You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Well this just goes in line with carbon taxes being a cash grab, and that there isn't any real global warming. They claim the ice caps on other planets are melting and it's just because the sun is in a period of giving off more heat.
this is a stupid ass documentary/show.
this is completely one sided.
don't bother watching it.
Their main point is that it costs more to recycle than it is to just throw it in the dump...
Which seems to be true. But, so what?
I don't care about any of their points, I still feel that its the responsible thing to do.
I have heard the stats that 40% of the sorted recycled product ends up in the landfill anyway. If there is no buyer for product at a given time, they dump it knowing that there is another ton on the way.
However, technology is the answer.
Build products that provide intrinsic value into the trash to begin with would be one.
Two, turn the plastic back into oil and it regains its value.
Of COURSE it's one sided. This is the OTHER side of the argument. From the moment we can learn language we are told to recycle, and that not doing so makes you a bad person who is destroying the planet.
Finally someone applies critical thinking, and brings up the other side, and all you can do is dismiss it, because it goes against what you were trained like a dog to think. Posted via RS Mobile
In Sask. they don't recycle anything. Even things like drywall that you have to recycle here by law is just tossed in the normal garbage. Any idea if other Provinces are similar? Living here for so long I just assumed everybody recycled but was totally surprised last time I visited there.
__________________
The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place... and I donīt care how tough you are, it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently, if you let it. You, me or nobody, is gonna hit as hard as life. But ain't about how hard you hit... It's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward... how much you can take, and keep moving forward. Thatīs how winning is done. Now, if you know what you worth, go out and get what you worth. - Rocky Balboa
Of COURSE it's one sided. This is the OTHER side of the argument. From the moment we can learn language we are told to recycle, and that not doing so makes you a bad person who is destroying the planet.
Finally someone applies critical thinking, and brings up the other side, and all you can do is dismiss it, because it goes against what you were trained like a dog to think. Posted via RS Mobile
What it comes down to is the less we produce to use and the more we reuse is better for us in the long term. Its simple logic.
Putting more into landfills is not the best idea when we can reuse most of the shit we throw in their. So why not?
The amount of energy used to recycle a product is WAY less than the energy used to produce the product in the first place.
The amount of energy used to recycle a product is WAY less than the energy used to produce the product in the first place.
Did you watch the video? If you did you would have realized they explained that for things like plastic bottles the OPPOSITE is true.
It takes WAY MORE energy to collect, ship, sort, clean, re-process those items than to make them from scratch.
So sure, we might not put as much plastic into a landfill, but we suck more oil out of the ground and make more CO2 emissions instead.
I agree with the video on paper recycling too. BC is a giant tree farm. It's not like we're cutting up old growth anymore, recycling paper actually hurts one of our big industries: FORESTRY
Did you watch the video? If you did you would have realized they explained that for things like plastic bottles the OPPOSITE is true.
It takes WAY MORE energy to collect, ship, sort, clean, re-process those items than to make them from scratch.
So sure, we might not put as much plastic into a landfill, but we suck more oil out of the ground and make more CO2 emissions instead.
I agree with the video on paper recycling too. BC is a giant tree farm. It's not like we're cutting up old growth anymore, recycling paper actually hurts one of our big industries: FORESTRY
Oil is a finite resource. The less we use to produce plastic the more you have to drive your car!
IT TAKES MORE OIL TO RECYCLE PLASTIC THAN IT DOES TO MAKE IT FROM SCRATCH
Pretty simple.
Ok well you pointed out that to recycle a product it takes "collect, ship, sort, clean, re-process"
So yes to collect and ship the recycled product would take oil for the transportation.
To sort, clean and re-process, Takes energy not necessarily oil to produce that energy. Whos to say 100% of recycle plants get their energy from oil. The energy for those 3 steps can come from many different power stations.
With producing plastic, alot of materials are used to produce it. So you have to count in the manufacturing of those materials, the transportation of such goods, ethylele glycol, methonol, p-xylene, acetic acid.
Quote:
The Pacific Institute estimates that in 2006:
Producing the bottles for American consumption required the equivalent of more than 17 million barrels of oil, not including the energy for transportation
Bottling water produced more than 2.5 million tons of carbon dioxide
It took 3 liters of water to produce 1 liter of bottled water
Energy Required to Make PET Plastic:
According to the plastics manufacturing industry, it takes around 3.4 megajoules of energy to make a typical one-liter plastic bottle, cap, and packaging. Making enough plastic to bottle 31.2 billion liters of water required more than 106 billion megajoules of energy. Because a barrel of oil contains around 6 thousand megajoules, the Pacific Institute estimates that the equivalent of more than 17 million barrels of oil were needed to produce these plastic bottles.
Ok well i decided to do some research myself as im curious about the topic.
How much energy does it take to recycle a plastic bottle?
I could only find a yahoo answers page with some results.
Quote:
A 500ml plastic bottle weighs about 20 grams. Material is PET or PETG. This is a very small amount of material and plasticizes very quickly. The following are estimates based upon equipment energy use per hour and recycling thousands of bottles at a time.
To recycle you must regrind the material= 400 watts for 0.5 seconds = 200 watt seconds
Remelt and repelletize the material=1200 watts for 1 second= 1200 watt seconds
Mold it into something new= 2000 watts for 2 seconds=4000 watt seconds
Total 5400 watt seconds= 1.5 watt hours
By comparison a 40 watt energy saving lamp uses 27 times the energy per hour.
Plastics melt at temperatures far lower than glass or metals and therefore uses far less energy to recycle
Now take in account that they are not accounting for the transportation of the recycled plastic, but neither was the "The Pacific Institute" in their findings.
Quote:
Here are some interesting facts and statistics about plastic bottles:
5.1 billion: Amount, in pounds, of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles and jars available in the U.S. for recycling in 2009.
2,456 million: Amount, in pounds, of plastic bottles – including PET and HDPE – recycled in 2009, making it a record high.
46: Number of plastics collection programs that were added to U.S. communities in 2009.
28: Percentage of PET plastic bottles that got recycled in 2009.
44: Percentage increase in 2009 of RPET (Recycled PET) used in food and beverage bottles.
2/3: The amount of energy that is saved when producing new plastic products from recycled materials instead of raw (virgin) materials. It also reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
Six: The number of hours that the energy conserved from recycling a single plastic bottle can light a 60-watt light bulb.
19: The number of 20 oz. PET bottles it takes to yield enough fiber for an extra large T-shirt or one square foot of carpet.
So by the math of my findings,
3.4 megajoules to create a new bottle and cap from scratch, compaired to 1.5 watt hours to recycle a plastic bottle.
3.4 megajoules = 144 watt hours.
I think the point is regardless if it's manmade or nautural why are we paying taxes towards it? It's not like the tax money is doing anything but paying a guy 20 bux an hour to sort garbage and a cash grab for the gov.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveDime
lol
how is global warming BS?
Its a fact that earth is getting warmer. Man made or natural w/e... its still a fact.
Ok well you pointed out that to recycle a product it takes "collect, ship, sort, clean, re-process"
So yes to collect and ship the recycled product would take oil for the transportation.
To sort, clean and re-process, Takes energy not necessarily oil to produce that energy. Whos to say 100% of recycle plants get their energy from oil. The energy for those 3 steps can come from many different power stations.
The issue with this is that while we are lucky here in BC, most of the rest of the world (with few exceptions) use coal, oil or natural-gas fired electrical power. This is especially true of the US, which P&T's BS is focusing on. Also remember that while we think of recycling as a regional thing, Americans love to do things like regional and state amalgamation, meaning that all plastics and processing would go from local depots to regional centres to recycling plants and from there get redistributed to plastic manufacturers and/or users....meaning that things are both more and less efficient.
It's like when you buy organic and you think you're doing a good thing, or when you buy "locally line-caught" fish...except that the amount of fuel used for that single fish, or the amount of fertilizer and care for that single head of lettuce is much more than that of a mass-produced one. Just because you think you're being green doesn't mean you actually are.