of renewable energy from aerobic and anaerobic digestion facilities by 2020. And let’s not forget the proposal to ban commercial food waste from Massachusetts landfills in 2014. These are great goals, because diverting organic material out of the solid waste stream provides opportunities for economic development that can improve the environmental impacts of solid waste management, and now DEP is developing the plan to make sure we get there.

The plan aims to ensure that organic “waste” isn’t wasted in a landfill. It calls for a few things:

• Gathering better and more current information about sources of food waste,
• Providing funding and technical assistance to work out the logistics of separating food waste from the actual trash, and
• Working with haulers to move this material to appropriate processing facilities.

There are also provisions for funding and technical assistance to facilitate the construction of additional processing infrastructure, like anaerobic digestion (AD) facilities, and to develop good markets for the resulting products.

Organics diversion presents an economic opportunity for cash-strapped municipalities to save money through reduced trash fees. It also allows developers – municipal or private – to generate revenue by using “waste” organics as inputs for marketable products like compost and other soil amendments and as a source of clean, renewable heat and electricity. At a time when municipal budgets are facing historic shortfalls and municipalities are seeking means of both cutting costs and creating revenue, this is surely a good thing.

DEP’s draft action plan is a progressive, proactive approach to organics management, but it’s missing something very important. It provides much-needed support and direction for people and organizations that are already proponents of better organic material management and will help project proponents navigate the technical and regulatory processes to achieve success. But what about the majority of people who likely have no idea that the DEP is interested in doing something dramatically different with organic waste?

This action plan and DEP efforts to date on this issue do little to address the very real need for public engagement and outreach to help citizens and businesses understand the good reasons for organics diversion. These include:

• Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions through improved methane utilization;
• Generating renewable energy from anaerobic digestion; and
• Producing nutrient-rich soil amendments through composting.

The intersection of waste management and energy development is more complex than either of these individual business sectors taken on their own. For instance, energy facilities such as anaerobic digesters, which use “waste” materials as inputs to generate energy, face the siting hurdles typically encountered by both energy and waste facilities. Public concerns with other renewable energy technologies, such as wind and solar, have emerged relatively recently, but communities and individuals have been fighting against landfills and transfer stations for a very long time.

Today, forward-thinking people and businesses are beginning to talk about “materials management” rather than “waste management,” and those on the inside know what we mean by that. But most people don’t currently make the distinction, especially when the materials in question are leftover food and other organics that can rot. In the case of a proposed anaerobic digestion facility, the result is often a contested siting process. While AD proponents see facilities that will produce clean energy and environmentally beneficial soil products, opponents are concerned about siting waste incinerators, trash transfer stations, and toxic sludge.

The DEP, along with other state agencies such as the Department of Agriculture and Department of Energy Resources, is pushing to change the way “waste” materials are managed in Massachusetts. This is a good thing for economic development and the environmental performance of our materials-based economy. However, many people will not readily accept the subtle changes in regulatory definitions that distinguish separated materials from mixed solid waste. With these changes, materials that formerly had to be permitted as solid waste (trash) and processed at a permitted solid waste facility are no longer legally considered trash, so they can be processed at a composting or AD facility without a solid waste permit. I’m very happy this distinction is being made for organic material, but I know that many other people will consider this just another form of garbage disposal.

An action plan to encourage better organic materials management through diversion to composting and digestion needs to include significant resources to engage stakeholders around the Commonwealth to have open and honest conversations about the wide-ranging benefits, the potential pitfalls, and what everyone needs to know to avoid problems.

There is no reason to continue to dump organic material into landfills and many reasons to get everyone on board with using this material to generate more economic value and more environmental benefits for Massachusetts. But we can’t just “dot the i’s and cross the t’s” on the permit applications; we have to engage with people and navigate the changes in a collaborative and productive way. Diverting organic material from landfills can lead to a host of economic, environmental, and community benefits, but anyone who thinks changing the system will be as easy as selecting a site, telling the neighbors about the benefits, and awaiting approval and praise is in for a rude awakening. CLF Ventures looks forward to working with communities and project proponents to engage in open, clear discussions of the real impacts and benefits of organics management facilities so that all stakeholders share the same understanding of the issues and speak with the same terminology.