Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Stealin' People's RecyclingFollow

#52 Jan 17 2013 at 7:07 AM Rating: Good
***
1,087 posts
Quote:
Although recycling programs in the United States have become a key component in waste management, recycling programs are in fact one the most costly methods of waste disposal. According to author Harvey Black of the Environmental Health Perspectives Journal, in San Jose, California “it costs $28 per ton to landfill waste compared with $147 a ton to recycle” (Black 1006). In Atlantic County, New Jersey, selling recyclable goods brings in $2.45 million. However, the cost of collecting and sorting these recycled materials plus interest payments on the recycling facility costs the county over $3 million (Black 1006). With the time, money, and energy spent collecting and processing recycled goods, the price of recycling is much higher than discarding waste into landfills or incinerators. Despite the high costs of recycling, proponents of recycling argue that the environmental and health benefits of recycling outweigh the costs. Recycling advocates believe that recycling is more than just an issue of economics and is essential to caring for human health and environmental sustainability. Nevertheless, recycling facilities not only cost a great deal of money, but they also damage the environment by generating large amounts of waste and endanger human health by emitting numerous toxic pollutants. Instead of spending a large sum of money on recycling programs, we should put money towards higher priority programs such as healthcare, education, and cost-effective environmental initiatives. Given that the environmental and health benefits of recycling do not outweigh the high costs, the United States must cut down its number of recycling programs. In order to offset several of the environmental benefits of recycling, waste reduction techniques such as reducing and reusing must become a commonplace component of this country’s waste management

Took one Google...... Univ. of Maryland btw,
____________________________
[99WAR,99BLM,99DRK,99BST,99PLD,99MNK,99SMN75RDM49THF45NIN/WHM/DNC
/SAM,,~] Galka

BASTOK:10 SKY: O SEA: O DYNAMIS: O
SIREN srvr
YARP !!!
#53 Jan 17 2013 at 7:28 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Took one Google

To find an essay by an undergraduate business student. Good work, fucknut. Maybe next time you can try to find a crayon drawing done by a 3 year old.

The university part is kind of meaningless when it's not sponsored research but a creative writing assignment to an undergrad, BTW.

My god, you people are morons.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#54 Jan 17 2013 at 7:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Landfills are a huge source of environmental degradation - to all media, and incinerators are notorious for going 'off-license' with their emissions. Any large scale garbage collection and treatment, to be most efficient is going to require the same level of sorting as recycling - there's simply stuff that won't burn and stuff that won't biodegrade and stuff that is too hazardous to allow into the public trash stream.

Recycling stuff, depending on the methods can be a squeaky clean process in comparison to traditional trash disposal. It costs more because the processes are much more regulated. Traditional garbage disposal would cost as much if not more if landfills and incinerators had to meet the same level of environmental standards as reuse industries.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#55 Jan 17 2013 at 7:41 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
http://depositphotos.com/5720848/stock-photo-Recycle-World.html

Ms. Jones class, BTW
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#56 Jan 17 2013 at 8:35 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Oh, not too mention as resources and space become more scarce, and as nimbyism spreads and spreads recycling will become more and more valuable - necessary even. Also, if you squeezed out all the monetary numbers involved with making our trash go away, you'll probably find that traditional trash disposal is subsidized at a much greater rate than reuse/recycling industries.

No one wants a dump in their backyard, or down the street from the playground or even off the highway as their so fricken ugly. Already landfills and incinerators are having to move further and further away from their source, increasing transportation costs and of course increasing levels of all that nice diesel exhaust heading into the atmosphere.

The traditional waste disposal infrastructure is incredibly inefficient. As cradle to grave manufacturing becomes the norm it will necessitate that products have a second or even third use.

In fact, if anyone wants to get into a lucrative business, find a way to get good clean reuse out of an abundant waste stream.


____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#57 Jan 17 2013 at 9:00 AM Rating: Excellent
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Quote:
“it costs $28 per ton to landfill waste compared with $147 a ton to recycle” (Black 1006). In Atlantic County, New Jersey, selling recyclable goods brings in $2.45 million. However, the cost of collecting and sorting these recycled materials plus interest payments on the recycling facility costs the county over $3 million (Black 1006).


These figures don't even support his argument.

If recycling costs 3 million and you get 2.45 million back, then the net cost per ton is 147 - (2.45/3 * 147) = 26.95 or $27 a ton, one dollar cheaper than landfill. This is assuming that the net cost of landfill is pretty much the same as the gross cost, and that it doesn't cost the council significantly more than 3 million to do their recycling - if it does then the figures are pretty ****. It also assumes that the price of sorting etc is counted in the gross cost, as it should be.

Honestly, it would have been much better to quote the Black article he's ripping chunks out of.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#58 Jan 17 2013 at 9:12 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Honestly, it would have been much better to quote the Black article he's ripping chunks out of.

Sure, but that wasn't the (obviously first year) writing assignment in his English class.

People need to understand that there's a loose hierarchy of knowledge. From most useless to most usefull:

sh*t you made up and wish were true: Gabji level knowledge.

Your personal experience related to everyone else on the planet at a leverage of 1 to 6,000,000,000: Most people's level of knowledge, AKA, My kid got a flu shot then got sick, the flu shot makes you sick.

sh*t you googled and didn't think about: The level on display here. AKA, Most people I know don't know how to use a search engine, so I assume my magical power to do so allows me to settle any augment without doing anything else.

Basic logic: Most above average intelligence people. AKA, just because crime rates went down as gun sales went up doesn't mean guns caused less crime.

Basic statistical understanding: Understanding variance, etc. Knowing when "New study shows apples cure cancer" is bullsh*t based on the other 900 studies that didn't find this, etc. Almost never seen here, maybe 4 or 5 posters capable of this, and most too lazy to bother much of the time as there's no reward.

Advanced understanding of systems theory and logical interaction in regards to human behavior. Extremely rare intuitive grasp of human nature coupled with extensive study of same and it's mathematical underpinnings to develop a system of analysis capable of understanding why people react a certain way to most situations, and frequently to predict same with reasonable accuracy in excess of randomness. - Me.

Edited, Jan 17th 2013 10:13am by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#59 Jan 17 2013 at 9:15 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,546 posts
Quote:
Advanced understanding of systems theory and logical interaction in regards to human behavior. Extremely rare intuitive grasp of human nature coupled with extensive study of same and it's mathematical underpinnings to develop a system of analysis capable of understanding why people react a certain way to most situations, and frequently to predict same with reasonable accuracy in excess of randomness. - Me.


Smiley: rolleyes

Come on guy, you don't even know how to operate the quote function!
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#60 Jan 17 2013 at 9:16 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
- Me.
dude, ur link doesn't work.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#61 Jan 17 2013 at 5:16 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Basic statistical understanding: Understanding variance, etc. Knowing when "New study shows apples cure cancer" is bullsh*t based on the other 900 studies that didn't find this, etc. Almost never seen here, maybe 4 or 5 posters capable of this, and most too lazy to bother much of the time as there's no reward.


Given the vast number of studies concluding that household recycling costs more than normal means of disposal, it's strange that you continue to cling to the exact opposition assumption.

Quote:
Advanced understanding of systems theory and logical interaction in regards to human behavior. Extremely rare intuitive grasp of human nature coupled with extensive study of same and it's mathematical underpinnings to develop a system of analysis capable of understanding why people react a certain way to most situations, and frequently to predict same with reasonable accuracy in excess of randomness. - Me.


Hah! Funny how the first and last levels are more or less interchangeable depending solely on perspective.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#62 Jan 17 2013 at 8:35 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Quote:
Advanced understanding of systems theory and logical interaction in regards to human behavior. Extremely rare intuitive grasp of human nature coupled with extensive study of same and it's mathematical underpinnings to develop a system of analysis capable of understanding why people react a certain way to most situations, and frequently to predict same with reasonable accuracy in excess of randomness. - Me.


Smiley: rolleyes

Come on guy, you don't even know how to operate the quote function!

Dude, he can't even spell argument. Obviously he knows nothing of statistical analysis, much less using the quote function.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#63 Jan 17 2013 at 9:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
My county has to pay the next county over a hefty sum of money to put our trash in their landfill, because we filled ours up and have no room for another.

We have a fairly robust recycling program. Mixed stream recyclables can be dropped off at multiple locations for free. It's encouraged... because recycling can be done in-county. Waste disposal cannot.

Edited, Jan 17th 2013 10:38pm by catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#64 Jan 18 2013 at 6:09 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Hah! Funny how the first and last levels are more or less interchangeable depending solely on perspective.

Indeed. Thank god for the Downing effect, eh?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#65 Jan 18 2013 at 8:11 AM Rating: Good
***
1,087 posts
Quote:
Given the vast number of studies concluding that household recycling costs more than normal means of disposal, it's strange that you continue to cling to the exact opposition assumption


But, it makes us feel better, & allows us to continue buying billions of plastic bottles......
Quote:
. In order to offset several of the environmental benefits of recycling, waste reduction techniques such as reducing and reusing must become a commonplace component of this country’s waste management

This requires ACTUAL solutions, rather than blindly feeling good about half measures. When a (self proclaimed) genius first response is to name call, it would appear a nerve has been struck. [quote]Good work, ***************
____________________________
[99WAR,99BLM,99DRK,99BST,99PLD,99MNK,99SMN75RDM49THF45NIN/WHM/DNC
/SAM,,~] Galka

BASTOK:10 SKY: O SEA: O DYNAMIS: O
SIREN srvr
YARP !!!
#66 Jan 18 2013 at 9:28 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
When a (self proclaimed) genius first response is to name call, it would appear a nerve has been struck.

Nah, too easy.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#67 Jan 18 2013 at 8:22 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Hah! Funny how the first and last levels are more or less interchangeable depending solely on perspective.

Indeed. Thank god for the Downing effect, eh?


Yes. That and the Rinemacher Paradox. But you're a "special" example of that one, aren't you?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#68 Jan 18 2013 at 8:34 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Going to assume that "Rinemacher Paradox" is a typo since it doesn't come up on Google. Care to elaborate what that is without devolving into needless words?
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#69 Jan 18 2013 at 8:50 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Criminy wrote:
Going to assume that "Rinemacher Paradox" is a typo since it doesn't come up on Google. Care to elaborate what that is without devolving into needless words?


It's the idea that people with little knowledge or understanding in a given area will tend to depend heavily on labeled terms to cover for their lack of understanding, assuming that by showing knowledge of a term they heard they will be viewed as knowledgeable in the subject at hand. The reason it's labeled a paradox should be obvious.


Oh. And I made it up to illustrate a point. Do you see what the point is?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#70 Jan 18 2013 at 8:55 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Oh I understand all right. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#71 Jan 18 2013 at 9:01 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,429 posts
I saw that movie almost 20 years ago...



Edited, Jan 19th 2013 6:02am by Kuwoobie
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#72 Jan 18 2013 at 9:23 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Criminy wrote:
Oh I understand all right. Smiley: rolleyes


You googled what I wrote, didn't you? Point made then.

Maybe I should explain the background. I once had a boss who used to love to mock people who got caught up in buzz words and phrases. He would intentionally make up things that would sound like they were some kind of industry term just to see how people would react. It's quite interesting actually. And it teaches people the difference between understanding what you're talking about and responding in a predictable (herd like) manner to a buzz phrase. It's very common to get a group of people to nod and agree to some term they've heard, even if you just explained the exact same thing in normal language and they all looked at you with blank stares. "Oh everyone knows to use the binary least square approach! Of course!"... Blank stare.


What Smash posted just triggered a memory is all.

Edited, Jan 18th 2013 7:32pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#73 Jan 18 2013 at 9:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I once had a boss who used to love to mock people who got caught up in buzz words and phrases.

I'm absolutely sure that there is no question that the truth is this is a simple fact.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#74 Jan 18 2013 at 10:14 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
gbaji wrote:
You googled what I wrote, didn't you? Point made then.


Smiley: oyvey

____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#75 Jan 18 2013 at 10:58 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
I once had a boss who used to love to mock people who got caught up in buzz words and phrases.

I had a boss once who killed 3 men with his bare hands, on separate individual occasions, years apart. He never mocked anyone. Not that I feel mocked, mind, you. I think you illustrate the concept of illusory superiority fairly perfectly, to be honest. Your post just reminded me of how the work I've done in my life mattered to a great many people and how if you had never existed, no one would have really minded.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#76 Jan 19 2013 at 4:27 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,546 posts
gbaji wrote:
Criminy wrote:
Going to assume that "Rinemacher Paradox" is a typo since it doesn't come up on Google. Care to elaborate what that is without devolving into needless words?


It's the idea that people with little knowledge or understanding in a given area will tend to depend heavily on labeled terms to cover for their lack of understanding, assuming that by showing knowledge of a term they heard they will be viewed as knowledgeable in the subject at hand. The reason it's labeled a paradox should be obvious.


Oh. And I made it up to illustrate a point. Do you see what the point is?



I thought that was called the Gbaji Complex?
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 70 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (70)