Dear Senator Bingham,

I’m writing concerning a small but important part of the House Energy Bill (HR 4) that you are now considering as a member of the conference committee on energy legislation. Division A, Title VIII, Miscellaneous, Sec. 801

("Waste Reduction and Use of Alternatives") hands over $275,000 in taxpayer money to DOE, which in turn hands it over to a "research-intensive institution of higher learning with demonstrated expertise in the fields of fiber recycling and logistical modeling of carpet waste collection and preparation" to study the feasibility of burning post-consumer carpet in cement kilns as an alternative energy source.

In reality, Section 801 is a direct government subsidy to a single private researcher, at a single university in Georgia, whose work is undermining real recycling of carpet waste and adding to the already dangerous air emissions from cement kilns. It is a waste of taxpayer’s money and bad environmental policy.

I’d like to make you aware of some facts about Section 801:

* Section 801 was submitted by Rep. Nathan Deal of Georgia. Rep. Deal represents Dalton, Georgia, where 44% of the world’s carpets are now made. Rep. Deal has been candid about the fact that it was written for one researcher at Georgia Tech, Dr. Matthew Realff. For the past two years, Dr. Realff has been getting paid by private industry to do exactly the kind of research requested by Section 801.

* Section 801 undermines the recent Carpet Recycling Pact between the carpet industry,15 States and the EPA. Signed in January 2002, this national precedent-setting agreement calls for recycling 40% of carpet waste in 10 years. This pact discourages kiln burning of carpet and encourages real recycling. No cement plants are currently burning carpet, and the pact has capped kiln burning to a maximum of only about 4% of the current volume. Even this small amount of kiln burning is to be phased out at the end of the pact’s 10-year life. If you encourage the burning of carpet wastes in kilns, as Section 801 does, you make it that more difficult to reach the true recycling goals of the State-EPA-Industry pact.

* Section 801 increases dangerous air pollution from cement kilns. According to the EPA, cement kilns are already the third largest source of dioxin pollution in the country. Burning carpets in them will only make things worse because burning any petroleum-based, or chlorine-based product such as carpeting will produce dioxins. At a 2001 carpet industry meeting, EPA and state environmental officials stated that:

"There are reasonable emission and toxicity concerns about burning carpet that need to be addressed. Perhaps the greatest concern is related to carpet containing chlorine, e.g. PVC backed carpet, which has the potential to produce dioxins when subjected to combustion. (Additionally, there are some recent studies that show concern over flame retardants and the potential to form brominated dioxins in a combustion environment.)"

In addition to dioxins, the mercury loading of post-consumer carpet is highly variable and the high nitrogen content of nylon carpeting increases Nitrogen Oxide emissions. Section 801 promotes a crude technology that can only add to the already dangerous inventory of air emissions released from the smokestacks of cement kilns.

* Section 801 transfers the funding of Dr. Realff’s solitary research from industry to the public dole. Dr. Realff is in the second year of a three-year study of carpet burning in cement kilns, paid in large part by the cement and carpet industries. The project’s name is the "Regional Fiber Recycling System Design and Implementation

Incorporating Cement Production Facilities." In its first year, Dr. Realff received over $66,000 in cash and more than that in in-kind contributions from the likes of Blue Circle Cement, LaFarge and Milliken. If this research is already being funded by industry, why do taxpayers now have to pick up the tab?

It is my sincere hope that you will vote not to include Section 801 in the final version of the Energy Bill. It’s an extreme example of pork barrel, special interest, environmentally damaging legislation that needs to be given a prompt burial by you and the rest of the Conference Committee. Thank you.

Sincerely,