4 ms·
So, would it not be more environmentally friendly to bury, not recycle, plastics back into the earth?
by dillonmckay 7y ago
So, would it not be more environmentally friendly to bury, not recycle, plastics back into the earth?
- mgbmtl 7y agoThat would become a technical debt, especially considering we do very little to reduce our use of plastics, which seems like the obvious thing to do before any other change.
- dillonmckay 7y agoWell, do you think we would use less plastic if we stopped decycling it and trying to find additional uses for it? Treat it as waste, not a raw material input for an inferior good?
- gruez 7y agoRecycling is carbon neutral - it doesn't cause co2 to be released nor does it sequester any. You can argue that the process itself generates co2, but so does producing virgin plastic.
- dillonmckay 7y agoHow is recycling plastic carbon neutral? The amount of energy required to chew/melt/process the plastic, the energy to transport the recyclables to the processing facility, and then the transportation costs to ship the decycled material to the buyer(s)?
- gruez 7y ago>You can argue that the process itself generates co2, but so does producing virgin plastic. It's carbon neutral compared to the alternatives.
- dillonmckay 7y agoCan you explain that to me? I do not understand the concept of comparative neutrality.
- gruez 7y agoRecycling generates co2, but so does producing virgin plastic. If you're not cutting plastic use completely, you're going to produce co2 either way. Assuming that recycling doesn't produce more co2, we're coming out ahead. I realize calling it "carbon neutral" is probably not the best word to describe it (flying a plane isn't carbon neutral just because it produces the same amount as driving).
- dillonmckay 7y agoRecycling plastic produces more CO2 than producing virgin plastic, I don’t understand assuming otherwise.