4 ms·

We need reducing, not recycling. Recycling is an amazingly inefficient and polluting solution to a problem that should not exist (in its current magnitude) in a

by avip 8y ago

We need reducing, not recycling. Recycling is an amazingly inefficient and polluting solution to a problem that should not exist (in its current magnitude) in a sanely-managed planet.

hutzlibu 8y ago
"We need reducing, not recycling." Why not more of both?
- 2muchcoffeeman 8y ago
  Reducing and reusing do not rely on external factors. You can do that yourself right now and it’s completely within your control.
  - hutzlibu 8y ago
    Yes, but did I say anything else? I let my nephews tear down broken old laptops for parts reuse, for example ... quite fun and useful. And since I am in germany, I can also add more to the recycling part. We sort old glas by colors - they do get recycled. Old paper - same. And even plastic to some extent, even though I know that most of that gets burned. But some of it actually does get recycled. Our ordinary trash bin is quite small.
benj111 8y ago
Well it is "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" and in that order
frafra 8y ago
Let's not overgeneralize. There are many recycling that do not export garbage elsewhere and they are profitable. Recycling metals is easy and works well for example; it is not inefficient nor dirty. Avoid producing waste, reuse, recycle, incinerate it, final disposal (or reuse in concrete etc): that's the chain to follow, and each part is important.
Apes 8y ago
Reduce is fine to a point, but populations are increasing faster than any policy of reduction can keep up with. Reuse is scalable, but is being completely ignored in our current disposable consumerism environment. There is almost no focus on reuse in the US. If you want to get groceries, you don't take a container to fill, you buy your food wastefully prepackaged. Fast food restaurants don't give you a plate and glass, they give you disposable wrapping and a plastic cup. Even clothes are meant to be disposable - most people don't repair their shoes, they just throw them out and buy new ones. I don't see this mentality changing any time soon, and it's really sad. We should start changing companies for the disposal costs of their products and packaging, rather than hiding the cost in environmental damage.
- JetSpiegel 8y ago
  In many European countries, single use plastic bags for groceries almost disappeared overnight after a flat tax of 10 cents was slapped on it, I think they used less than 50% in 1 year or something like that. The supermarket sold some sturdier and bigger bags for like 50 cents, who can be reused for years and they even replace it for you if the bag is ruined for some reason, but using this was socially frowned upon. After the tax, it is socially acceptable to reuse bags now. It is possible to change this on a society level, and the change can be vary fast on our current hyper-connected economy. A similar thing happened with lunches. Before 2008, people would never carried their own lunches from home, it was a total social faux-pa. The mix of economic downturn (even if the same people did not feel it), healthy lifestyles are trendy and the classic one-upmanship between who would bring the fanciest lunch lead to droves of people carrying their lunches on public transit almost overnight, special stores that sell thermos and special bags, and hundreds of cook books.

by avip 8y ago

We need reducing, not recycling. Recycling is an amazingly inefficient and polluting solution to a problem that should not exist (in its current magnitude) in a sanely-managed planet.

hutzlibu 8y ago

"We need reducing, not recycling." Why not more of both?

2muchcoffeeman 8y ago
Reducing and reusing do not rely on external factors. You can do that yourself right now and it’s completely within your control.
- hutzlibu 8y ago
  Yes, but did I say anything else? I let my nephews tear down broken old laptops for parts reuse, for example ... quite fun and useful. And since I am in germany, I can also add more to the recycling part. We sort old glas by colors - they do get recycled. Old paper - same. And even plastic to some extent, even though I know that most of that gets burned. But some of it actually does get recycled. Our ordinary trash bin is quite small.

benj111 8y ago

Well it is "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" and in that order

frafra 8y ago

Let's not overgeneralize. There are many recycling that do not export garbage elsewhere and they are profitable. Recycling metals is easy and works well for example; it is not inefficient nor dirty. Avoid producing waste, reuse, recycle, incinerate it, final disposal (or reuse in concrete etc): that's the chain to follow, and each part is important.

Apes 8y ago

Reduce is fine to a point, but populations are increasing faster than any policy of reduction can keep up with. Reuse is scalable, but is being completely ignored in our current disposable consumerism environment. There is almost no focus on reuse in the US. If you want to get groceries, you don't take a container to fill, you buy your food wastefully prepackaged. Fast food restaurants don't give you a plate and glass, they give you disposable wrapping and a plastic cup. Even clothes are meant to be disposable - most people don't repair their shoes, they just throw them out and buy new ones. I don't see this mentality changing any time soon, and it's really sad. We should start changing companies for the disposal costs of their products and packaging, rather than hiding the cost in environmental damage.

JetSpiegel 8y ago
In many European countries, single use plastic bags for groceries almost disappeared overnight after a flat tax of 10 cents was slapped on it, I think they used less than 50% in 1 year or something like that. The supermarket sold some sturdier and bigger bags for like 50 cents, who can be reused for years and they even replace it for you if the bag is ruined for some reason, but using this was socially frowned upon. After the tax, it is socially acceptable to reuse bags now. It is possible to change this on a society level, and the change can be vary fast on our current hyper-connected economy. A similar thing happened with lunches. Before 2008, people would never carried their own lunches from home, it was a total social faux-pa. The mix of economic downturn (even if the same people did not feel it), healthy lifestyles are trendy and the classic one-upmanship between who would bring the fanciest lunch lead to droves of people carrying their lunches on public transit almost overnight, special stores that sell thermos and special bags, and hundreds of cook books.