If you've seen the Bullshit episode then tell me what you think of it.
There is proof that Recycling is completely worthless (Unless it's aluminum cans). They said it costs less to make new products, we have enough room for the trash in landfills, landfills are completely sanitary, do not leak, and actually become parks after word and also create energy from the gases it gives off.
There is no positive to recycling besides creating jobs
If America is smart, they'll use more bio-degradable products and not recycle shit except for aluminum cans
List of landfills that have become beautiful parklands, please.
And just so you know, money isn't everything. Better to use what we have as many times as possible than to just go with the cheapest method.
Quote from: Lawlz on May 03, 2007, 03:38:49 PM
List of landfills that have become beautiful parklands, please.
And just so you know, money isn't everything. Better to use what we have as many times as possible than to just go with the cheapest method.
Here are a few google searches for landfils becoming parks.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6386743.stm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go1631/is_200208/ai_n7137522
http://advance.uconn.edu/2006/061204/06120406.htm
http://www.joburg.org.za/2004/nov/nov29_landfill.stm
http://www.climbonline.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1172113875
I'll find some stuff later on how we can get away with not recycling. Just so you know, by turning landfills into parks, we're really just recycling in a way. The Earth reuses these materials and turns them into regular old dirt.
We should use everything as many times as we can, it'll help our Earth last longer and keep materials from becoming precious. Who cares about money when the future of the Earth is being talked about? But yeah, we should use more biodegratable products, but that might take a while to get around to so why don't we make the most out of recycling what we do now?
Quote from: MILADMAAAN on May 03, 2007, 04:53:20 PM
We should use everything as many times as we can, it'll help our Earth last longer and keep materials from becoming precious. Who cares about money when the future of the Earth is being talked about? But yeah, we should use more biodegratable products, but that might take a while to get around to so why don't we make the most out of recycling what we do now?
As I said before, we should switch to bio-degradable products/bags.
If we do that, we're letting the Earth itself recycle our waste. Either way though, land fills make the Earth recycle whats in the waste already, but if we switch to bio-degradable products/bags then it'll be a faster process
Recycling is seriously one of the dumbest things I've heard of when it comes down to cost. It's not worth it. Especially for trying to protect the environment, because it really doesn't.
However, I don't see anything wrong with trying to reuse things as long as possible. Just don't waste crud and you're in good standing.
How stupid of me, I forgot to mention we populate more when we recycle, spend more money, and waste time. We have to transport the recyclables to a place to recycle them, sort through them, actually recycle them, transport them to a place who will use the raw material.
No one else wants to say anything?
Quote from: Reaper on May 03, 2007, 01:19:25 AM
If you've seen the BullLAWLZON episode then tell me what you think of it.
There is proof that Recycling is completely worthless (Unless it's aluminum cans). They said it costs less to make new products, we have enough room for the trash in landfills, landfills are completely sanitary, do not leak, and actually become parks after word and also create energy from the gases it gives off.
There is no positive to recycling besides creating jobs
If America is smart, they'll use more bio-degradable products and not recycle LAWLZON except for aluminum cans
Do you know how much is it to keep those landfills operating & the transportation of the trash? tax payer dollars spent for nothing...why not have the whole nation transport their cans? And get $ from it.
And those gasses emitting from those landfills are also destroying our environment & polluting stink (methane)
Quote from: cackslop on May 06, 2007, 07:39:00 AM
Do you know how much is it to keep those landfills operating & the transportation of the trash? tax payer dollars spent for nothing...why not have the whole nation transport their cans? And get $ from it.
And those gasses emitting from those landfills are also destroying our environment & polluting stink (methane)
If we get rid of recycling plants then we could spend the money we did for recycling plants onto landfills.
We transport more stuff while recycling actually.
The gases emitting from landfills actually are used to create energy, and we actually get more population from recycling. Since we transport more, have to recycle the products too, and the thing is we also get energy from landfills.
And we do NOT leak any harmful things into the environment from landfills, why? Because landfills HAVE TO put down a 6 inch layer of impermeable stuff, I'm not sure what it is but it's like cement.
Quote from: Reaper on May 06, 2007, 02:12:54 PM
Quote from: cackslop on May 06, 2007, 07:39:00 AM
Do you know how much is it to keep those landfills operating & the transportation of the trash? tax payer dollars spent for nothing...why not have the whole nation transport their cans? And get $ from it.
And those gasses emitting from those landfills are also destroying our environment & polluting stink (methane)
If we get rid of recycling plants then we could spend the money we did for recycling plants onto landfills.
We transport more stuff while recycling actually.
The gases emitting from landfills actually are used to create energy, and we actually get more population from recycling. Since we transport more, have to recycle the products too, and the thing is we also get energy from landfills.
And we do NOT leak any harmful things into the environment from landfills, why? Because landfills HAVE TO put down a 6 inch layer of impermeable stuff, I'm not sure what it is but it's like cement.
But here's the thing...The money being spent by the government to operate & transport everything for those landfills are going straight down the tubes!
At least the money being spent on paying recyclers is going back into our economy directly.
And sure they can make as many of those landfills into parks as they want but as time dwindles on, there won't be much room for anything at all...try building housing developments over landfills.
#1 who's gonna want a house built over decomposing filth? Not me.
#2 Imagine laying gas, water, electricity, and sewer piping with tons of trash below it.
#3 Just think how much man power it takes to make these dumps into habitable places...and how much money it costs to hire private contractors to do it?
And sure...it would be neat if everything including paper was biodegradable, but that wouldn't stop thousands of acres of trees from being cut down every day. caterpie;
Quote from: cackslop on May 07, 2007, 04:33:53 AM
But here's the thing...The money being spent by the government to operate & transport everything for those landfills are going straight down the tubes!
At least the money being spent on paying recyclers is going back into our economy directly.
And sure they can make as many of those landfills into parks as they want but as time dwindles on, there won't be much room for anything at all...try building housing developments over landfills.
#1 who's gonna want a house built over decomposing filth? Not me.
#2 Imagine laying gas, water, electricity, and sewer piping with tons of trash below it.
#3 Just think how much man power it takes to make these dumps into habitable places...and how much money it costs to hire private contractors to do it?
And sure...it would be neat if everything including paper was biodegradable, but that wouldn't stop thousands of acres of trees from being cut down every day. caterpie;
Wow, the first point you brought up is good. I can say some of the money is still ran into the economy again, the cost of transportation (which still, landfills need transportation, but defiantly not a much as we would need for recycling) the energy which is given off makes energy which makes money. So the money isn't completely wasted, but yes, some of it is.
America has so much room for landfills. We wont run out of room for land fills because by the time we ever fill up America with land fills (which would happen say in 3 billion years, and by that time we'll find a better solution) the stuff decomposes! Tada, it's like we never had landfills in the first place.
Many people will want a house over the filth, it'll bring the same joy of recycling, they'll feel like they're saving the environment. And you should check out the links I showed Lawlz for what the parks look like afterwards. My house was built on farm land and my neighboring set of houses was built on a chicken farm, which is actually good for lawns.
I never heard of landfills becoming places for houses anyways, they're usually transformed into parks and golf courses.
Costs less, actually as stated from the Penn and Teller show, it'll cost us 30% of what it costs us to pick up recycling. Those landfills/dumps have so many regulations, they're so clean.
And that last thing you said was completely stupid, about the trees. We cut down trees, BUT we also regrow trees. "Paper grows from trees so we grow trees to make paper", this is a quote from Penn and Teller. Recycling doesn't save trees at all. We have three times more trees then we did in 1990
Thats like saying we're losing potatoes just because people farm them. We literary farm trees.
I'll look up the economy part in depth though
recycling is fun.
Economically, recycling is a giant waste of money.
Environmentally, the energy used to transport recycled goods hurts the environment more than using the standard trash can.
Aluminum cans, as mentioned, are a good exception.
Many things we recycle are easily renewable, like paper. Lumber companies want more money, so they plant trees when they cut down trees. A greater demand for wood means a greater need to plant trees.
Quote from: coz on February 27, 2009, 08:36:13 PMA greater demand for wood means a greater need to plant trees.
i'm pretty sure there's still a net loss of trees worldwide though so uh
Quote from: guff on February 27, 2009, 08:47:15 PM
i'm pretty sure there's still a net loss of trees worldwide though so uh
Yes, there is. Trees take much longer to get big than they take to be sliced into paper. Still, trees are an unlimited resources, and people who chop without planting will eventually learn that it's not a wise monetary move.