Register to reply

Why I don't recycle

by slide_Rules
Tags: economics, environment, recycling
Share this thread:
slide_Rules
#1
Jun9-10, 09:20 PM
P: 20
Outside of obviously toxic items like chemicals, electronics and batteries, I don't recycle my trash. I don't think the environmental benefit is worth the opportunity cost of my time (lost classifying and sorting trash). My time is better spent working, improving my skills, paying more taxes, and generating wealth.

Also, given that:
A) landfill space is inexpensive in North America AND
B) within 100 years we should have robotic sorters (with RFD chips in packaging?!?) to separate trash
- it makes no sense to separate trash manually now. Increasing economic growth by working harder so that we get to the point where trash can be sorted by robots would be a better use of everyone's time.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Scientists develop 'electronic nose' for rapid detection of C. diff infection
Why plants in the office make us more productive
Tesla Motors dealing as states play factory poker
DaveC426913
#2
Jun9-10, 09:39 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,319
We don't recycle because it is cost effective; we recycle because it will be cost-effective and we need to learn how to get there from here.

Major change doesn't happen overnight; it often doesn't even happen in a generation. But next generation will grow up with it as second nature; just like they are growing up knowing how to type and use a phone. They don't know a world without it.

We recycle for the future.
Cyrus
#3
Jun9-10, 09:48 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,777
Quote Quote by slide_Rules View Post
Outside of obviously toxic items like chemicals, electronics and batteries, I don't recycle my trash. I don't think the environmental benefit is worth the opportunity cost of my time (lost classifying and sorting trash). My time is better spent working, improving my skills, paying more taxes, and generating wealth.

Also, given that:
A) landfill space is inexpensive in North America AND
B) within 100 years we should have robotic sorters (with RFD chips in packaging?!?) to separate trash
- it makes no sense to separate trash manually now. Increasing economic growth by working harder so that we get to the point where trash can be sorted by robots would be a better use of everyone's time.
You're time is better spent paying more taxes? You're dead wrong on that. Also, recycling means throwing away plastic bottles, aluminum cans, and paper products. You don't sort through it after you throw it away, you throw it away in the recycling bin from the start so that you don't have to sort it out later. I guess common sense isn't very common.

Cyrus
#4
Jun9-10, 09:49 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,777
Why I don't recycle

Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
We don't recycle because it is cost effective; we recycle because it will be cost-effective and we need to learn how to get there from here.
What? No.

Major change doesn't happen overnight; it often doesn't even happen in a generation. But next generation will grow up with it as second nature; just like they are growing up knowing how to type and use a phone. They don't know a world without it.

We recycle for the future.
For the future? This is nonsense.
slide_Rules
#5
Jun9-10, 09:54 PM
P: 20
We don't recycle because it is cost effective; we recycle because it will be cost-effective and we need to learn how to get there from here.

I don't find virtue in doing manual labor that can (and should) be automated.
Trash recycling needs the same economies of scale that modern sewage systems have.
DaveC426913
#6
Jun9-10, 09:55 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,319
Quote Quote by Cyrus View Post
What? No.



For the future? This is nonsense.
There are many detractors who point out that it is expensive and inefficient to recycle. If we simply went with what is or is not working right now, it would be not.
BobG
#7
Jun9-10, 09:57 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
BobG's Avatar
P: 2,280
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
We recycle for the future.
Once in a while, a person's post and signature are totally in synch.

Fortunately, my kids are grown and I don't have to worry about setting a good example for them. Plus, I can't believe the ex used the recycle crates to pack her stuff in when she left. I'm going to lose my deposit on those!

I guess I still have those pesky grandkids coming around asking me if I recycle. I'll handle it the same way as when the kids asked where I buried their bird, their gerbil, and their pet goldfish.

(Disgusting trivia: When my sister-in-law moved, her brother discovered a dead cat in her freezer. Evidently, the ground was frozen too hard when it died, so she stuck it in the freezer until the ground thawed. But, she moved in August!)
DaveC426913
#8
Jun9-10, 09:58 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,319
Quote Quote by slide_Rules View Post
[I]
I don't find virtue in doing manual labor that can (and should) be automated.
Trash recycling needs the same economies of scale that modern sewage systems have.
I think it should be automated too. But it isn't.

If you were living a couple of centuries ago, would you be sitting in your own filth, claiming that you'll wait until we build sewers?

Do you also believe that we shouldn't put any effort into fusion generators until after they become cost-effective?
Mu naught
#9
Jun9-10, 10:03 PM
P: 212
Quote Quote by BobG View Post
Once in a while, a person's post and signature are totally in synch.

Fortunately, my kids are grown and I don't have to worry about setting a good example for them. Plus, I can't believe the ex used the recycle crates to pack her stuff in when she left. I'm going to lose my deposit on those!

I guess I still have those pesky grandkids coming around asking me if I recycle. I'll handle it the same way as when the kids asked where I buried their bird, their gerbil, and their pet goldfish.

(Disgusting trivia: When my sister-in-law moved, her brother discovered a dead cat in her freezer. Evidently, the ground was frozen too hard when it died, so she stuck it in the freezer until the ground thawed. But, she moved in August!)
If it was too cold to bury the cat she could have just put it in the garage!
BobG
#10
Jun9-10, 10:04 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
BobG's Avatar
P: 2,280
Quote Quote by Mu naught View Post
If it was too cold to bury the cat she could have just put it in the garage!
At least the cat would have reminded her no later than June.
slide_Rules
#11
Jun9-10, 10:05 PM
P: 20
Quote Quote by Cyrus View Post
You're time is better spent paying more taxes? You're dead wrong on that. Also, recycling means throwing away plastic bottles, aluminum cans, and paper products. You don't sort through it after you throw it away, you throw it away in the recycling bin from the start so that you don't have to sort it out later. I guess common sense isn't very common.
Plastic, aluminum and paper are renewable. Landfill space is cheap. When the cost of these items rises to the point where it's profitable to remove them from the trash stream, it will be done.

My time to put items (properly, according to my local G) in a bin is expensive. Therefore, the benefit is near zero to me. I guess economic literacy isn't very common.
russ_watters
#12
Jun9-10, 10:05 PM
Mentor
P: 22,301
Quote Quote by Cyrus View Post
You don't sort through it after you throw it away, you throw it away in the recycling bin from the start so that you don't have to sort it out later. I guess common sense isn't very common.
Exactly: for me it is as simple as having two trash cans in my kitchen!
humanino
#13
Jun9-10, 10:05 PM
humanino's Avatar
P: 2,828
Quote Quote by Cyrus View Post
You're time
It's "your".
You're argument is invalid.
slide_Rules
#14
Jun9-10, 10:12 PM
P: 20
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
I think it should be automated too. But it isn't.

If you were living a couple of centuries ago, would you be sitting in your own filth, claiming that you'll wait until we build sewers?

Do you also believe that we shouldn't put any effort into fusion generators until after they become cost-effective?
Knowledge about disease and sickness would make living in one's own filth dumb. It would be cost effective to be clean even if doing so was horribly inconvenient. Avoiding the very (often fatal) consequences of becoming ill back then would be worth the effort.

Fusion research is a valid scientific endeavor for governments - although I think fission will rule for another century or two.
Automated trash sorting research is also a valid endeavor for governments.
Evo
#15
Jun9-10, 10:12 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 26,552
Quote Quote by slide_Rules View Post
Plastic, aluminum and paper are renewable. Landfill space is cheap. When the cost of these items rises to the point where it's profitable to remove them from the trash stream, it will be done.

My time to put items (properly, according to my local G) in a bin is expensive. Therefore, the benefit is near zero to me. I guess economic literacy isn't very common.
Some states don't even have landfill space, they have to pay to ship it to another state.

This thread is pointless, you're obviously trolling.
Jack21222
#16
Jun9-10, 10:14 PM
P: 772
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
I think it should be automated too. But it isn't.

If you were living a couple of centuries ago, would you be sitting in your own filth, claiming that you'll wait until we build sewers?

Do you also believe that we shouldn't put any effort into fusion generators until after they become cost-effective?
I don't think fusion power plants should be built until after they produce more power than they take in. Likewise, I don't think recycling should be mandatory until it's more cost efficient than throwing garbage out.

You're conflating doing research with a finished product. Fusion is in the research stage, recycling is in the "out in the marketplace" stage, so to speak. You're quick to point out other peoples logical fallacies, so I'm sure you knew that when you made your post.
Cyrus
#17
Jun9-10, 10:14 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,777
Quote Quote by humanino View Post
It's "your".
You're argument is invalid.
Zing!
Cyrus
#18
Jun9-10, 10:16 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,777
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
There are many detractors who point out that it is expensive and inefficient to recycle. If we simply went with what is or is not working right now, it would be not.
Then, why are you bothering to recycle if its expensive and inefficient! -it doesn't make any sense. In fact, it's a bad idea and a waste of money in that case.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Recycle Radioactive Material? Nuclear Engineering 81
PF PHOTO CONTEST - Recycle 7 June Photography 17
Recycle Bin Computers 5
Recycle ? General Discussion 5