Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated • Hacker News Board

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#161

Post by 1k » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:26 AM UTC

Liron wrote: post #30

We really shot ourselves in the foot with this whole pointless "recycling paper and plastic" thing huh? The convenience of throwing something away is a triumph of modern civilization and one of life's little pleasures, and we had to ruin it by acting like it's wrong when it's actually not. When I walk up to some wastebins holding a papery-plasticky object with a bit of food stuck to it, my heart sinks. Now I have to…

> or donating cans of food.

Thanks, I never realized

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/im-begging-you-stop-donatin...

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#162

Post by Geee » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:26 AM UTC

Bworkbwork wrote: post #6

londons_explore wrote: post #3

This is why markets should make decisions about this stuff (with appropriate taxes for externalities) rather than politicians with their gut instinct... "We're doing nothing for the environment" doesn't get one elected tho...

Markets haven't been doing a good job of it so far, why would they in the future?

Markets work based on information. Lack of information causes consumers to buy something they don't want to buy, e.g. negative effects on the environment. Markets should be controlled in a such way that the seller must tell what they are selling, including environmental effects, and they must not lie.

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#163

Post by repsilat » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:29 AM UTC

contactlight11 wrote: post #154

How about this information from CT's DEEP which quotes the EPA for the majority of it's information? Compared to virgin materials, using recycled materials more efficient by: - 40% for paper - 60-74% for steel and tin cans - 33% for plastics - 30% for glass - 5% for aluminum cans These numbers appear to be referencing the generation of new products using recycled vs new materials, but do they fail to take in to accou…

> using recycled materials more efficient by:

> ...

> - 5% for aluminum cans

I found this phrasing confusing. From the article you linked,

>> Aluminum can be recycled using less than 5 percent of the energy used to make the original product. (EPA)

I would say that's more efficient by 95%. (Thank you for providing the link!)

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#164

Post by KaiserPro » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:30 AM UTC

> Incinerating waste and generating electricity from it is an alternative form of rubbish disposal that is good for the environment and solves the problem permanently, but expensive to operate up front.

well, I think you are slightly off the mark there.

If pumping out more CO2 that would normally be sequestered, or dumping out a boat load of particulates with nitrogen dioxide is an environmental thing, then yes.

My heating and how water did come from a very well run incinerator, but its not exactly the paragon of cleanliness.

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#165

Post by yongjik » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:32 AM UTC

repsilat wrote: post #163

contactlight11 wrote: post #154

How about this information from CT's DEEP which quotes the EPA for the majority of it's information? Compared to virgin materials, using recycled materials more efficient by: - 40% for paper - 60-74% for steel and tin cans - 33% for plastics - 30% for glass - 5% for aluminum cans These numbers appear to be referencing the generation of new products using recycled vs new materials, but do they fail to take in to accou…

> using recycled materials more efficient by: > ... > - 5% for aluminum cans I found this phrasing confusing. From the article you linked, >> Aluminum can be recycled using less than 5 percent of the energy used to make the original product. (EPA) I would say that's more efficient by 95%. (Thank you for providing the link!)

Well, if you're using less than 5% of energy, that means with the same amount of energy you can make 20x. So I'd say it's actually 1900% more efficient.

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#166

Post by thereisnospork » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:43 AM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #164

> Incinerating waste and generating electricity from it is an alternative form of rubbish disposal that is good for the environment and solves the problem permanently, but expensive to operate up front. well, I think you are slightly off the mark there. If pumping out more CO2 that would normally be sequestered, or dumping out a boat load of particulates with nitrogen dioxide is an environmental thing, then yes. My h…

It's more nuanced: environmentally landfills literally displace acreage of environment (which in my semi-uneducated opinion is often overstated) and have sporadic local issues e.g. material leaching into ground water.

Whereas power generated from incineration of trash displaces CO2 emissions from fossil fuel emissions.

'''Do the benefits of incinerating trash for electricity outweigh the costs thereof in comparison with costs of equivalent conventional electricity and costs of burying aforementioned trash?''' Absolute issues (e.g. NOx or CO2 emission) not in the context of opportunity cost are irrelevant to misleading.

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#167

Post by basicallydan » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:44 AM UTC

I, too, have listened to the latest episode of Planet Money

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#168

Post by 1338 » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:50 AM UTC

contactlight11 wrote: post #154

How about this information from CT's DEEP which quotes the EPA for the majority of it's information? Compared to virgin materials, using recycled materials more efficient by: - 40% for paper - 60-74% for steel and tin cans - 33% for plastics - 30% for glass - 5% for aluminum cans These numbers appear to be referencing the generation of new products using recycled vs new materials, but do they fail to take in to accou…

Most of the statistics are worded differently from that source, but according to the EPA, the energy used to make products with recycled materials is:

            paper: 40% less

    steel and tin: 60%-74% less

          plastic: 33% less

            glass: 30% less

         aluminum: 95% less

edit:formatting

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#169

Post by em-bee » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:53 AM UTC

em-bee wrote: post #140

yongjik wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The convenience of throwing something away is a triumph of modern civilization ... I think you got it backwards. Throwing stuff away was the normal way of life before modern civilization arrived, just like defecating wherever you find convenient, hunting animals for dinner, or riding hoses on whatever side of road you like. The wonder of modern civilization gave us so much power to produce stuff that it's no longer…

uhm no. i'd like to see some evidence to that. most of what we throw away is packaging. in the past there was little packaging. and most packaging was reusable, a cloth, a bag or a chest for example. if it wasn't for packaging, in my daily life i would hardly have any trash at all. almost everything i am able to reuse, and i buy with re-usability in mind. this is not something i learned in school, or from somehow env…

in the past, the only form of trash was compost. and even that was (re)used.

Re: Landfill is underrated and recycling overrated

#170

Post by yongjik » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 5:56 AM UTC

nordsieck wrote: post #150

yongjik wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The convenience of throwing something away is a triumph of modern civilization ... I think you got it backwards. Throwing stuff away was the normal way of life before modern civilization arrived, just like defecating wherever you find convenient, hunting animals for dinner, or riding hoses on whatever side of road you like. The wonder of modern civilization gave us so much power to produce stuff that it's no longer…

> Throwing stuff away was the normal way of life before modern civilization arrived What? Absolutely not. Things were precious and labor was cheap back in the day. Anything that could be repaired was. Ever heard of "darning socks"? Yeah - no one would do that today, but it was common 100 years ago. > just like defecating wherever you find convenient Lol. People found out pretty quickly that you have to give a crap ab…

> The earth is big. Really big. Stupendously big.

The wonder (and horror) of modern civilization is that this kind of thinking is obsolete. Pregnant women are advised not to eat tuna, caught anywhere, because we managed to pollute the entire ocean with mercury. We're producing so much chemical fertilizers that we create more biologically available nitrogen than the rest of nature combined. And of course we're warming the planet itself.

Even ancient Americans, with their stone tools, managed to exterminate virtually every large animal in the Americas.

> Conceptually it's trivial to make a landfill large enough ...

Conceptually it's also trivial to stop global warming. We just have to stop making any more CO2 (and maybe suck up a bit from the air). Doesn't mean it's easy in practice.