Why do environmentalists fail to realize that not all recycling is good?

Question

I'm not saying that all recycling is tree-hugger propaganda, just that some of it doesn't make sense.

One type of recycling I agree with is aluminum. Reusing it takes way less energy than mining and purifing new ore.

Recycling glass is not practical though. You make glass out of sand, and you can find sand anywhere. Recycling old glass takes more energy than making new glass. This means that you actually waste energy, going against the whole principle of recycling.

If this sounds familiar, it was in a book I recently read by G. Gordon Liddy.

anywho, do you agree disagree, or just not give a fu<k?

Answer 1

well from a certain point of view, anything is better than throwing stuff in our landfills.

That&#039;s really the whole point of recycling, not how to make a profit off of it.

Whether it takes more energy or not, I don&#039;t know as I&#039;ve haven&#039;t seen any studies, nor have I read the Liddy material you refer to.

If it truly takes more enery to recycle glass than to make new glass, then yes, in and of itself in that context I would agree it doesn&#039;t make sense.

Whether I could agree to that in absolute terms would require a lot more information and facts than are in your question.

Answer 2

I Have no idea how much energy it cost to recycle . And i don&#039;t know if environmentalist do either . Do you know what it cost down to the penny and how much fuel is burned by recycling compared to starting out fresh?

Maybe everything that is recycled should be studied and compared then information given to the public and let them decide if they want to recycle a certain material or not . If its better to just trash it then so be it

Answer 3

ALL reducing, reusing and recycling is GOOD!!!!! End of story

Answer 4

yea true ..but its still better to recycle ..than to throw it in the land fileds

Answer 5

Actually, a lot of places are running out of sand. I learned this recently in my environmental studies course. You should look further into it. It&#039;s quite interesting.

Answer 6

G. Gordon Liddy is not a scientist.  And he&#039;s dead wrong about glass.

It takes way more energy to melt sand than to melt old glass.  Glass is up there with aluminum as something where recycling makes a lot of sense.

Don&#039;t take my word for it:

http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resources/...

http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/...

http://www.deq.state.mt.us/Recycle/Glass...

http://www.epa.gov/msw/glass.htm

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/Toolsand...

Google glass recycling energy for lots more.

It&#039;s better to get facts on environmental issues from scientists, and not political hacks.  And to always research the information further.

Answer 7

It is known that not all recycling is good.  But only by trying different recycling alternatives; can we come to find worthwhile means to productively manage waste and create energy - as a valuable by-product.  Pursuing such endeavors is great. It also means a more efficient means of recycling!

Answer 8

they should make glass back into sand when its obsolete!!!

Answer 9

G. Gordon Liddy wasn&#039;t too

smart even in his heyday.  I

see that he hasn&#039;t gotten any

smarter.  Recycled glass makes many lovely things.

If you use the portion of sand,

you are making the glass to

begin with.  If the glass is already made, all you have

to do is melt it and add colors,

pour into molds and make anything you want.  It can

also be blown into lovely

vases/lamps/dishes, etc.