Pop-up compost project: reframing the processes and perceptions of community composting in New Brunswick, NJ
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The sanitary response to trash eliminates refuse from both the individual’s and community’s consciousness, transporting waste “away” to unimagined landscapes.(1) While municipal waste hauling companies provide a crucial service for American communities, the carting off of trash from neighborhoods to distant places perpetuates an inability to separate and cycle waste streams into more valuable materials.(2) With many communities lacking engaging waste sites integrated into the fabric of their localities, most American places have lost the ability to creatively manage their trash. (3) This paper identifies the need for incorporating additional waste cycling sites into communities as a way to address America’s unhealthy relationship with waste. It reviews New York City’s Compost Project, an initiative popularizing the closed-loop waste cycle of composting “by giving New Yorkers the knowledge, skills, and opportunities they need to produce and use compost.”(4) Three selected case studies from this project offer a variety of composting methods and compost site experiences - specific criteria informing the design of innovative urban waste landscapes. After reviewing case studies in community composting, this project shifts to proposing a composting initiative for the city of New Brunswick, NJ. Entitled, POP UP Compost Project,(5) this proposal envisions a three-step system including 1) organic collection sites, 2) compost cycling locations, and 3) strategies for re-investing finished compost back into the city. Integral to this proposal is the compost drum - a mobile organic collection unit that retrofits a 55-gallon drum with a “waste window.” Organic collection sites featuring the compost drum will be integrated at New Brunswick Community Farmers Market locations while compost cycling sites will be located at existing community gardens throughout New Brunswick. In many ways, this project is a response to the work of landscape architect, Mira Engler, and her efforts to expand the scope of landscape architecture to include public waste sites. These spaces challenge residents to rethink their connection with waste, demonstrating the process of turning materials deemed valueless into valuable while deconstructing fears and guilt associated with waste. Connecting Engler’s research to the community composting movement, this project seeks to integrate composting sites as dialectic places - messy yet clean, functional yet beautiful(6) - in New Brunswick, NJ. (1) Robin Nagle, Picking Up: On the Streets and Behind the Truck with the Sanitation Workers of New York City, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013), 3. (2) Mira Engler, Designing America’s Waste Landscapes, (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), xxi. (3) Edward Humes, Garbology: Our Dirty Love Affair with Trash, (London: Penguin Books, 2013), 4. (4) “NYC Compost Project Overview”, Department of Sanitation New York (DSNY). Accessed March 20, 2016, www1.nyc.gov/assets/dsny/zerowaste/residents/nyc-compost-project.shtml. (5) In the title, P.O.P. stands for “people operated power” while POP UP refers to the network of temporary organic collection sites operating during market hours in New Brunswick, NJ. (6) Mira Engler, Designing America’s Waste Landscapes, (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), xxi.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».