For the last time, and only because I'm starting to feel sorry for you:
Read posts # 5, 9, 11, 14, 16, 19, 21, 23, and 24. They all very clearly say the same thing -- #19 says it in more detail.
Your original statement that "CuSO4... [is] Far more environmentally friendly than Ferric Chloride." is nonsense on 2 levels:
First, it simply isn't true. Sorry, I can't explain it within the confines of this blog -- it's just that simple. Copper Sulfate is NOT more "environmentally friendly" than ferric chloride -- by any measure!! PERIOD!
Second, it is irrelevant to the topic of this conversation anyway! The question isn't which etchant is better of worse for the environment, because they're both relatively benign as far as the environment goes.
IT'S THE PRODUCT, THE END RESULT OF THE ETCH, THE FRIKKIN COPPER that's the problem! It doesn't make one darn bit of difference which etchant you use because the end product, Copper salts, is the same! In this context, and assuming you know something about chemistry, I can't understand your obsession with ammonium persulfate!
This is basic basic BASIC inorganic chemistry!
Now that I've said the same thing TEN TIMES, I'm done!