| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bassexpander
Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Location: Someplace you'd rather be.
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:36 am Post subject: Taxing people more efficient than garbage disposal |
 |
|
I think what they really mean is that some gov't officials will lose kickbacks, or perhaps a family member is going to lose an under-the-table revenue stream if the gov't allows garbage disposals in homes:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/02/117_60720.html
| Quote: |
The Ministry of Environment has put the brakes on Seoul City Hall's plan to allow the introduction of food waste disposal units at apartments and homes.
As pertinent measures to the central government's plan to slash 20 percent of food waste disposal by 2012, the two have come up with very different approaches: placing garbage disposal units to homes or imposing a tax on waste generation.
According to the city government, the disposal units will be installed at the 538-household Purgio apartment complex in Dangsan-dong for a test run this month. It will be considered for adoption in other residential areas.
The waste disposal units grind waste in the kitchen sink and virtually liquefy it for safe flow into septic tanks, but not directly into the sewage system. At these apartments, separate pipes were attached to send the waste into water-purification tanks.
Such facilities are common in the U.S., Japan and other nations, but the Korean government is negative toward their introduction over concerns they could pollute water and block sewerage pipes.... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
santafly
Joined: 20 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| How is it that Koreans expect their nation/culture to be taken seriously/respected? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
What a silly situation. Disgusting bags of garbage out on the street are a better state of affairs? It says the waste will be going into (presumably) private septic tanks, and not public sewerage pipes. Definitely some graft or dodgy dealings going on here.
The waste situation here is genuinely retarded. I live in a villa so I don't have to worry so much. But what is more degrading than sorting your trash out, the way people are forced to in apartments? I just throw everything in the same trash bag. Anything above that (eg sorting it out) is beneath me. I'm literally too good to be sorting trash. We come from civilized societies, and (supposedly) live in one. Surely one of the benefits of living in a civilized society is either having the technology to sort our trash, or at least having the wealth to pay someone to do it for us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| santafly wrote: |
| How is it that Koreans expect their nation/culture to be taken seriously/respected? |
This isn't strictly a Korea thing. Municipal trash collection is rife with graft, corruption and inefficiency in our home lands as well.
Though, I never came across putrefying bags of food waste in my home town. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChilgokBlackHole
Joined: 21 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Take a look around. Are these a people you want to *encourage* to put things down the sink drain? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dalem
Joined: 30 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
wow, senior. Too good to sort the recycling out of your trash? Recycling is beneath you? wow.... but you're willing to pay someone else to do it for you?
Many countries sort trash. I know Germany's hardcore about it
(however, they also have a working trash removal system in place). It just makes sense. I live in an appartment, and have no problem sorting my trash. I have seperate bags in my appartment, and it's all set up. It's really easy.
Recycling... give it a try sometime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Capo
Joined: 09 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What will the pigs eat? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dalem wrote: |
wow, senior. Too good to sort the recycling out of your trash? Recycling is beneath you? wow.... but you're willing to pay someone else to do it for you?
Many countries sort trash. I know Germany's hardcore about it
(however, they also have a working trash removal system in place). It just makes sense. I live in an appartment, and have no problem sorting my trash. I have seperate bags in my appartment, and it's all set up. It's really easy.
Recycling... give it a try sometime. |
Hate to break it to you, but recycling is one of the big scams. It makes sense to recycle aluminium. People pay for cans so that they can recycle them. Most other material; paper, metal, glass, so on is actually better for the environment to throw in the trash. Think about the chain of events that occur for something to be recycled, paper for instance.
Firstly, a truck that belches Co2 comes along to pick up the paper. Secondly, no firms willingly recycles paper because they can't make any money from it. So, govt subsidies are required to make it economical. This further wastes resources. We haven't even got the paper to the recycling plant yet and it's already wasted a lot of resources.
Next, we need to make the paper ready to be turned into something useful. I was always taught that wood chucks eat the paper and 10 hours later shit out reams of pearly white A4. It turns out this isn't necessarily the case. Actually, what really happens is the waste paper goes through an immensely labor and energy intensive industrial process. The bleach and chemicals in the paper need to be extracted. This creates a lot of toxic waste that has to be disposed of some how.
So, now you have this material that isn't really useful in and of itself, except to make inferior paper that people won't buy at the market price. So, the recycled paper needs to be subsidised in order for it to be cheap enough for people to actually want to buy.
Pheeww. So, you can see that when I throw out my recyclables, I'm actually doing the environment and taxpayers a favor.
In truth, I do recycle because it's cheaper. It's possible to throw recyclables out in the street, and they will be picked up for free. I was referring to food waste. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old Gil
Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Location: Got out! olleh!
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a safe bet that somebody involved in this process is very stress.
EDIT: Seriously this country sucks. Nobody shaves their pubes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IamBabo
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:17 am Post subject: garbage disposal |
|
|
Old Gil:
that is just wrong...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
talltony4
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are you serious, Senior? You seem like a troll, but anyway, I'll bite...
You may be right that recycling is a scam, but don't you think that reducing waste is a worthy goal?
How do you propose we do that if we don't recycle? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kimchieyescream
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| talltony4 wrote: |
Are you serious, Senior? You seem like a troll, but anyway, I'll bite...
You may be right that recycling is a scam, but don't you think that reducing waste is a worthy goal?
How do you propose we do that if we don't recycle? |
Not a troll. Quite genuine. We are fed the line that recycling is this great act and that you are saving th environment, but really recycling is worse for the environment in many ways. This isn't some loon fringe idea, there is plenty of research out there on this.
Like I said earlier, it is worth while to recycle some materials. Especially aluminium. Other materials eg paper and glass, use more resources to recycle than to simply make a new one.
If your goal is to simply reduce waste without any other benefits then go ahead and recycle. But you have to realize that there are other knock on effects of achieving that goal. And overall the net result may be negative rather than the positive result you were going for. This phenomena is called "unintended consequences", and they spring out of govt officials trying to create circumstances that people wouldn't naturally do of their own free will.
Here is a humorous, though not exactly rigorously researched, introduction to what I'm talking about.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1444391672891013193# |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Haha, we quoted the exact same link.
It isn't exactly the most authoritative of sources, but it clearly sets out the logic behind the idea.
Basically, a good rule of thumb is, if it needs to be subsidized, it isn't worth doing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
If your goal is to simply reduce waste without any other benefits then go ahead and recycle. But you have to realize that there are other knock on effects of achieving that goal. And overall the net result may be negative rather than the positive result you were going for. |
What the...?
I love how that 'professor' said recycling "SOMETIMES" affects the environment negatively, and the editorial "WE have more trees now than in 1900". Yes, there's some hard evidence for you. My father was CFO of Abitibi Price, one of Canada's major paper companies. I remember him telling me tree farms are a joke, and the company was constantly having to look harder and harder for good sources.
As for subpar papers, there are worlds outside of offices.
A goal of recycling IS to reduce waste. The trucks used to haul recyclables to nearby plants also use less fuel, and churn out less CO2 than older trucks and barges which haul piles of garbage to landfills way out in the countryside.
The chemicals used in the recycling process can themselves be reused, and slowly the push towards clean energy will negate your point altogether.
Lets just stick with your only reason. You can't be bothered... "It is beneath you." That's fine, if that's how you feel. Soon there's going to be a lot more 'beneath you', seeping into your basement and produce.
And, by the way... health care, and farming are also subsidized. They must not be worth doing as well?
Last edited by crescent on Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:02 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
