The world, as we know it, is becoming “greener.”

Communities across the country, and especially here in Maine, are working diligently to reduce their carbon footprint, the amount of solid waste produced going to incinerators or landfills, and seeking out alternative forms of energy, such as windmills.

Saco has been the front-runner in York County when it comes to the “Green Revolution,” boasting its own windmill, solar heating systems located atop the police station, a “green” transportation facility, curbside recycling and various other programs, such as efficient lightbulb giveaways.

Businesses, too, are looking to go green. The volume of recycling in Maine has increased both on the residential side, but also commercial.

Strangely, even the recession being felt in the global economy has had a “green” result. The volume of trash being produced nationally has significantly dropped. Gas prices remain low, but recent data shows public transportation ridership is at an all-time high locally and nationally.

So, knowing that being green is important in our society, it came as a bit of a shock last week that a supposedly environmentally-friendly company might penalize communities for not producing enough trash.

According to a report by Staff Writer Tammy Wells, Sanford has been “underproducing” trash for consumption by the Maine Energy Recovery Company in Biddeford. The town is contractually held to 10,500 tons, a mark it hasn’t hit in years.

So, instead of a “at-a-boy” from Casella, Sanford received a bill for $109,000. According to Maine Energy General Manager, Sanford isn’t alone. Numerous communities within the Maine Energy system did not meet their quotas, and received letters saying as much.

As Robbins said: “We’ve been contemplating this for awhile. This year we took a look at it. A lot of communities under-delivered.”

Under-delivered? Huh?

How can a business that ranks slightly below recycling and far above landfilling in the state’s solid waste hierarchy see producing less trash as under-delivering, a contractually bad thing?

Apparently, this is yet another confirmation that it is all about the money.

Compare Maine Energy to Ecomaine, the quasi-municipal incineration facility in Portland. Ecomaine encourages its participating communities to recycle, thus reducing the tonnage.

Sanford is going to try to get “forgiveness” for its lack of trash, but I don’t see it happening. I suspect the other communities involved here will have the same result.

I understand that Maine Energy is a business. It is beholden to its parent company, Casella Waste, and its stockholders.

But, in the current world, shouldn’t the company be willing to work with communities when they “under-deliver?” Is it possible that holding communities to standards established before recycling was a greater imperative would be a better economic and business plan that penalizing them?

We all hope that less trash is produced. It is the only way to keep our few landfills from overflowing, and perhaps it might help Maine Energy handle the volume of trash it is already receiving. Many of the odor issues the company experiences is from not being able to efficiently burn what it receives, thus negative pressure failures occur.

I hope that Robbins and his cohorts can consider this. Taking in less trash might not be fiscally the best thing going, but, for our environment and world, it could be.

— Contact Publisher Drew McMullin at 282-1535, Ext. 326 or  dmcmullin@gwi.net.