5 ms·

There is nothing wrong with landfill or incineration. Unlike metals, recycling plastic is not economic. So converting it to energy by incineration is a pretty

There is nothing wrong with landfill or incineration. Unlike metals, recycling plastic is not economic. So converting it to energy by incineration is a pretty good option. In the future if the oil supplies will dwindle it might be economically viable to recycle plastic and then people (or maybe robots) will excavate those landfills for material. It is us taking care of the future generations. Isn't it what all those Gertas of the world want?

avip 7y ago
Orthogonally, claiming and getting paid to provide service X while not in fact providing it, would usually come across as fraud.
- bzbz 7y ago
  Right. I think parent commenter hasn't read the article, and doesn't realize that these are _recycling_ companies, not just your average tech office with a blue bin in the snack room.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    It's a white lie. It's not really the garbage seller's business whether it is recycled into fire or buried. They aren't harmed. It's a violation of HN etiquette to accuse people not not reading the articles.
    - dictum 7y ago
      > It's not really the garbage seller's business whether it is recycled into fire or buried. They aren't harmed. Apparently the companies use artful language to imply certain processes without specifically naming them: "All three companies make green promises on their websites and in promotional videos, using buzzwords like "sustainability" and "environmental solutions." One Waste Connections video goes as far as to say, "sustainability and becoming more green … have been hallmarks and backbones of Waste Connections from the day we formed the company." But if any company specifically contracted for recycling and did not recycle, it is a breach of contract with possible repercussions. Recycling requires that the materials return to the market at a certain point, but it does not require a short window of time between collection and processing of materials. This is where some creative lawyering can go a long way: if you can say that you're going to process it at some indefinite point in the future, you're not comitting fraud unless the contract defines an specific time limit, specific technical processes, and an specific destination for the processed materials. I don't think commercial contracts that meet all these criteria are viable at scale.
  - Thorrez 7y ago
    golemiprague might not be saying anything about those specific companies, just saying that in general, there's not a reason for us to want to recycle plastic.
TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
Incineration means needlessly releasing greenhouse gasses.
- adambard 7y ago
  The incinerators used in this case (claim to) recapture the emissions from the incineration. However, they do leave some amount of toxic ash, which requires special disposal.
  - jcampbell1 7y ago
    They don't do CO2 capture. They don't have some magic technology that doesn't exist. They capture toxic particulates.
- jcampbell1 7y ago
  I agree. These are perfect prepackaged blocks for carbon storage. Why would you go the other way?
- ars 7y ago
  No it doesn't. They don't just burn it and release the heat, they use the heat to generate electricity. It's a direct 1 to 1 reduction in oil usage. Burning plastic is what we should be doing.
  - La1n 7y ago
    It would be if a 100% of energy came from oil. I would argue that burning trash is cheap and thus makes adoption of renewable energy sources lower.
dictum 7y ago
> Isn't it what all those Gertas of the world want? You can defend a position without snidely representing other positions, similar or opposite to yours, but if you choose to make so, make sure you've correctly named your target.
rwallace 7y ago
The article claims if you incinerate plastic with scrubbers, that prevents air pollution. I've seen it elsewhere claimed incinerating plastic still produces a lot of really nasty air pollution. Which is correct?
- whenchamenia 7y ago
  The answer, as usual, is 'it depends'. Many will just burn it at incredibly high temp and hope for the best, while many advanced scrubbing systems exist, with various effectiveness, usually correlated with cost. The incentives are obvious on both sides.
La1n 7y ago
I think the "Gertas of the world" want decisions to be made by not only the fact if something is economically viable, but by what's good for the environment.
benj111 7y ago
"It is us taking care of the future generations" And I suppose pumping co2 into the atmosphere is to keep future generations nice and warm? And we're helpfully clearing the rainforests for them too.

avip 7y ago

Orthogonally, claiming and getting paid to provide service X while not in fact providing it, would usually come across as fraud.

bzbz 7y ago
Right. I think parent commenter hasn't read the article, and doesn't realize that these are _recycling_ companies, not just your average tech office with a blue bin in the snack room.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  It's a white lie. It's not really the garbage seller's business whether it is recycled into fire or buried. They aren't harmed. It's a violation of HN etiquette to accuse people not not reading the articles.
  - dictum 7y ago
    > It's not really the garbage seller's business whether it is recycled into fire or buried. They aren't harmed. Apparently the companies use artful language to imply certain processes without specifically naming them: "All three companies make green promises on their websites and in promotional videos, using buzzwords like "sustainability" and "environmental solutions." One Waste Connections video goes as far as to say, "sustainability and becoming more green … have been hallmarks and backbones of Waste Connections from the day we formed the company." But if any company specifically contracted for recycling and did not recycle, it is a breach of contract with possible repercussions. Recycling requires that the materials return to the market at a certain point, but it does not require a short window of time between collection and processing of materials. This is where some creative lawyering can go a long way: if you can say that you're going to process it at some indefinite point in the future, you're not comitting fraud unless the contract defines an specific time limit, specific technical processes, and an specific destination for the processed materials. I don't think commercial contracts that meet all these criteria are viable at scale.
- Thorrez 7y ago
  golemiprague might not be saying anything about those specific companies, just saying that in general, there's not a reason for us to want to recycle plastic.

TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago

Incineration means needlessly releasing greenhouse gasses.

adambard 7y ago
The incinerators used in this case (claim to) recapture the emissions from the incineration. However, they do leave some amount of toxic ash, which requires special disposal.
- jcampbell1 7y ago
  They don't do CO2 capture. They don't have some magic technology that doesn't exist. They capture toxic particulates.
jcampbell1 7y ago
I agree. These are perfect prepackaged blocks for carbon storage. Why would you go the other way?
ars 7y ago
No it doesn't. They don't just burn it and release the heat, they use the heat to generate electricity. It's a direct 1 to 1 reduction in oil usage. Burning plastic is what we should be doing.
- La1n 7y ago
  It would be if a 100% of energy came from oil. I would argue that burning trash is cheap and thus makes adoption of renewable energy sources lower.

dictum 7y ago

> Isn't it what all those Gertas of the world want? You can defend a position without snidely representing other positions, similar or opposite to yours, but if you choose to make so, make sure you've correctly named your target.

rwallace 7y ago

The article claims if you incinerate plastic with scrubbers, that prevents air pollution. I've seen it elsewhere claimed incinerating plastic still produces a lot of really nasty air pollution. Which is correct?

whenchamenia 7y ago
The answer, as usual, is 'it depends'. Many will just burn it at incredibly high temp and hope for the best, while many advanced scrubbing systems exist, with various effectiveness, usually correlated with cost. The incentives are obvious on both sides.

La1n 7y ago

I think the "Gertas of the world" want decisions to be made by not only the fact if something is economically viable, but by what's good for the environment.

benj111 7y ago

"It is us taking care of the future generations" And I suppose pumping co2 into the atmosphere is to keep future generations nice and warm? And we're helpfully clearing the rainforests for them too.