3 ms·
This looks like a tech-demo for the AI company, and not what you would actually want to do for a real recycling centre. Those arms are huge, heavy, and take a l
by jiggawatts 4y ago
This looks like a tech-demo for the AI company, and not what you would actually want to do for a real recycling centre. Those arms are huge, heavy, and take a lot of energy to move around. The mechanics of industrial-scale sorting of plastics is a solved problem: drop the waste off a ledge, and blast falling items with puffs of air from a row of nozzles. It's sufficient to nudge items just a little bit so that they fall down a different chute.
The #1 problem with recycling is that the cost to manufacture something like an aluminium can is about 5 cents. Recycling it has to be cheaper, otherwise it's a net harm to the environment. For example, if you spend just 10c on energy trucking the waste to a facility, sorting it, remelting it, and making a new can from the molten aluminium, then you've caused 5c more pollution than it would have required to just make a new one!
These energy balance equations are brutal. It's crazy difficult to recycle most packaging materials like plastics or aluminium cans cheaply enough to be beneficial. Currently, it's only truly worth it for more expensive metals like copper and steel, especially if they come in a bulk form. That's why you regularly see headlines like "90% of recycling goes into landfill".
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- midoridensha 4y agoThe problem with your cost analysis is that you probably aren't properly accounting for the all the environmental costs incurred in the 5c example of making a can from newly-mined aluminum. The costs of mining and other resource extraction are usually externalized (i.e., just dig a big hole in the ground, don't worry about environmental fallout, and let future generations deal with the problems caused). Recycling doesn't get this advantage usually.
- lozenge 4y agoThe cost analysis is done exactly how any corporation would do it. If you want externalised costs to be included then it has to be done by government policy. And good luck getting re elected if such a policy has a noticeable impact on people's lives.
- jiggawatts 4y agoThis is precisely why policies such as carbon credits are required, otherwise doing things the "dirty" way is too cheap for the "clean" way to be competitive. Socialise losses, privatise profits is unfortunately the current norm.
- WeylandYutani 4y agoPollution has a noticeable impact on people's lives which is why the EPA was established in the 1970s.