3 ms·
This is my argument against recycling. It is not sustainable to recover a tiny amount of energy when balanced with the extra diesel-guzzling truck traversing t
by gosub100 2y ago
This is my argument against recycling. It is not sustainable to recover a tiny amount of energy when balanced with the extra diesel-guzzling truck traversing the neighborhood. All so we can think we're "making a difference" by keeping plastic bottles out of a landfill.
- gruez 2y ago>extra diesel-guzzling truck At least where I live, the garbage trucks have split compartments which means there's no additional trucks.
- bluGill 2y agoStill additional trucks as the truck cannot hold as much - one compartment will fill faster than the other.
- maxerickson 2y agoAre you sure? The truck goes a couple of miles on 7 pounds of diesel, how much material is it able to recover in a couple of miles?
- kergonath 2y ago> It is not sustainable to recover a tiny amount of energy when balanced with the extra diesel-guzzling truck traversing the neighborhood. It’s a good thing we have electric motors, then. An additional benefit is that they are much less likely to wake you up when they get your bins at 5am.
- gosub100 2y agoExactly. Recycling shouldn't be implemented if it uses dirty energy. There should be accounting and accountability. Don't pretend an operation is green unless it really is.
- coding123 2y agoMaybe someone should write a book about virtue signaling and it's dangers.
- gosub100 2y agoI think people generally want to do what they feel is right. The problem lies in 1) the use of propaganda to force blanket solutions to what they pose as the problem and 2) not using evidence-based scientific methods. for 1) various groups show heart-breaking images of wildlife suffering due to pollution, then work to mobilize the outrage into their solution. for 2), recycling programs should have had metrics, such as lbs of plastic "saved" from the landfill, energy saved from collecting cans, but also the counterpoints such as "tons of CO2 emitted by recycling trucks", and "dollars removed from poor people when local cash-for-cans businesses are shuttered". If the data show they emit more CO2 equivalent than they save, then they should concede that the program has failed. If the program needs a jump-start before it is "ecologically profitable", they should say so and agree to cancel the program if their goals aren't met by X date.
- supportengineer 2y agoIt would be difficult to promote such a book by word-of-mouth.
- burnished 2y agoThe real danger is allowing corporate mouthpieces to pollute our discourse with propaganda and outright lies.