Recycling? Resource conservation?

[The Children of the Revolution]

I was in a lecture the other day (I know, strange...) which was based around the "Club of Rome" report on 'the predicament of mankind'. The report centered around predictions of doom and gloom; economic collapse, overpopulation, resource shortage etc. etc. In the interests of equality, our lecturer (a decent chap) presented an overview of the arguments of one Julian Simon.

He strongly discounts the ideas of the "Club of Rome", and promotes his own - based around the continuation of current resource usage, and the need to STOP recycling or at least dramatically reduce it. The points he raised were 'different'; that is all that can be said of them!

> Recycling uses energy, therefore is not economically viable.
> Resources, if used up, will be replaced by something else.
> Fossil fuels should be burnt mercilessly; as they grow scarce, the "market" will regulate their prices and make renewable sources an attractive alternative.

Basically then, green policies are useless...

I disagreed with this view though. I thought it relied solely on economic factors and discounted environmental ones. Nobody wants to live next to a landfill; without recycling, landfill use will undoubtedly increase. Also, recycling is not just about preserving energy or saving money - but about reusing current resources instead of plundering new reserves.

Furthermore, there is no guarantee that materials will be found to replace current resources. This would leave future generations up the creek without a paddle. (As it were) Finally, Simon does not take into account the effects of pollution - global temperatures are already on the rise; burning fossil fuels excessively would only serve to exacerbate this problem.

Your views, comrades?

[@[email protected]@]

good

[apathy maybe]

The amount of energy used to create one aluminum can is about the same as that to recycle some 20 cans. Aluminum can recycling saves 95 percent of the energy needed to make aluminum from bauxite ore.
etc
Sure lets burn the coal and oil, the air doesn't mater, I breath carbon dioxide all the time. Who cares if New York subways are flooded? I don't.

quite basicly the guy is talking shit.


http://www.cancentral.com/success1.htm
http://www.earth911.org/master.asp

[Rastafari]

all the right thinks about are high-end "economic factors"
when will people realize that are existance (let alone our fucking wallets&#33 is forfeit to the benefit of the environment.

This guy is against the Earth, which I really hate to see. If for every ten people who really are concerned, one of these jokers pops up, we will still lose our world in short time.

[The Children of the Revolution]

Excellent. These were my views too.

The amount of energy used to create one aluminum can is about the same as that to recycle some 20 cans. Aluminum can recycling saves 95 percent of the energy needed to make aluminum from bauxite ore.

Fantastic - the links are very useful too. I need figures and quotes for an essay i'm writing you see! Thanks.

The trouble is, these views are becoming more and more prevalent. Because they effectively "legalise" being lazy and not recycling, the majority of the populace will tend to believe them. As well as right wing, non-green, pro-business governments. :angry:

Anyone want to argue FOR the cases of Julian Simon?

[Rastafari]

Interesting idea, but I don't think we'll see any arguement here. lets split this sucker off into OI...

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Recycling and looking after our environment is very important, this dued seem to be thinking only of the economic factors, which don't exist under communist society.
The environment is the responsibility of everyone, keep it green, clean and mean.

[crazy comie]

what a wierdo

[DEPAVER]

"Recycling uses energy, therefore is not economically viable."

Recycling does use energy, so perhaps it's better to resist and refuse than recycle and reuse. Question everything you purchase, especially if it comes in some sort of manufactured packaging.

"Resources, if used up, will be replaced by something else."

This is not true. We live in a world of finite resources, and those resources must be used wisely. All people are entitled to a fair share of the world's resources as long as they are assuming their responsibility for sustaining the earth, and all people must be held responsible for their own pollution and environmental degradation. No individual, corporation, or nation has a right to an ever-increasing share of the earth's finite resources. As Mahatma Gandhi said, "The earth provides enough to satisfy every person's need but not every person's greed."

"Fossil fuels should be burnt mercilessly; as they grow scarce, the "market" will regulate their prices and make renewable sources an attractive alternative."

Nonsense. The people living in East Tennessee and Western North Carolina can tell you first hand the folly of this position. Over 100 days per year, the National Park Service issues a severe health warning because of poor air quality in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The culprit? TVA, coal-fired plants causing air pollution. Why would anyone want to burn a finite resource to extinction for economic reasons?

Sustainable means that the society does not consume more natural resources than can be replenished by natural biological and geophysical cycles, and does not produce waste faster than can be dispersed by natural biological and geophysical cycles.

I think its pretty clear that any group that does not follow these simple guidelines will not long last.

[@[email protected]@]

And used the aspect again in the recycling, the Chinese once does very much well. But, as a result of the economical fast development, we has neglected about this aspect education. I worried very much. Should let the frugal consciousness maintain at in generation of generation of person's brains. We only an Earth.

[crazy comie]

is that guy a nutter.

[ComradeRed]

Heres my solution: throw everything away
then it would be sorted
biodegradable things would do so
reusable things would be reused
the rest compacted into a cube surrounded in cement, and used to make homes for the homeless.
YEAH!

[Invader Zim]

maybe a v=better system would be to not actually produse as much utter shit. Like akk the excess packaging you get. ETC