Re: The green house effect - one of Thatcher's lies?

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 07:01:04 -0000, "Fata Morgana"
<fata.morgana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Jim Webster" <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:55ojuoF25nlnkU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I find myself constantly shocked by the waste that you see as you wander
about


A lot of the problem is an inability to re-cycle. Most new items actually
use less material than the old technology.
Look at a 28" CRT television and consider its LCD replacement. So properly
recycled when you hand in your old 30lb tv and colect your 10lb replacement
you should be putting 20lb of raw material back into the system. There is
the energy in the product, but that should also be part of the plan for
renewables.

Yes that's the "Big Picture" bit missing from so many kneejerk
responses, you not only have to look at the environmental impact of
wind generation but that of producing the generators and recycling
them at the end of their life (which part is what makes nuclear so
non-competitive)

So many consumer items nowadays aren't designed for maintenance as
they were, chuck'em and replace. :( Each one may be low impact by
comparison but if you need three to replace the whole life of one
older version . . .

The biggest waste in my life is packaging, Most items I buy have a high
quality cardboard container made to measure for the item and
inside a expanded foam holder, also not usable for anything else.. A long
time ago when I worked for the MoD such items would have come in a pine box
with a foam rubber inner container, and was returned for reuse.

The food wrapers are over-kill with high quality cardboard and inserts,
often the packaging exceeds the weight of the contents, allowing for the
overall box the collection of individual packages come in, which means over
half the transport costs is for the packaging.

At least we have an enlightened council wrt recycling, they collect
paper, card and metal, and all plastics other than wrapping, and have
bottle banks easily accessible. How much *actually* gets recycled I
don't know, if it works out less costly to tip it in a pit that's what
some councils/recycling companies have been doing. :(

They also collect garden and kitchen waste for composting but I
compost my own (and feed edible stuff to the birds - and it seems I
also feed some of the birds to the sparrowhawks . . .)

Old cartoon

"This is a plastic dustbin, it doesn't burn, rot or degrade!"

"What do you use it for?"

"You put all your rubbish that doesn't burn rot or degrade in it . .
.."

There is a lot of things we can do to reduce waste which will reduce our
co2 footprint, I am not convinced that the global warming issue is proved
but reducing waste with its associated consumption of raw materials and
polution is justified in its own right and it will significantly reduce CO2
production, which cannot hurt.

If you dislike waste, see how many perfectly good TVs and FM radios make
their way to the dump over the next few years as the
services are shut down in favour of digital !!

My old Sony is going that way soon <sniff> well it lasted well over
twenty years but is no longer cost-effective to repair. One too many
dry joints. Mother's even older Mitsubishi with goldfish-bowl tube ,
no SCARTs and no remote control is still going strong, and in many
ways the picture gives some of this flat-screen crap a run for its
money.

I did eventually "go digital", the LCD screen takes up a metric
shitload less space in my office, and doubles as a pretty decent
computer monitor. Somehow though I doubt it'll have so long a life.
.