"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
Just Bury Your Trash
151–160 of 176 posts
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#152The world used to work just fine before single-use plastics. We started using them because it increased profits.
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this is really true, why does Gillette advertise their high-end, multi-blade razors as multi-use? For their top product, they say "up to 20 comfortable shaves".
Sure, as you can also reuse single use razors. But the main benefit of single use is reducing the chances of skin inflammation after using the razor. If using single-use razors, I'd recommend replacing just the blades, not the razor.
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#154Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
The energy requirements for growing cotton being largely the sun, and a resource which makes up most of the universe (yes, I know water is several steps from hydrogen). ((And the tangentials like the fertilizers, dieslel etc.)) Compared to the energy requirements of petroleum based products: Incredible density and pressure acting on sufficient organic matter(thousands of times greater than growing cotton), on milleni…
I think the main point is that this post is not a good faith attempt to convince people otherwise. It's a shoddly researched opinion piece that has little to no merit as it ignores the complexities of producing either item.
(1) assuming a HN submission and the discussion around it is in good faith/informed on the topic
(2) Arguing about said topic and not the merits of the submission/discussion
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#156I 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.
My state did away with bags a few years ago, and you now never see bags blowing around or stuck on trees. It also seems everyone stopped complaining about it once we got over the hump of "remember to bring your bags". So we are just left with a small group of old timers, who would probably bring back metal (pull) tab cans if they could, complaining about it. Ironically its the same group of people who blocked windmil…
It would mean you don't have to remember to carry the bag all day (which is fine if you drive, but a pain if you use public transit and have to carry bags everywhere). Just "check one out" if you don't have one, bring them back and they will be reused (and you credited) for returning them (or just reuse them yourself, if you want).
This may partially be driven by my mother, who has like 7 different types of bags that she takes to the local HEB. It is always a little song and dance with the bagger about which things go in which of her bags. These are true first world problems, but it just makes me consider alternatives.
Also, minor, but if the bags were actually "valuable", then it would encourage the homeless who find discarded bags to collect them and return them themselves, which helps with the "visible garbage" problem.
These are idiot thoughts of mine, but I do sometimes wonder about alternatives.
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#157I don’t understand how plastic bags for “100 years at current rates” is an argument FOR its longevity/being fine?
Yes… I don't think the author is thinking on a long enough time horizon. I'm curious what happens to these landfill sites in 100, 1000 and 10k years. Do they inevitably break down and leak into the water table? Do they eventually stop off-gassing and become inert? Do they become fossilized layers of sediment on a long enough horizon? If we maintain our current waste levels, how much land is required by the year 3000?
thousands of years becomes a long time, it makes more economic sense to burn it for energy, rather than performing a thousand years of inspections and repairs for every landfill
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#158Penn & Teller have a Bullshit! episode about this (Season 2, Episode 5). Well, it's technically about recycling, but it makes the claim that landfills are not a bad thing, and much better than the current recycling situation, in most cases. That episode has always stuck with me, and I've always wondered how valid their argument is.
I remember watching that as a young teen with a libertarian bent. As an old man who no longer identifies as libertarian that episode for some reason has stuck with me as the arguments were pretty compelling. I agree and would like to know if the calculations have changed today or if their argument is still valid.
In actuality what will happen is that all these buried landfills will break, all the bad stuff will leak out and enter the ground water. The groundwater becomes polluted, the plants start dying. And you end up with dead dirt that nothing will grow in.
The people advocating for landfills now, are not going to be around 500 years from now to see the results of their selfish thinking.
The primary issue is that we took elements naturally found in nature and used them to create manmade synthetic material, that nature has no tools to deal with. And these manmade synthetic material will eventually break down small enough to the point where quantum forces take over (nanoscale sized particles) and enter the groundwater. And plants and animals will drink in these manmade synthetic materials the size of nanometers, and the body has nothing that can breakdown or deal with these manmade synthetic materials. Putting a piece of shit into icecream and mixing it is easy. Unmixing a icecream mixed with shit to remove the shit is scientifically impossible.
For billions of years, high-density elements (lead, cadmium, mercury, rare earth elements, arsenic) were locked away in solid mineral ores, buried under hundreds of feet of rock. Surface biology only ever encountered them as faint, background trace elements.
We mined gigatons of these ores, refined them to near-100% purity, combined them with synthetic chemicals, and packed them into hyper-dense landfill cells right above or near freshwater aquifers.
Landfills are fundamentally a temporal transfer mechanism. They take the immediate waste generated by modern high-consumption lifestyles—cheap electronics, disposable packaging, synthetic textiles, convenience goods—and bury it out of sight, converting a present-day logistical crisis into a slow-motion geological problem for future generations.
Re: Just Bury Your Trash
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your state has eliminated metal tab cans? Huh. What do you drink 12oz of pop out of?
I think they mean the 1970s-style "pull-tabs" that disconnected from the can. These were frequently discarded as litter, instead of put in a proper bin. I can remember seeing a lot of them in road gutters as a kid. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drink_can#Opening_mechanisms
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/79/12/4f/79124fb24fd0cc6ac4cf...