Education will help improve recycling

To the editor:

The current residential recycling method is working, as far as it goes. Those who are willing to participate are using the three crates that are provided and the pickup schedule is adequate. Changing a schedule or providing a single, large cumbersome container will not increase the amount of recycling by making the process easier or more user friendly.

Where I work, my department recycles about 99 percent of our scrap paper and cardboard through an outside recycling service, eliminating about 10 cubic yards of landfill material every week. My company, however, does not recycle much else. I see the large truck-size dumpsters filled with cardboard boxes headed to a landfill; I see most of the office paper and other paper products going the same way. There is no recycling program set up to handle the vast amount of aluminum cans, plastic and glass bottles, steel food cans, electronic equipment and florescent light bulbs.

A little effort could save a vast amount of landfill space, generate income, and save on dumpster fees.

If every commercial and industrial company in the valley followed a recycling plan, landfills would last longer and the environment would benefit from fewer pollutants.

Education and a good marketing effort should be directed to these large users where the bulk of the landfill and recyclable materials are generated. Help make Nevada and Las Vegas a cleaner and better place to live.

Jim Steffner

LAS VEGAS

Water use

To the editor:

The Aug. 24 edition of the Review-Journal featured two letters related to the Southern Nevada Water Authority’s plans to draw upon a portion of our state’s unused, naturally renewable groundwater resources. Unfortunately, neither letter accurately depicted the facts.

Drawing upon the unused groundwater supplies of east-central Nevada will not decimate the environment. The office of the Nevada state engineer, whose responsibilities include protecting groundwater basins, uses the amount of natural recharge to “budget” how much water is available for use annually. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has simply requested the state engineer’s permission to use a portion of the basin’s available water.

Use of this renewable resource will be supervised by the state engineer, while sensitive species and the habitats that support them are protected by both Nevada and federal wildlife agencies. Southern Nevada’s request for available groundwater from outside its own valley is not unusual. Interbasin transfers have been requested by other Nevada communities and approved by the state engineer for more than 100 years. We are simply asking that the law apply equally in this case.

With regard to ocean desalination as a “silver bullet” solution, the Southern Nevada Water Authority recently spearheaded a regional research project analyzing potential options to aid the ailing Colorado River. While desalination is one measure that could provide some additional water for our region, it would be foolhardy to consider an option dependent upon a Colorado River exchange as a viable alternative to tapping existing, renewable groundwater supplies in our own state.

Some would have you believe that Southern Nevadans have done nothing to conserve; this is simply not true. Multi-tiered conservation rates are already in place, and even now local water providers are evaluating whether additional changes are needed. Last year, this community consumed 18 billion gallons less water than we did in 2002. Southern Nevada is now recognized as a national leader in water conservation. Our residents should be congratulated, not admonished, for their efforts.

Ken Albright

LAS VEGAS

THE WRITER IS DIRECTOR OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES FOR THE SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITY.

Gifted kids

To the editor:

It was nice to read something intelligent about the sorry state of public education available for gifted children. (Review-Journal, Aug 26). Nevada is not alone, unfortunately.

My children attended public school in California with no gifted program available for them. They were lucky; I was able to homeschool them. Essentially, they graduated from homeschool/high school at the age of 12; subsequently, they graduated from college at the age of 16.

They are both productive adults, unlike many gifted children who, often due to boredom, become problem children which carries into their adulthood.

Again, thank you for a well-written and accurate editorial.

Ruth Cornelius

LOGANDALE