From: alizard@pil
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Social inhibitions to environmental change
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 01:51:45 PST

Re: Re: Social inhibitions to environmental change
 
> From: ksm@abb-sc.abb-sc.com (Ashley)
> Newsgroups: alt.pagan
> Subject: Re: Social inhibitions to environmental change
> >of this planet is made of the stuff. NO ONE foresees our running out of it.
> >2. Would you like to come up with an estimate on how much electrical power
> >it would take to reduce a toilet into fine powder, what chemical processing
> >will be required to make it practical to reuse this powder?
> >This is a case where recycling would be a NET DETRIMENT to the planet.
> >Chemical waste products and wasted energy. I got a good laugh out of this,
> >though, thanks.
> Still being derisive? Fine. Apparently you want to adhere to the old 
> "disposable use" mindset. Apparently you have only read what I have written 
> to find things to attack instead of trying to see what was being said. 
> Here we have a fine example of a product that could easily be made 
> into something else or placed back in the ground. You laugh because 

I guess Dawn was wrong and Ashley does NOT like having his errors pointed
out. My point in the quoted section of the post is that there are times
when recycling is even more dangerous and wasteful than NOT recycling.
It takes energy, labor, and processing (often chemical) to recycle.
Occasionally, it takes more of this to recycle a material than it does to
make another one from scratch. It would appear that recycling a toilet will
among other things, result in a more expensive toilet, both in consumer cost
and in energy than one made from "virgin" materials. There are cases where
recycling makes no sense. Recycling is a STRATEGY, not an item of religious
belief. Do it where it makes sense. 

Fill for SHEETROCK??? Do you think that the energy it takes to pulverize
treated wood for filling sheetrock comes free just because it's
environmentally correct from your point of view? 

Certainly solid waste disposal is a problem. A very large problem, where I
live, we had a 10 year political war over where the new county dump was to
be located. It needs to be attacked using a rational set of priorities.

Here's an example: The common telephone book, distributed by your local
phone company every year. It's several hundred pages, and does not biodegrade
especially well. It is a major component of the bulk of what you find in
a landfill. It's not all that great for recycling ("Yellow Pages." Get the
idea?)... the French attacked the problem by distributing Minitel terminals
to customers, allowing them to dial up the local on-line phone book, get
up to the minute phone numbers, or to intelligently search for businesses
of specific types with specific characteristics. Why can't we do that?

Let me also add that a good chunk of the newsprint you congratulate yourself
for putting out in recycle bins for the trash collectors goes straight into
either warehouses waiting for buyers... and stays there... or goes straight
into landfills. Recycling only works when it makes economic sense and should
only be used when it does LESS damage to the environment than NOT recycling.
>>I think some serious study of how things REALLY work, from natural processes
>>to recycling to how things are actually made in a technological culture
>>is in order for Ashley, unless Ashley wants to provide unintentional
>>entertainment to the users of this newsgroup.
>>
>>blessings,
>>                                                 A.Lizard
>        My ass. The problem here is that I don't agree with you and
>you are too close-minded to see the point in what I'm saying. You'd
>rather look for things to pick out and flame me over than learn
>something. I really hope the people developing the technologies of the
>future are more mature than you or we're in more trouble than I
>thought. Hope you don't choke on your own hubris, you're so bitter
y>ou'd probably poison the aquifier.

No, I disagree with you because you are dead wrong. And I stand by my
statement that you need to do some SERIOUS study in this area if you don't
like making a fool of yourself publically, your post confirms it. Let me
add that ***I*** am still studying this and related areas, and expect to
spend the rest of my life doing so. I'm interested in SOLUTIONS. Not
trying to defend ideas as easily discredited as yours.
                                                 A.Lizard
====== 93 ====== sum saurus, sum saurus, sum maximus saurus! ====== 93 ======
 (slogan contributed by Jessica Mc Geary)  (translated by Murray Altheim)
Mail to me should be sent to:       |  There are no fnords in this sig file.
alizard%tweekco%boo@PacBell.COM     |  autoreply to address I posted this
     ^^^ preferred site ^^^         |  from only if you want to wait a
PacBell.COM!boo!tweekco!alizard     |  solstice or two for my answer.
alizard@seer.mystic.com             |              Kallisti!
^^^use ONLY if all else fails       |  PGP2.0 public key available on request

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Image Limited VBBS (510) 831-3634 [MUDS] Free Internet Access.
Subs-On Request/PCP Via CALOAK...     VBBS 5.608