Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 293 posts

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#171

Post by acjohnson55 »

Johnny555 wrote: post #135
acjohnson55 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a perfectly fine source of cash for people in need and willing to hustle.

It's not optimal when the poor and disadvantaged are forced to sort through the trash of others to eke out a bit of a living -- without any sort of protective gear or easy access to healthcare to treat any injuries/illnesses. It'd be a little safer if they could just pick through recycling bins, but that's illegal [1] so they are forced to pick through trash bins. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Recycling-bins…

Good point on the health externalities.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#173

Post by aviv »

barbecue_sauce wrote: post #161
aviv wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give me a break. First address the atrosious food consumption habits within the 94% of US population who do not live in so called food deserts before it can be used to justify the behavior of the vast majority.

Poverty? Marketing?

What? It's often helpful to form a full sentence if you want others to engage in a discussion with you.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#174

Post by skriticos2 »

pkaye wrote: post #104
blattimwind wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you sell something with a deposit on it you have to accept returns of stuff with deposit on it.

A remember some stores stopped accepting recyclables after it became a pattern for homeless to scavenge for the good stuff and leave a mess behind.

Most supermarkets have bottle recycling ATMs (outside the entrance) around here in Germany. The homeless scavenging bottles from public bins and returning them are doing just fine. I'm not aware of the lot of mess this causes though, not sure what you are talking about there.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#176

Post by icebraining »

pfranz wrote: post #58
jiaweihli wrote: post #27

How do compostable products compare to recyclable ones? How much better/worse are they and how much impact do they have?

Just my opinion, but compostable doesn't make that great of a product in a lot of places they're being pushed. I've seen a bunch of places switch to compostable silverware and cups. The silverware is a lot less durable than plastic (which is already a low bar) and coffee lids don't fit properly. One place I frequent uses them and I constantly hear others complain and discover this for themselves. I sound like an old…

Arguably, being annoying is a feature, not a bug; we want to discourage single-use packaging and get people to bring their own reusable containers.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#177

Post by mirimir »

49para wrote: post #167
mikewilliams wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recycling will never be profitable, but we can't just keep burying trash and forgetting about it, or maybe we can, I don't know.

Or perhaps we could just stop creating it in the first place. Is there really a need for all of the one use plastics or the excessive packaging ?

That's the "reduce" part. But just how does one roll back packaging practices? I can't imagine how that would work.

Maybe the German model. But in the US? It seems unlikely.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#178

Post by WalterBright »

joe_the_user wrote: post #101
mdorazio wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't all trash, but a significant portion was. Without expensive sorting machinery, recycling is generally only profitable with extremely cheap labor and a disregard for environmental damage caused by tossing the unprofitable stuff in the nearest dump. What was profitable for 1990s China would not have been profitable for the US.

" What was profitable for 1990s China would not have been profitable for the US. " And may not be "profitable" for China. Indeed, one might argue China got a leg up in development by trading environmental destruction for capital - but now they have the capital and the destruction is haunting them. And that's the thing. Recycling everything might be affordable but when skimming the best and tossing the rest is more pr…

> recycle all the CRTs

I'm really glad to be done with those. Ugh. Back around 1970 my dad said the world was waiting for two great inventions:

1. A TV you could hang on the wall like a picture

2. A typewriter that you could back up and correct mistakes on. (Few people likely remember Whiteout. Glad to be done with that, too!)

And great inventions they turned out to be :-)

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#179

Post by icebraining »

aviv wrote: post #55
barbecue_sauce wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a rather elitist perspective.

Eating fruits and vegetables that can easily be composted is elitist? News to me.

Fruits and vegetables are often packed in plastic as well.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#180

Post by dpark »

mirimir wrote: post #177
49para wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or perhaps we could just stop creating it in the first place. Is there really a need for all of the one use plastics or the excessive packaging ?

That's the "reduce" part. But just how does one roll back packaging practices? I can't imagine how that would work. Maybe the German model. But in the US? It seems unlikely.

What is the German model? I don’t recall there being a massive difference in packaging there except for the reusable (deposit required) soda bottles.
Post reply on HN