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

Just Bury Your Trash

worksinprogress.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 176 posts

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#71

Post by strken »

leonixyz wrote: post #48

The authors think reusing a cotton bag for 173 times is difficult - that's all we need to say about this article. When recommendation for landfilling comes from this kind of sources, I think we can safely assume we are doing absolutely great with our demands to reuse, repair and recycle!

I imagine part of what makes it difficult is that people can and do reuse plastic bags. If I reuse a plastic bag 20 times before it breaks then you now have to reuse your cotton bag 3460 times, which is much harder.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#72

Post by Flavius »

butlike wrote: post #20
Flavius wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely, but green activists are actively fighting against burning trash. This needs to stop. Even if a country doesn't burn coal it should still burn trash instead of sending it to poor countries. People need to take responsibility for the trash that they generate.

Yeah, burning trash isn't a great answer

90% of countries use some kind of fossil fuel to generate electricity or heat, so burning trash instead won't increase the CO2 emissions. The rule is simple: if you already burn fossil fuels, you should burn trash instead.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#73

Post by tclancy »

elil17 wrote: post #29
lillecarl wrote: post #21

Just burn your trash https://www.energimyndigheten.se/en/news/2025/from-waste-to-... My understanding is that biological decomposition of waste creates methane which is a worse greenhouse gas than CO2.

That's only if it's buried. Properly managed compost is the best option.

Is that something I can do with plastic though?

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#74

Post by murderfs »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #45
murderfs wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of this when incineration is an option? Even its wikipedia page has only negatives compared to incineration. > Air emissions can be cleaner than landfills and similar to that of incinerators. > Large initial investment costs relative to that of alternatives, including [...] incineration. > Operational costs are high relative to that of incineration.

I think you misread the Wikipedia page. Plasma gasification air emissions are cleaner with costs being somewhat higher than incineration. Plasma gasification breaks matter down at the molecular level versus combustion of incineration. With plasma gasification, you are paying more to end with a more inert end material and reduced hazardous process byproducts.

I interpret "can be cleaner than X and similar to that of Y" to mean "inferior to that of Y, but kinda close". Otherwise, it would be "cleaner than X and Y".

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#75

Post by globular-toast »

duggan wrote: post #7

I don't remember energy use being the problem with plastic bags? It was plastic bags being absolutely everywhere in the environment. Streets, parks, trees. Wrapped around anything sticking out of the ground. On your face on a windy day. Pollution is the problem with plastic. Probably health, too, now that microplastics are being recognized as an issue.

Right. This seems to be written by someone who has never been outside and seen the amount of plastic alongside roads or caught in bushes etc. And this is in a country that is supposed to be good at collecting waste.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#76

Post by cucumber3732842 »

smcg wrote: post #16

Not every place has space for landfills... which is why we often ship trash over to low-income countries.

>Not every place has space for landfills... because we're stupid and let the anti-landfill people decide what acceptable space is

Fixed that for you.

My municipality is staring down getting screwed bad in the 2030s so I've gone down the rabbit hole.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#77

Post by m-ee »

SamBorick wrote: post #58

"Instead of paying more to recycle, we could spend that money far more effectively on other environmental mitigation measures like carbon capture." Yeah, let's stop doing the fairly well established recycling programs that have knock on benefits like reducing pollution, and instead start scaling an entirely unproven and expensive mitigation program. These are some prominent Effect Altruism guys so I know "cause prior…

Almost all EA takes I’ve read strike me as basic contrarianism

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#78

Post by vel0city »

embedding-shape wrote: post #40
justonceokay wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When visiting Seattle for the first time my mom was simultaneously outraged at the lack of plastic bags and the recycling bins everywhere, and also in awe at how clean the city was. Never did the two thoughts cross each other in her head

> When visiting Seattle for the first time my mom was simultaneously outraged at the lack of plastic bags and the recycling bins everywhere The first part I kind of get, humans get used to stuff they get, and get frustrated when it disappears without them really understanding why, it's kind of understandable. But why would she be outraged about recycling bins being more readily available? Are the recycling bins like…

> Sounds like being upset about there being too many libraries or something.

You joke but people who complain about public recycling bins would also likely be the ones to complain about public libraries too. I've encountered many people who think libraries exist to poison the minds of the youth and somehow make homelessness a problem and we should shut them all down to alleviate the homeless issues in our communities and ensure higher community standards in education (mostly, go read the bible at church, that's all you need).

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#79

Post by bluGill »

conorbergin wrote: post #11

I think using a cotton bag 173 times to beat plastic bags and a mug 1,000 times to beat disposable cups sounds completely reasonable.

Can you use the cotton bag 173 times? Cotton wears out over time. They also didn't ask about the cost of washing the cotton bag, which really should be done once in a while since they collect dirt and food particles - this will increase the times you need to use the bag. (it isn't clear if it lasts longer with or without washing - dirt is often sharp enough to wear the bag, but washing also puts wear on them)

Similar for the cup - I've dropped and broke several ceramic cups in my life - and I don't drink coffee/tea. Those cups will never get another use since the shards are scrap.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#80

Post by scotty79 »

trencedamp wrote: post #53
duggan wrote: post #7

I don't remember energy use being the problem with plastic bags? It was plastic bags being absolutely everywhere in the environment. Streets, parks, trees. Wrapped around anything sticking out of the ground. On your face on a windy day. Pollution is the problem with plastic. Probably health, too, now that microplastics are being recognized as an issue.

Another point, to counter the " plastic bags are cheap, cotton is expensive" argument, is that most of the reusable bags are plastic too. They are way cheaper to produce than cotton bags, and earn their keep within about 5 to 10 uses as opposed to 100 or whatever the crazy figure was for cotton bags.

You can use single use plastic bag 50 times or more before it deteriorates, not the thinnest kind, but the average one. They are incredibly strong. The dedicated mult-use ones are insanely strong, but also few times thicker and more unwieldy.

Like with single use shaving razor. They don't need to be literally single use. It depends on the user. You can use it as long as it serves you.

The best thing limiting access to plastic bags did was familiarizing people with the idea of taking bags to the market.

Post reply on HN