3 ms·

I think this can only be a good thing. A depressing percentage of people have no idea that "recycling" is, for the most part, a lie, and that up until now most

I think this can only be a good thing. A depressing percentage of people have no idea that "recycling" is, for the most part, a lie, and that up until now most things you "recycled" just went in a dump like everything else, except it was a dump in China. A wake-up call as to the reality of the situation should encourage better practices.

quotemstr 9y ago
"Recycling is largely ineffective for substances that aren't aluminum" is just the tip of the iceberg as far as truths we never mention in polite company. I'm looking forward to a phase change into a society that's more honest with itself.
- QAPereo 9y ago
  And glass. And steel. And precious metals. As for an honest society, do you have some historical reference point, or are you just aiming for utopia?
  - convolvatron 9y ago
    don't forget copper and alloys of it. and reclaimed woods that we can't afford to grow any longer. and wood fiber products. and hdpe. and lead. no. its not like we can really close the loop, but there are a lot of things that are perfectly viable to melt down and reuse. in my shop, and quite a lot of others, we have a crucible and a rolling mill for metal scraps of any sufficiently valuable material.
    - ars 9y ago
      > and reclaimed woods that we can't afford to grow any longer. and wood fiber products. and hdpe. Copper (all metal) yes. But reclaimed wood costs more than alternatives. I looked into it once - the premium I would have to pay to keep wood out of a landfill was just unrealistic. Wood fiber is only worth it from industrial plants that create it in quantity, and without contaminants. HDPE is not worth recycling - it costs more than just making it fresh. I propose just burn it for energy (and thus reduce oil use). Then use that oil to make other HDPE. The lifecycle works out better that way.
    - quotemstr 9y ago
      You're right. Scrap metal collection, architectural salvage, and so on are all important forms of reuse. I was being a little glib and talking mostly about the kind of multiple-plastic-bin consumer goods recycling that's most visible.
  - ars 9y ago
    Not glass. Yes metal. Glass is so worthless for recycling, all they do with it is crush it and use it to cover landfill each night to keep down rodents and dust. That's considered "recycled". > As for an honest society, do you have some historical reference point, or are you just aiming for utopia? For some reason greenwashing is really prevalent among people who should know better (policy makers, scientists, environmentalists). And regular people desperately want recycling to be a real thing so that they feel better about themself. It's a perfect match, leading to the situation we have now.
    - yorwba 9y ago
      Broken glass may be essentially worthless, but intact bottles can be cleaned and refilled. Since that actually happens, I imagine the logistics involved to be somewhat cost-effective compared to making new glass (or maybe it's all fueled by subsidies).
      - ars 9y ago
        > but intact bottles can be cleaned and refilled Only a very small percent of them. You are probably thinking of soda bottles, and yes, they used to do that. But today it's plastic bottles (and I'm glad for it!). Milk in glass bottles is all but dead. Most glass these days is jars for olives, and salsa, and tomato sauce, and other random things, where there is just not scale to collect them. It's not anymore all uniform, every jar is a difference size. Beer from the very largest companies might still work, although I think it's mostly cans now. But there are a lot of small producers, and routing the glass back to them would be too expensive. We haven't even touched on how there is basically no point in doing it anyway. The entire crust of the planet is basically made of glass. We can't run out without dismantling (discrusting? :) the planet. It's also harmless to dispose of, just crush it first. Recycle metal, burn plastic and paper (for energy!! not for disposal!!), crush and landfill glass and other organics. Those are the most environmentally friendly options.
        QAPereo 9y ago
        It takes far more energy to make new glass than to clean and reuse old glass. Even melting existing glass is valuable, as it lowers the melting point of the raw materials and therefore energy expenditure. Until glass manufacture uses solar or wind or something similar, it’s an issue. The problem isn’t a lack of silica, it’s yet more waste of energy and pollution purely screwing is over.
- daodedickinson 9y ago
  Heard a comedian joke recently about how he read Ted Kaczynski's stuff and it made sense until he got to the part about recycing being fake. I couldn't laugh.
- gisely 9y ago
  And I'm looking forward to a phase change to a society where 100% waste recycling is the norm. When a society aspires to be much better than it is currently, should we really be surprised that this leads to various forms of hypocrisy? This seems to be the only ecosystem supporting planet in our solar system, so a little over-eager hope about our ability to keep it healthy for a long term future might not be completely irrational.
adrianN 9y ago
There is a reason why "recycle" comes last in "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle". Unfortunately "Reduce" and "Reuse" are bad for the economy...
- emj 9y ago
  I wish it was possible to create a tax that would make reduce and reuse more profitable, I think EU has a legislation that makes producers responsible for recycling their products and packing material maybe extend that. It feels ripe for abuse.
- Endy 9y ago
  The way one ecology prof I had put it was along the line of, "The marketing guys wasted a lot of paper and plastic and ink to come up with the slogan 'Reduce, Reuse, Recycle' - and all the producers heard was "RECYCLE, Reuse, reduce" - with that last word being whispered. He then went on to talk about waste materials, about food waste and the related ecological damage, the lack of composting, and similar topics. American business doesn't work if people are encouraged to reduce (or as the average American will see it, 'deprive' ourselves). Reusing means that less products get sold, so the producers create one-use items with guaranteed obsolescence, and then slap a licensing agreement on top so that you don't actually own the item you paid for. And people wonder why I'm anti-corporate.

quotemstr 9y ago

"Recycling is largely ineffective for substances that aren't aluminum" is just the tip of the iceberg as far as truths we never mention in polite company. I'm looking forward to a phase change into a society that's more honest with itself.

QAPereo 9y ago
And glass. And steel. And precious metals. As for an honest society, do you have some historical reference point, or are you just aiming for utopia?
- convolvatron 9y ago
  don't forget copper and alloys of it. and reclaimed woods that we can't afford to grow any longer. and wood fiber products. and hdpe. and lead. no. its not like we can really close the loop, but there are a lot of things that are perfectly viable to melt down and reuse. in my shop, and quite a lot of others, we have a crucible and a rolling mill for metal scraps of any sufficiently valuable material.
  - ars 9y ago
    > and reclaimed woods that we can't afford to grow any longer. and wood fiber products. and hdpe. Copper (all metal) yes. But reclaimed wood costs more than alternatives. I looked into it once - the premium I would have to pay to keep wood out of a landfill was just unrealistic. Wood fiber is only worth it from industrial plants that create it in quantity, and without contaminants. HDPE is not worth recycling - it costs more than just making it fresh. I propose just burn it for energy (and thus reduce oil use). Then use that oil to make other HDPE. The lifecycle works out better that way.
  - quotemstr 9y ago
    You're right. Scrap metal collection, architectural salvage, and so on are all important forms of reuse. I was being a little glib and talking mostly about the kind of multiple-plastic-bin consumer goods recycling that's most visible.
- ars 9y ago
  Not glass. Yes metal. Glass is so worthless for recycling, all they do with it is crush it and use it to cover landfill each night to keep down rodents and dust. That's considered "recycled". > As for an honest society, do you have some historical reference point, or are you just aiming for utopia? For some reason greenwashing is really prevalent among people who should know better (policy makers, scientists, environmentalists). And regular people desperately want recycling to be a real thing so that they feel better about themself. It's a perfect match, leading to the situation we have now.
  - yorwba 9y ago
    Broken glass may be essentially worthless, but intact bottles can be cleaned and refilled. Since that actually happens, I imagine the logistics involved to be somewhat cost-effective compared to making new glass (or maybe it's all fueled by subsidies).
    - ars 9y ago
      > but intact bottles can be cleaned and refilled Only a very small percent of them. You are probably thinking of soda bottles, and yes, they used to do that. But today it's plastic bottles (and I'm glad for it!). Milk in glass bottles is all but dead. Most glass these days is jars for olives, and salsa, and tomato sauce, and other random things, where there is just not scale to collect them. It's not anymore all uniform, every jar is a difference size. Beer from the very largest companies might still work, although I think it's mostly cans now. But there are a lot of small producers, and routing the glass back to them would be too expensive. We haven't even touched on how there is basically no point in doing it anyway. The entire crust of the planet is basically made of glass. We can't run out without dismantling (discrusting? :) the planet. It's also harmless to dispose of, just crush it first. Recycle metal, burn plastic and paper (for energy!! not for disposal!!), crush and landfill glass and other organics. Those are the most environmentally friendly options.
      - QAPereo 9y ago
        It takes far more energy to make new glass than to clean and reuse old glass. Even melting existing glass is valuable, as it lowers the melting point of the raw materials and therefore energy expenditure. Until glass manufacture uses solar or wind or something similar, it’s an issue. The problem isn’t a lack of silica, it’s yet more waste of energy and pollution purely screwing is over.
daodedickinson 9y ago
Heard a comedian joke recently about how he read Ted Kaczynski's stuff and it made sense until he got to the part about recycing being fake. I couldn't laugh.
gisely 9y ago
And I'm looking forward to a phase change to a society where 100% waste recycling is the norm. When a society aspires to be much better than it is currently, should we really be surprised that this leads to various forms of hypocrisy? This seems to be the only ecosystem supporting planet in our solar system, so a little over-eager hope about our ability to keep it healthy for a long term future might not be completely irrational.

adrianN 9y ago

There is a reason why "recycle" comes last in "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle". Unfortunately "Reduce" and "Reuse" are bad for the economy...

emj 9y ago
I wish it was possible to create a tax that would make reduce and reuse more profitable, I think EU has a legislation that makes producers responsible for recycling their products and packing material maybe extend that. It feels ripe for abuse.
Endy 9y ago
The way one ecology prof I had put it was along the line of, "The marketing guys wasted a lot of paper and plastic and ink to come up with the slogan 'Reduce, Reuse, Recycle' - and all the producers heard was "RECYCLE, Reuse, reduce" - with that last word being whispered. He then went on to talk about waste materials, about food waste and the related ecological damage, the lack of composting, and similar topics. American business doesn't work if people are encouraged to reduce (or as the average American will see it, 'deprive' ourselves). Reusing means that less products get sold, so the producers create one-use items with guaranteed obsolescence, and then slap a licensing agreement on top so that you don't actually own the item you paid for. And people wonder why I'm anti-corporate.