Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money • Hacker News Board

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#51

Post by dingleberry » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:10 AM UTC

let's stop/reduce buying new glasses so there'll be no/less recycling.

i wore -4 diopter and i'm six months in 'no glasses' experiment after reading 'getting stronger' blog on eyes homeostatis. Here's what i found: - i can read books without glasses at all. i used to wear my -4 for anything. no more. - for laptop, i can use reduced (-2) and texts come sharp. i opt for no glasses and increase the text font size instead. - for driving , daylight gives sharper vision (it's like wearing a -2, with no glasses). it's a bit blurry for driving, but i don't need eagle-sharp clarity, i just need to avoid collisions.

so instead of donating your old glasses, you can use them to train your eyes, say for example: no glasses for books, -1 for tvs, -2 for laptop, -3 for driving, etc

i chose cold turkey because i often forget where i put my glasses and it's frustrating.

there is a plus lens therapy which i don't practice much because i keep losing my plus glasses.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#52

Post by titzer » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:11 AM UTC

dingleberry wrote: post #51

let's stop/reduce buying new glasses so there'll be no/less recycling. i wore -4 diopter and i'm six months in 'no glasses' experiment after reading 'getting stronger' blog on eyes homeostatis. Here's what i found: - i can read books without glasses at all. i used to wear my -4 for anything. no more. - for laptop, i can use reduced (-2) and texts come sharp. i opt for no glasses and increase the text font size instea…

Please don't drive without glasses. You're likely violating the law and you are putting others in danger.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#53

Post by titzer » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:15 AM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #17

douche wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aluminum (and steel) is one of the very few things that is in any way worthwhile to recycle. Most of the things that we are urged to recycle (glass, plastics, paper, cardboard, etc) are cheaper and easier to make new from the abundant raw materials.

Corrugated cardboard is a net benefit to recycle, I've heard. Otherwise you are correct. It's just feel-good. Most of what you drop off at recycling centers is just trucked to landfills after it's out of your sight.

> Most of what you drop off at recycling centers is just trucked to landfills after it's out of your sight.

This is definitely not true in Germany. And for glass bottle recycling, most bottles are washed and reused up to 50 times before being melted down.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#54

Post by john61 » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:16 AM UTC

But not a waste of resources and CO2.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#55

Post by DanBC » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:16 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #50

twblalock wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> things revert to normal when you stop paying Not if you do it right. If your goal is to destroy an industry in another country, you can stop dumping after that industry has been destroyed. Then, the people of that country will have no choice but to buy from you, because there is nobody left in that country that produces the goods you produce.

Can you provide a case history of an industry destroyed in this manner (selling below cost), where the dumper goes on to enjoy monopoly profits?

Steel industry in UK has been destroyed, and part of that is the complex pricing of Chinese steel.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#56

Post by brownbat » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:31 AM UTC

twblalock wrote: post #43

WalterBright wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dumping is a losing game for the dumper. It's nearly as bad as paying someone to buy your products. It only "works" as long as you keep paying, things revert to normal when you stop paying. Meanwhile, the dumpees are better off at your expense.

> things revert to normal when you stop paying Not if you do it right. If your goal is to destroy an industry in another country, you can stop dumping after that industry has been destroyed. Then, the people of that country will have no choice but to buy from you, because there is nobody left in that country that produces the goods you produce.

Well, there's one hiccup.

You can't privately dump. Well, you can try.

Since you're selling at a loss on the open market, others with capital will see an unexpected price and wonder if you have developed a unique efficiency. After some basic research, some will guess at what you're trying to do.

They then have some great options. Invest in competitors or substitutes for the coming reduced supply. Or, stockpile the goods you sell, buying cheaply from you and even undercutting you in the future. Or, develop ways to reduce fixed costs. Build "fast spin up" sites with on-call labor so you can quickly return to market.

The dumping strategy works pretty well in a game with only two players. It does not work against the entire global system of capital and investment.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#57

Post by dingleberry » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:34 AM UTC

titzer wrote: post #52

dingleberry wrote: post #51

let's stop/reduce buying new glasses so there'll be no/less recycling. i wore -4 diopter and i'm six months in 'no glasses' experiment after reading 'getting stronger' blog on eyes homeostatis. Here's what i found: - i can read books without glasses at all. i used to wear my -4 for anything. no more. - for laptop, i can use reduced (-2) and texts come sharp. i opt for no glasses and increase the text font size instea…

Please don't drive without glasses. You're likely violating the law and you are putting others in danger.

for motorbike, it's okay because the distance to front wheel is short and my vision is sharp up to the distance.

i can't read number plates and stuffs clearly; however, i don't drive to see those things clearly. my mission is move from a to b without collisions.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#58

Post by dahart » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:43 AM UTC

This argument seems really weird to me. It's a "waste" compared to what? If the alternative is glasses going in the garbage or plastic recycling to recover nothing more than raw materials, then 7% of donations surviving the donation process seems like a massive win.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#59

Post by wvenable » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 5:51 AM UTC

throwaway_exer wrote: post #15

I read the complete article, and I'm kind of skeptical of the conclusions. Having travelled in Asia, for example, they have the skill and parts to repair eyeglasses and cut lenses to old frames. (In fact, I get my glasses repaired in Manila since the eyeglass cartel in the USA refuses to do major repairs. I've certainly tried in Silicon Valley multiple times.) Also, eyeglass cases are considered to be valuable and re…

At a $1.88 to make a pair of glasses, I fail to see how your economics works. Minor repairs, databases, etc all cost more than that for a potentially inferior product.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#60

Post by DanBC » Sun, Jul 03, 2016, 6:00 AM UTC

13of40 wrote: post #13

sliverstorm wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you mark as the worthwhile ones? Personally I place high value on raw material recycling. Even if it's more expensive monetarily, so long as it uses less resources it seems worth it to me. Aluminum cans are currently recycled more than any other beverage container in the U.S, which is good for business and the environment, says the Aluminum Association, because making a can from recycled aluminum saves not…

I read that the alloy used in the tops of aluminum cans is different from the alloy used in the body [1], and as a result when they're melted down they create a third alloy. That seems like it's at odds with the claim that it's infinitely recyclable and "can be recycled and back on the store shelf as a new beverage can in less than 60 days" [2]. Anyone know the answer to that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bevera…

(I didn't downvote)

Your wikipedia article says:

> When recycled without other metals being mixed in, the can–lid combination is perfect for producing new stock for the main part of the can—the loss of magnesium during melting is made up for by the high magnesium content of the lid.