4 ms·

This is pretty much what the environmentalists were preaching when I was growing up. Not sure why to be honest. In retrospect it certainly seems like "but the l

This is pretty much what the environmentalists were preaching when I was growing up. Not sure why to be honest. In retrospect it certainly seems like "but the landfills!" is the lesser of all evils.

nostrademons 7y ago
Probably a combination of NIMBYism and poor land-use planning. Back when many of these landfills were created, they were on the outskirts of urban areas, where "outskirts" = 15-20 miles away. After the wave of suburbanization in the 1950s-80s, suddenly those outskirts are right next to someone's home. Now it's a crisis. Most people's conception of what land is available is limited to their local metropolitan area, and they have no idea just how abundant land is in the hinterlands. You could probably bury all the nation's garbage in the craters left inside the Nevada Proving Grounds, which is a radioactive wasteland anyway. And shipping contains of garbage 500 miles from LA, Vegas, and SF to Northern Nevada looks a lot more appealing when you've gotten used to shipping it 10,000 miles to China.
- whatshisface 7y ago
  Shipping over water is cheaper than shipping over land.
  - nostrademons 7y ago
    True, but probably not 20x true.
  - SomeOldThrow 7y ago
    Only if you don’t price in environmental impact. Trains are much more efficient than ships in this regard and can be powered purely by green energy.
    - nkurz 7y ago
      > Trains are much more efficient than ships in this regard Is that really true? At least for CO2 emissions, other sources seem to imply the opposite, with ships being much more efficient than trains: https://truecostblog.com/2009/11/23/is-local-really-greener-than-global/ https://truecostblog.com/2009/11/23/is-local-really-greener-...
      - SomeOldThrow 7y ago
        I'm referring to an electric train powered by green energy—an ideal, not a current reality. As far as I am aware, shipping lanes are just as difficult to green as planes are, maybe even more so.
        Godel_unicode 7y ago
        We know how to make very large nuclear powered ships. You could fit an astonishing amount of waste on something the size of the Nimitz, especially if it didn't need to make task group speeds.
        SomeOldThrow 7y ago
        Hmm, fair point.
        cr1895 7y ago
        >an ideal, not a current reality. Dutch trains run on sustainable power. https://www.ns.nl/en/about-ns/sustainability/energy/sustainable-energy.html https://www.ns.nl/en/about-ns/sustainability/energy/sustaina...
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    If you live next to a harbor, sure. Lots of places in North America are not near the coast.

This is pretty much what the environmentalists were preaching when I was growing up. Not sure why to be honest. In retrospect it certainly seems like "but the landfills!" is the lesser of all evils.

nostrademons 7y ago

Probably a combination of NIMBYism and poor land-use planning. Back when many of these landfills were created, they were on the outskirts of urban areas, where "outskirts" = 15-20 miles away. After the wave of suburbanization in the 1950s-80s, suddenly those outskirts are right next to someone's home. Now it's a crisis. Most people's conception of what land is available is limited to their local metropolitan area, and they have no idea just how abundant land is in the hinterlands. You could probably bury all the nation's garbage in the craters left inside the Nevada Proving Grounds, which is a radioactive wasteland anyway. And shipping contains of garbage 500 miles from LA, Vegas, and SF to Northern Nevada looks a lot more appealing when you've gotten used to shipping it 10,000 miles to China.

whatshisface 7y ago
Shipping over water is cheaper than shipping over land.
- nostrademons 7y ago
  True, but probably not 20x true.
- SomeOldThrow 7y ago
  Only if you don’t price in environmental impact. Trains are much more efficient than ships in this regard and can be powered purely by green energy.
  - nkurz 7y ago
    > Trains are much more efficient than ships in this regard Is that really true? At least for CO2 emissions, other sources seem to imply the opposite, with ships being much more efficient than trains: https://truecostblog.com/2009/11/23/is-local-really-greener-than-global/ https://truecostblog.com/2009/11/23/is-local-really-greener-...
    - SomeOldThrow 7y ago
      I'm referring to an electric train powered by green energy—an ideal, not a current reality. As far as I am aware, shipping lanes are just as difficult to green as planes are, maybe even more so.
      - Godel_unicode 7y ago
        We know how to make very large nuclear powered ships. You could fit an astonishing amount of waste on something the size of the Nimitz, especially if it didn't need to make task group speeds.
        SomeOldThrow 7y ago
        Hmm, fair point.
      - cr1895 7y ago
        >an ideal, not a current reality. Dutch trains run on sustainable power. https://www.ns.nl/en/about-ns/sustainability/energy/sustainable-energy.html https://www.ns.nl/en/about-ns/sustainability/energy/sustaina...
- jessaustin 7y ago
  If you live next to a harbor, sure. Lots of places in North America are not near the coast.