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

131–140 of 176 posts

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#131

Post by throwaway2037 »

bluGill wrote: post #79
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…

    > Can you use the cotton bag 173 times?
I can confirm: Easily. While I don't like the feel as much (the scrunching plastic sound is awful compared to natural fibers), PET bottles that are recycled to make reusable bags are incredibly tough. I had one that I used for 15 years(!) for multiple shops per week.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#132

Post by broken-kebab »

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!

One argument for PET packaging bans is that there are people for whom the discipline of disposal is hard. If it's true, than re-using cotton bags for 173 times is hard - on average level, not for you personally.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#133

Post by throwaway2037 »

collabs wrote: post #113

> By contrast, there is no danger of running out of paper. We can always grow more trees, and that is in fact a decent way of removing carbon from the atmosphere. The silicon used to make glass is one of the most abundant elements on Earth. Please correct me if I am wrong, but from what I understand, not all sand is created equal. Desert sand, like in the Sahara Desert, is eroded by wind. The smooth, round, and tiny…

To add more fuel to your well-lit (!) fire, landfill projects also cannot use desert sand for similar reasons. It really needs sand from a river because it can create a stable bed for soil in a way that desert sand cannot.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#134

Post by throwaway2037 »

robtherobber wrote: post #86

Every now and then I'd come across articles from this source and thought that they were decent. Perhaps not the best, but reasonably well researched and argued. But coming across this statement kind of sealed the deal for me in the wrong way: > Instead of paying more to recycle, we could spend that money far more effectively on other environmental mitigation measures like carbon capture. Pure unadulterated bollocks,…

I didn't flag the article, but I have similar feelings to you. The weird part: This media source is usually high-quality with well-researched and well-written (balanced) and articles. They really fell flat on this one. And yes, the carbon capture comment made me clench my fist. I have been listening to that hogwash for at least twenty years with very little progress made. I'm not saying that it cannot work, but I doubt with current technology it can be done in an economical manner.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#135

Post by bryanlarsen »

scotty79 wrote: post #87
xd1936 wrote: post #9

The argument that is pro-polyethylene plastic bags over cotton completely ignores the source: Renewable plants that are grown and harvested, vs. finite fossil fuels extracted from the Earth and refined. > Instead of a simple blowing and sealing process, the cotton must be made into yarn, woven into fabric, prepared, dried, sized, dyed, and finished, which takes around 1,725 megajoules, around 3,050 times as much ener…

If we used oil only for plastics it would probably last us 1000 years. By that time we'd figure out how to grow plastics.

We can make plastic from synthetic oil. Synthetic oil can be made from plants or from carbon captured from the air.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#136

Post by throwaway2037 »

rapnie wrote: post #25

In the Netherlands the cradle to cradle hype of some years ago has created a paper reality where waste is turned magically into building material and can thus be effectively dumped anywhere in the environment.

I don't understand this comment. As I understand, many types of incineration (coal, garbage, etc.) produces some amount of fly ash. This can be used when making concrete. I think that is a good way to dispose of fly ash.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#137

Post by throwaway2037 »

Flavius wrote: post #12
ImHereToVote wrote: post #5

If a country burns coal. It should burn trash first, before the coal.

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.

    > Absolutely, but green activists are actively fighting against burning trash.
This is a widly broad statement. Most rich countries excluding the US and Canada make wide use of garbage incineration. It can be done in a very clean manner that disturbs the environment less than a landfill. One simple example: Sweden has almost unlimited amounts of land for landfills, yet chooses garbage incineration where possible. (To be clear: Certain stuff like broken ceramics [mugs, plates, etc.] cannot be burned and must be landfilled.) As I understand, there is not a large, active "green activists" lobby trying to stop this trend. (Any Swedes: Please correct me if wrong.)

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#138

Post by throwaway2037 »

smcg wrote: post #16

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

Can you give a specific example of a rich country that is "ship[ping] trash over to low-income countries" in 2026? It must be a tiny minority at this point.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#139

Post by collabs »

broken-kebab wrote: post #130
collabs wrote: post #113

> By contrast, there is no danger of running out of paper. We can always grow more trees, and that is in fact a decent way of removing carbon from the atmosphere. The silicon used to make glass is one of the most abundant elements on Earth. Please correct me if I am wrong, but from what I understand, not all sand is created equal. Desert sand, like in the Sahara Desert, is eroded by wind. The smooth, round, and tiny…

On one hand, you are not wrong, sands differ in qualities, but the question is what you need to make from it. Glass-grade sands aren't everywhere, but they are abundant anyway. Some industries, like solar panels production, require higher purity, and such sands reserves are way more limited.

What I left unsaid to be polite was if they missed/hand waved something that even I know, what else is missing from this analysis? It feels like a gross oversimplification of a very real, very multifaceted problem.

Re: Just Bury Your Trash

#140

Post by adwn »

crab_galaxy wrote: post #94
RankingMember wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were also so damn cheap that clerks would bag EVERYTHING without asking, so they not only covered the streets like you describe, but often after offering no actual utility to begin with.

People used to love giving out plastic bags for one item. Who needs a bag for a single item??

A plastic bag protects against water and dirt, and it has handles for carrying. I'm not necessarily defending the practice, but it has its reasons.
Post reply on HN