This abundant underdeveloped land also meant, it was assumed, that landfills could easily handle any increase in volume brought by a rapidly changing waste stream. By expanding landfill capacity, public officials assumed they could ignore waste generation issues. Expanding landfills became a yardstick of productivity. Most landfills in this period were little more than open pits. By the end of the 1950s, policy makers began promoting a more refined, and presumably environmentally benign, method of disposal, the sanitary landfill. Though more complex and costly than the open pit, the economics of the sanitary landfill remained an attractive means to offset public discontent about the hazards of land disposal. If the landfill had triumphed as the dominant method of getting rid of trash, the sanitary landfill became in turn the symbol of the most technically advanced form of that method.The sanitary landfill distinguished itself from the open dump primarily by its practice of covering the waste with “ a layer of earth at the conclusion of each day’s operation or at such more frequent intervals as may be necessary.” Sanitary engineers emphasized during the 1950s and 1960s that the sanitary landfill was a method based on the principles of engineering capable of eliminating any nuisances (odor problems, for example) “or hazards to public health or safety,” as opposed to simply burying the wastes without any additional intervention. Since the 1970s, the sanitary landfill remains the overwhelming disposal method of nearly every community. The conflicts over landfills are at their peak. Public officials have to concede that the days of land disposal are numbered. How to get rid of the garbage is a national dilemma.II. The Alternative By transforming waste materials into useable resources, recycling provides a way to manage solid waste while reducing pollution, conserving energy, creating jobs and build...
