Seems like it would be easier to make a smaller variety of waste products than to try and recycle it all. In my location, there’s no municipal (and I’m 6 miles outside the city anyway) plastic recycling. Rather than trying to set up recycling for umpteen different kinds of plastic bottles, bags, etc, why not just make cardboard water cartons rather than plastic bottles, paper bags instead of plastic bags? Seems like that would make recycling easier. Or at least the stuff would rot. We’d have to harvest more trees, I suppose. But at least trees grow back, whereas petroleum based products use a non renewable commodity. I don’t know, might be a bad idea. But it must be very difficult to set up recycling infrastructure for multiple products in a rural setting. I don’t think plastic and paper recycling is all that economically attractive as a business venture. And the govt can’t subsidize it in every little small town. Few people are going to sort, store a bunch of waste, and then drive 30 miles out of their way to find a place that recycles the stuff. So it gets landfilled. Not sure what the proper solution would be.
I have an interesting book called “Cradle to Cradle” which makes the case for recycling virtually everything. It quotes a US carpet manufacturer who uses only old carpet to make new.
During WW II there was a great shortage of many materials, and recycling was in full swing . Silk stockings discarded went into making parachutes, and tin cans and glass bottles were all recycled. What was then a national emergency has is now looming as an environmental necessity. Shortage of new materials will not be the driving issue here now…
Our city has 3 colored bins for waste for every residence ; Green for comostables, blue for recyclables, and black for garbage.
Over the last year we have had only1/3 of the bins put out for garbage the other 2/3 for recyclables and compostables.
The recyclables amount to 60,000 tons per year for the city. this is separated and sold. The compostables are turned into garden mulch and used by the parks department given back to homeowners or sold.
We put out 75 large bins in the last year and 50 of these were recycled or composted. We also have a deposit system on beverage containers which we can take to a depot for refund. This started years ago as litter control program. If you’ve ever driven across the Western US and saw the roadside littered with beverage containers you’ll understand the reason for the program. People still litter some, but the kids pick up the bottles; 10 cents for small cans and bottles and 20 cents for larger ones. It even includes milk cartons.
I take back $25 worth every three months.
Around here they were complaining about the market for recycled products being so bad now. Hard to get rid of the stuff they recycle and the rates are so low it’s difficult to stay in the black. We recycle everything we can but there is a limit. In the old days we used to incinerate a lot of it. Natures way of recycling. The city had a public incinerator that you’d dump your stuff into and everyone had a burning barrel to burn the papers once a week. Only singed my eye brows once or twice playing with the fire. Let’s work on filters and air cleaners and quit just dumping all this stuff in landfills.\
It used to be you’d go buy a spark plug and it might be in just a paper box from a bulk package. Now you buy a plug and its in indestructible plastic plus the cardboard, along with every other product. Do we really need to package all this stuff to make it impossible to steal or open?
I don’t argue that energy is relevant to cars, but I see how this discussion is really car related anymore. Can you bring it back on topic, please? Thanks.
I hear you! I think how much it would cost me to build an indestructible package like bulbs and wipers come in. Then I gotta buy Tupperware, but reusable stuff from the Chinese restaurant is free. Practicing saying I am retired and on a fixed income, and still pick up a penny if I see one!
@Scrapyard_John @ Docnick Agree biggest problem is recycleing plastics next biggest problem i rural area’s like I am in is lack or recylcing center’s within a reasonable distance. Also lot of people are to lazy to bother from what I see on the curb on pickup day. Another thing we don’t have is a deposit system as other area’s do witch I think is needed nationwide. Back to car’s I may be wrong { & it would not be the first time } but I think part of the petroliem refining leaves by product’s that is used in making plastic’s.
That is CLASSIC science denier.
Scientific theories are NEVER EVER PROVEN. They are only DISPROVEN. Scientific theories are based on SCIENTIFIC FACTS that lead scientists to theories. When climate change theory was first proposed it was complete rejected by the scientific community. So scientists all over the world have tried to disprove it…and the more they tried to disprove it the more they concluded the theory is sound. After 50+ years the science community is well on board with the climate change model. And if some other theory comes along that contradicts the Climate Change model they science community will try to disprove that one too. The Climate Change model may be superseded by some other scientific theory. But right now it’s the leading candidate. And the more people study it and try to disprove it, the more evidence is discovered it’s real and man made.
I know people who smoke who think the science on smoking is “socially driven”. Their argument is “I’ve been smoking for 40 years and I’m not dead yet.” Can’t argue with stupid.
Einstein’s theory of Relativity is just a theory…but you’re GPS wouldn’t work as accurately if his theory wasn’t applied to the calculations. The difference between being within 2 miles and 2 meters.
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
Denier or skeptic, judge me how you wish. We can post again in 50 years and then we’ll know for sure. Until then, as long as the media tries to blame every fire, flood, or rain cloud on man made climate change, I’ll probably remain skeptical.
And it is untrue that the entire scientific community, or even a huge majority, agrees that climate change is man made, despite the political and media rhetoric that you’ve heard.
This will probably really get you going. I feel the same skepticism towards the theory of evolution as well.
If you combine those two theories, you have to accept that over evolved apes are destroying the world. Sounds like a heck of a movie, though!
If your conclusion is that the Theory of Evolution says we are over-evolved, then you don’t understand the Theory of Evolution.
I’ll also note your misuse of the word “skeptic.” “Skeptic” does not mean “refuses to believe a claim even when presented with overwhelming evidence to the veracity of the claim.” A skeptic is someone who looks at the evidence and draws his own, evidence-based conclusion.
It is absolutely true that the vast majority of the relevant scientific community (and by relevant I mean people with degrees and/or experience in the field - no one cares what a research psychiatrist thinks of the climate even though she’s a scientist) has concluded that climate change is happening and that a large portion of it is caused by humans.
WRONG…Sorry but it is true. Besides MULTIPLE scientific journals and MULTIPLE articles from all over the world. You admit you don’t know the science or math to know if Climate Warming is actually real, but somehow you have this knowledge that the scientific community are all not on board with it. Only ONE so called news outlet is pushing that - Fox.
Keep living in your world - it must be nice there.
That may be your belief…fine. But don’t start quoting any SCIENCE or say that you know something about scientists to or the scientific process. Belief is one thing…science is something else.
And many enlightened religions (including Christian religions) believe in Evolution. It’s the ones who close their eyes and ignore any evidence that don’t.
.
Like you guys said, you have your beliefs, I have mine. Odd that your beliefs don’t instill anger in me like my beliefs seem to instill in you guys. And I don’t even unequivocally deny that climate change could be partially human caused. I do find it strange how every weather event known to man is now blamed on man made climate change, and I don’t buy the sky is falling mentality just yet.
Shadow, I’d have to see evidence before I’d agree with your stating I misused the word skeptic. I’ve seen no evidence that humans are causing climate change in its entirety or that it isn’t a natural event. What is the evidence that you base your belief on? I don’t consider “scientists say” or “the media says”, or even “the general consensus is” to be evidence.
I’m not closed minded about it. If you guys have facts and data that you’ve based your opinion on, I can be converted. What are they?
Probably because our scientific facts predict significant problems as a result of people operating on your beliefs, and we know we and our children are the ones who are going to be paying for your insistance on swaddling yourself in baseless beliefs rather than facing reality.
Then you’re intentionally closing your eyes to the evidence that’s readily available. I’m not going to bash my head against the wall trying to get you to see what you are doing everything in your power to ignore.
Then there is no standard of evidence you’d be willing to accept. You either rely on the scientists who have made it their life’s work to understand these things, or you learn to understand these things yourself. You show no inclination to do either, which explains why you prefer to believe without evidence rather than accept scientific consensus.
Again, all I asked for were the facts that you base your opinion on. I’m not judging you or your beliefs or blaming you for the demise of my grandchildren, but if you think that’s the proper way to go about the discussion, that’s up to you.
I’m not even a true denier of climate change, possibly partially man made. I do think the situation is over hyped by the media and the Al Gores. And I do think the climate is going to change with or without humans. Are we possibly accelerating it? I wouldn’t deny that either. Are we causing hurricanes and flooding and if we don’t change our ways pretty quick, the world is ruined? That part, I find to be a stretch.