Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rodrica Davis on February 24, 2011 at 10:20pm

Loved it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Morgan Matthew on February 25, 2011 at 2:33pm

Very well written Dallas! Great points!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kirk Holden on February 24, 2011 at 4:13pm

There are clearly only two extreme choices in this straw man derby. Free, White, Patriotic, True, Blue Mercans. And gay pedophile tree huggers.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on February 24, 2011 at 4:29pm

"And gay pedophile tree huggers."

 

Probably communist too.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arcus on February 24, 2011 at 4:50pm

I was aiming at those who don't see the middle road. More often than not, it's better than either extremes.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on February 24, 2011 at 4:31pm

Meh, anything and everything can be followed religiously, but that doesn't make everything a religion.  I mean, if we're going to spin things this badly, Justin Bieber-ism is also a religion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lindsey on February 24, 2011 at 7:28pm

Hey, don't give those Bieber fans any ideas.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rodrica Davis on February 24, 2011 at 10:58pm

lol

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve M on February 24, 2011 at 8:55pm

Paper recycling is questionable from the fuel for the trucks to pick the stuff up to  the toxic bleaching agents used to remove the ink to  the generally inferior paper produced.  Most paper companies plant trees specifically to harvest for paper so it is a renewable resource that sequesters carbon at the same time. I think that qualifies as  a win win.  One could argue that burning paper could produce energy in a carbon neutral way similar to the burning of wood.  Scrubbing the  chemicals out of the paper would create the same problems as removing them in the recycle process so that is not a gain. Interesting aside .The Sierra Club was once called to task for printing their news letter on virgin paper and their response was that their donors were accustom to high end  products.

Also interesting if the factionalization of environmentalists concerning the solar farms of the western deserts.  Some are more concerned with the environmental impact on the desert eco system than the use of the abundant solar resource to  supply clean energy.  Who wins or loses on that deal?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dallas the Phallus on February 25, 2011 at 10:10am

Paper recycling is questionable...to  the generally inferior paper produced. 

 

Steve, metals such as aluminum can be recycled indefinitely. Paper, however, "downcycles," meaning that it is never as good as the first time. However, there are still many good uses for downcycled paper, such as bags, envelope padding, egg cartons, etc. But when it comes to pollution, the paper industry is a contributer to the problem. As I understand it, the whole process is rather toxic. But what are we to do? Paper is one of the most commonly used products in the world. It's not likely we'll ever give it up. All we can hope is to improve the technology / process.

 

Most paper companies plant trees specifically to harvest for paper so it is a renewable resource that sequesters carbon at the same time.

 

The replanting of the trees is not really the issue. Clear cutting forests destroys ecosystems, drives out life, and pollutes rivers and streams. That is the largest area of concern.

 

Also interesting if the factionalization of environmentalists concerning the solar farms of the western deserts.  Some are more concerned with the environmental impact on the desert eco system than the use of the abundant solar resource to  supply clean energy.  Who wins or loses on that deal?

 

Unfortunately, a perfect technology does not exist. The concerns about the desert ecosystems are probably quite legit. We have to understand the consequences of our efforts and weigh them against the alternatives. There is nothing wrong with that kind of debate.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T A A on February 25, 2011 at 8:42pm

It all boils back down to that very basic RRRs

1-Reduce

2-Reuse

3-Recycle

Unfortunately, recycling seems to be the only capitalistically profitable portion, so it's nearly the only aspect that gets done. From the environmental standpoint, recycling should be the last resort, as trash should practically not exist.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arcus on February 25, 2011 at 11:10pm

Coming from a country which reuses (not just recycles) around 95-99.9% of cannisters, I am amazed that not more people calling themselves environmentalists don't throw Molotov coctails to get the point across. It appears to me that people generally wants more reuse and recycling. That is, of course, as long as it does not alter their ways.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 8
• Next ›
• Page