4 ms·

It is one of the few tangible things we do envirnmentally. Its all about intent and feelings. Honestly I would be happy if people would just make it to a trash

It is one of the few tangible things we do envirnmentally. Its all about intent and feelings. Honestly I would be happy if people would just make it to a trash can instead of the roadside or ocean. Imho even recycling is mostly useless. The return, both environmental and economic, on everything but metal recycling is abysmal. Most plastic and paper processes are lucky to break even, with a few exceptions (hdpe comes to mind).

kw71 9y ago
I didn't know that plastic like PE is worth money (my local garbage service manages to sell it) but cardboard has been worth as much as steel for a long time now.
canes123456 9y ago
Both things you mention are interrelated. People want to feel like they are doing something tangible and we waste time and money on recycling even when it doesn't work. Stop recycling and calling blue apron to complain about waste. Instead spend that time calling your congress person to start a carbon tax or to stop farm subsidies. Doing something that feels like it helps is worse than doing nothing. At least when you do nothing, you know it.
- freeflight 9y ago
  >Stop recycling and calling blue apron to complain about waste. Instead spend that time calling your congress person to start a carbon tax or to stop farm subsidies. Sorry, but I can't really agree with that line of thinking because it's basically throwing any and all personal responsibility out of the window. While pushing for better/smarter regulation is an important part of the whole process, it's only one part of the whole process that involves many different parts. On an individual basis recycling might only add up to a rounding error but the same could be said about many improvements in energy efficiency, the point here being that many of these rounding errors add up to a bigger actual impact. If everybody thinks recycling is a waste of time and they should instead just lobby for carbon tax, then barely anybody will be more conscious about their waste production and how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. It's estimated that by 2050 there will be more plastics swimming in the ocean than actual fish, we are on a steady course of turning this planet into a massive garbage dump.
  - canes123456 9y ago
    > If everybody thinks recycling is a waste of time and they should instead just lobby for carbon tax, then barely anybody will be more conscious about their waste production and how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. A huge percentage of it is a waste of time. It is a small positive for paper and aluminum. If this doesn't make people feel like they are doing their part, this adds up to a tiny benefit. However, it probably does make people feel like they are doing more then they actually are. The net effect could easily be negative. For many other things, recycling has no effect or a small negative effect on carbon. This does not add up to a bigger actual impact. It is only negative. > if everybody thinks recycling is a waste of time and they should instead just lobby for carbon tax, then barely anybody will be more conscious about their waste production and how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. I am saying this would be a good thing. People are way too conscious about their recycling when it has almost zero impact. Doing literally almost anything else, has a bigger impact in most cases. > how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. I don't know how you decide is needless waste but a carbon tax will cause everyone decide what they need vs don't need. Regardless, there is no chance that needless waste is as much of an issue as farm subsidies or global warming.

kw71 9y ago

I didn't know that plastic like PE is worth money (my local garbage service manages to sell it) but cardboard has been worth as much as steel for a long time now.

canes123456 9y ago

Both things you mention are interrelated. People want to feel like they are doing something tangible and we waste time and money on recycling even when it doesn't work. Stop recycling and calling blue apron to complain about waste. Instead spend that time calling your congress person to start a carbon tax or to stop farm subsidies. Doing something that feels like it helps is worse than doing nothing. At least when you do nothing, you know it.

freeflight 9y ago
>Stop recycling and calling blue apron to complain about waste. Instead spend that time calling your congress person to start a carbon tax or to stop farm subsidies. Sorry, but I can't really agree with that line of thinking because it's basically throwing any and all personal responsibility out of the window. While pushing for better/smarter regulation is an important part of the whole process, it's only one part of the whole process that involves many different parts. On an individual basis recycling might only add up to a rounding error but the same could be said about many improvements in energy efficiency, the point here being that many of these rounding errors add up to a bigger actual impact. If everybody thinks recycling is a waste of time and they should instead just lobby for carbon tax, then barely anybody will be more conscious about their waste production and how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. It's estimated that by 2050 there will be more plastics swimming in the ocean than actual fish, we are on a steady course of turning this planet into a massive garbage dump.
- canes123456 9y ago
  > If everybody thinks recycling is a waste of time and they should instead just lobby for carbon tax, then barely anybody will be more conscious about their waste production and how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. A huge percentage of it is a waste of time. It is a small positive for paper and aluminum. If this doesn't make people feel like they are doing their part, this adds up to a tiny benefit. However, it probably does make people feel like they are doing more then they actually are. The net effect could easily be negative. For many other things, recycling has no effect or a small negative effect on carbon. This does not add up to a bigger actual impact. It is only negative. > if everybody thinks recycling is a waste of time and they should instead just lobby for carbon tax, then barely anybody will be more conscious about their waste production and how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. I am saying this would be a good thing. People are way too conscious about their recycling when it has almost zero impact. Doing literally almost anything else, has a bigger impact in most cases. > how to prevent more needless waste from being produced, which is just as much of an actual issue (if not even more) as farm subsidies or carbon production. I don't know how you decide is needless waste but a carbon tax will cause everyone decide what they need vs don't need. Regardless, there is no chance that needless waste is as much of an issue as farm subsidies or global warming.