|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kiknkorea
Joined: 16 May 2008
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:10 am Post subject: UK introduces 9-bin recycling system |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Households have been told to separate cardboard from paper, and plastic bottles from glass, tins and aerosols.
The regulations have prompted fierce criticism, with people complaining that the scheme is too confusing and their homes do not have space for the various different bins and bags.
The new bin system by Newcastle-under-Lyme Council, north Staffordshire, includes a silver slop bucket for food waste, which is then emptied into a larger, green outdoor bin.
There is a pink bag for plastic bottles, a blue box for glass, foil, tins and aerosols, a green bag for cardboard and blue bags for paper and magazines.
Clothing and textiles go in a white bag, garden waste in a wheelie bin with a brown lid and non-recyclable waste in a separate grey wheelie bin.
If successful, the scheme � which is more rigorous than any previous recycling standards expected of households � is likely to be adopted by councils up and down the country. |
I guess I would be paying some fines.
No way would I be able to keep track of that.
I have enough trouble here with my apartment complex bins (only 5!)
Full article-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenerliving/7627055/Nine-bin-recycling-system-introduced.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hyeon Een
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Probably do the same as I do here:
Save up the dark colored plastic bags for secret midnight runs to the nearest trash place/street filled with everything I can't be bothered to sort or couldn't understand.
Speaking of which: Onion skins and egg shells.. do they go in the food waste bag? If not, general trash? Or.. some other secret thing I don't know about... (I've only lived here 6 years. And I just told my wife that putting plastic bags into the (plastic) food bag was a no-no.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The regulations have prompted fierce criticism, with people complaining that the scheme is too confusing and their homes do not have space for the various different bins and bags. |
Fierce criticism over the logistics of putting the right thing into the right box or bag? Come on, if it's to confusing, write a list. If you're going to recycle, you might as well do it well, and doing more of the sorting on the individual side makes the process more efficient. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We live in a civilized society. If we are at the point socially where we are being forced by some outside entity to wallow around in our own trash, then we have gone decidedly backwards in recent generations.
Really. Making people sort their own trash is completely inefficient. It wastes millions of hours a year compared with industrially sorting it. Or if you want to save time and money, the cheapest, most efficient, most environmentally sound method of disposal is to dump the trash in the ground.
Recycling is NOT good for the environment. For many items, it uses less resources to make a new one than to recycle it. Which is why private firms happily recycle aluminium and copper but need subsidies to make recycling paper and glass economical.
Absurd. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The regulations have prompted fierce criticism, with people complaining that the scheme is too confusing and their homes do not have space for the various different bins and bags. |
Fierce criticism over the logistics of putting the right thing into the right box or bag? Come on, if it's to confusing, write a list. If you're going to recycle, you might as well do it well, and doing more of the sorting on the individual side makes the process more efficient. |
I'm sure it makes the process more efficient for the recyclers, but it is infinitely less efficient in sum total. Ignoring the total impact of an (especially govt) action, is so endemic in our society.
We have massive and prosperity crushing taxes on our wealth, now it seems that they are coming for our free time. What will be next? Presidential addresses broadcast on every news station? (already happens). Compulsory gymnastics for the fat? (gym class) Compulsory attendance at political rallies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kotakji
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The regulations have prompted fierce criticism, with people complaining that the scheme is too confusing and their homes do not have space for the various different bins and bags. |
Fierce criticism over the logistics of putting the right thing into the right box or bag? Come on, if it's to confusing, write a list. If you're going to recycle, you might as well do it well, and doing more of the sorting on the individual side makes the process more efficient. |
I'm sure it makes the process more efficient for the recyclers, but it is infinitely less efficient in sum total. Ignoring the total impact of an (especially govt) action, is so endemic in our society.
We have massive and prosperity crushing taxes on our wealth, now it seems that they are coming for our free time. What will be next? Presidential addresses broadcast on every news station? (already happens). Compulsory gymnastics for the fat? (gym class) Compulsory attendance at political rallies? |
At the same time Senior, wouldn't mandating this kind of inefficiency be a good thing for society in the long run? God knows that the average citizen has an excess of fat-stored energy that needs to be wasted some way or another. Sorting recyclables isn't, for the most part, going to come out of the work schedule; its going to come out of the time spent watching Jerry Springer or whatever the local analog is. In addition, I agree with Fox's comment about complexity. Seriously, is it so hard to figure out how to put one type of thing in one bag?! have we really sunk that far?
Now to be perfectly fair, I agree that some recyclables are not worth the effort of reprocessing even if you ignore the cost of separating them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| regulations have prompted fierce criticism, with people complaining that the scheme is too confusing and their homes do not have space for the various different bins and bags. |
Fierce criticism over the logistics of putting the right thing into the right box or bag? Come on, if it's to confusing, write a list. If you're going to recycle, you might as well do it well, and doing more of the sorting on the individual side makes the process more efficient.[/quote]
I'm sure it makes the process more efficient for the recyclers, but it is infinitely less efficient in sum total. Ignoring the total impact of an (especially govt) action, is so endemic in our society.
We have massive and prosperity crushing taxes on our wealth, now it seems that they are coming for our free time. What will be next? Presidential addresses broadcast on every news station? (already happens). Compulsory gymnastics for the fat? (gym class) Compulsory attendance at political rallies?[/quote]
At the same time Senior, wouldn't mandating this kind of inefficiency be a good thing for society in the long run? God knows that the average citizen has an excess of fat-stored energy that needs to be wasted some way or another. Sorting recyclables isn't, for the most part, going to come out of the work schedule; its going to come out of the time spent watching Jerry Springer or whatever the local analog is. In addition, I agree with Fox's comment about complexity. Seriously, is it so hard to figure out how to put one type of thing in one bag?! have we really sunk that far? [/quote]
No. It isn't a good idea for the govt to be mandating certain behavior.
A) It isn't for you, or any one else, to be forcing their morals or standards of behavior on other people.
B) See "unintended consequences".
| Quote: |
| Now to be perfectly fair, I agree that some recyclables are not worth the effort of reprocessing even if you ignore the cost of separating them. |
Which is why subsidizing them is as stupid as mandating what people do with their free time.[/code] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wait, this isn't UK-wide, is it? Its just Newcastle-under-Lyme. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| I'm sure it makes the process more efficient for the recyclers, but it is infinitely less efficient in sum total. |
When I throw a glass bottle away, tossing it into bin c instead of bin b costs me precisely zero extra time. Bagging multiple types of garbage might take an extra minute or two a week; a minute or two which I (and all of us) have to spare.
| Senior wrote: |
| Ignoring the total impact of an (especially govt) action, is so endemic in our society. |
And what is the total impact? What will our society lose because of this? A social service is being made more efficient, and anyone of remote intellect will lose somewhere between a few moments per day and no time at all. It's all well and good to talk about "millions of hours a year being wasted," but it's hugely deceptive. Yes, people spending a minute or two a week sorting their own rubbish adds up to millions of hours a year when spread over a population, but back in reality-land, it's still just a minute or two a week.
We all have sufficient spare time to engage in an activity for a minute or two a week at precisely zero cost to ourselves. No one is going to lose productive work-time over this. No one is going to have to forego a hobby or activity they'd otherwise engage in because of this. No one will lose sleep-time over this. Your life will be exactly the same in terms of content, except you'll spend an extra minute or two a week on garbage. That's not something I'd call a meaningful cost to society.
And in the end, no one is even being forced to do this. You only have to sort your rubbish if you want the government to haul it away for you. If you are willing to forego that, you can do whatever the Hell you want. This isn't tyranny, it's just setting the terms and conditions of government-offered waste removal services.
| Senior wrote: |
| What will be next? Presidential addresses broadcast on every news station? (already happens). Compulsory gymnastics for the fat? (gym class) Compulsory attendance at political rallies? |
Likening people having to sort their own rubbish if they want the government to collect it to compulsory attendance at political rallies is boarderline retarded. This kind of hysteria is why the general public has such a hard time taking libertarians seriously. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
schwa
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Yap
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I look out over a neighborhood trash pickup place & I've watched the recycling guys in action. All the neatly separated glass, metal, plastic, & paper gets chucked together into the same compactor.
Freelance trash pickers do however extract newspaper, cardboard, & beer bottles before the city guys get there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| I'm sure it makes the process more efficient for the recyclers, but it is infinitely less efficient in sum total. |
When I throw a glass bottle away, tossing it into bin c instead of bin b costs me precisely zero extra time. Bagging multiple types of garbage might take an extra minute or two a week; a minute or two which I (and all of us) have to spare.
| Senior wrote: |
| Ignoring the total impact of an (especially govt) action, is so endemic in our society. |
And what is the total impact? What will our society lose because of this? A social service is being made more efficient, and anyone of remote intellect will lose somewhere between a few moments per day and no time at all. It's all well and good to talk about "millions of hours a year being wasted," but it's hugely deceptive. Yes, people spending a minute or two a week sorting their own rubbish adds up to millions of hours a year when spread over a population, but back in reality-land, it's still just a minute or two a week.
We all have sufficient spare time to engage in an activity for a minute or two a week at precisely zero cost to ourselves. No one is going to lose productive work-time over this. No one is going to have to forego a hobby or activity they'd otherwise engage in because of this. No one will lose sleep-time over this. Your life will be exactly the same in terms of content, except you'll spend an extra minute or two a week on garbage. That's not something I'd call a meaningful cost to society.
And in the end, no one is even being forced to do this. You only have to sort your rubbish if you want the government to haul it away for you. If you are willing to forego that, you can do whatever the Hell you want. This isn't tyranny, it's just setting the terms and conditions of government-offered waste removal services.
| Senior wrote: |
| What will be next? Presidential addresses broadcast on every news station? (already happens). Compulsory gymnastics for the fat? (gym class) Compulsory attendance at political rallies? |
Likening people having to sort their own rubbish if they want the government to collect it to compulsory attendance at political rallies is boarderline retarded. This kind of hysteria is why the general public has such a hard time taking libertarians seriously. |
You still gotta have people re-sort the recyclables that people didn't put in the right place.
And
What about people who don't sort properly? Gonna give them fines? Make them criminals? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| You still gotta have people re-sort the recyclables that people didn't put in the right place. |
A small amount of deviation can be ignored with regards to sorting; a few incorrect bottles or so forth here or there doesn't require resorting. Only systematic, large-scale missorting would result in a serious need for this, and in response to that:
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| What about people who don't sort properly? Gonna give them fines? Make them criminals? |
No fines. No criminal charges. Just don't pick up their garbage if they don't sort it well enough. Garbage collection is a service, not a right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| I'm sure it makes the process more efficient for the recyclers, but it is infinitely less efficient in sum total. |
When I throw a glass bottle away, tossing it into bin c instead of bin b costs me precisely zero extra time. Bagging multiple types of garbage might take an extra minute or two a week; a minute or two which I (and all of us) have to spare. |
Why are you making judgment calls about how much other people value their free time? It isn't for you to decide.
Personally, I resent wallowing in trash, in order to assuage the feelings of middle class hippies.
| Quote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Ignoring the total impact of an (especially govt) action, is so endemic in our society. |
And what is the total impact? What will our society lose because of this? A social service is being made more efficient, and anyone of remote intellect will lose somewhere between a few moments per day and no time at all. It's all well and good to talk about "millions of hours a year being wasted," but it's hugely deceptive. Yes, people spending a minute or two a week sorting their own rubbish adds up to millions of hours a year when spread over a population, but back in reality-land, it's still just a minute or two a week. |
Why would you so tritely dismiss an actual drain on resources? Wasting time is just as bad as wasting water or electricity. How is incremental squandering of time any different?
| Quote: |
| We all have sufficient spare time to engage in an activity for a minute or two a week at precisely zero cost to ourselves. No one is going to lose productive work-time over this. No one is going to have to forego a hobby or activity they'd otherwise engage in because of this. No one will lose sleep-time over this. Your life will be exactly the same in terms of content, except you'll spend an extra minute or two a week on garbage. That's not something I'd call a meaningful cost to society. |
Again you are making an individual judgment call, and applying it to everyone. Stop doing it.
Taken in isolation, this probably isn't a big deal. But, where does it end? If people accept this, then ever more onerous taxes on time will become acceptable.
| Quote: |
| And in the end, no one is even being forced to do this. You only have to sort your rubbish if you want the government to haul it away for you. If you are willing to forego that, you can do whatever the Hell you want. This isn't tyranny, it's just setting the terms and conditions of government-offered waste removal services. |
The govt monopoly crowds out true competition. Who wants to compete against a firm who has an unlimited bank roll?
| Quote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| What will be next? Presidential addresses broadcast on every news station? (already happens). Compulsory gymnastics for the fat? (gym class) Compulsory attendance at political rallies? |
Likening people having to sort their own rubbish if they want the government to collect it to compulsory attendance at political rallies is boarderline retarded. This kind of hysteria is why the general public has such a hard time taking libertarians seriously. |
Maybe you have trouble taking reality seriously, but thankfully the rest of the populace is coming around to all the bull that is being piled on them. You're probably right, in that sorting your recyclables is a very small thing, but it's one of thousands of small things that are unnecessarily put in citizens way.
In any case, this whole debate is moot. Recycling is nothing more than a make work scheme for political cronies. The govt subsidized part of recycling is WORSE for the environment than just throwing the trash in the ground. This being a fact, why are we doing it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Why are you making judgment calls about how much other people value their free time? It isn't for you to decide. |
You're right, and it's not for your to decide either, so stop speaking as if you are speaking for everyone. Anyone who values that 1 or 2 minutes a week such that this is a problem for them can pay someone else to handle their rubbish for them. This needn't be an entrepreneur, and it could easily even be a local kid looking for a bit of pocket money.
| Senior wrote: |
| Personally, I resent wallowing in trash, in order to assuage the feelings of middle class hippies. |
Then don't do it, and the government won't carry your trash away for you. Seems simple enough.
| Senior wrote: |
| Why would you so tritely dismiss an actual drain on resources? Wasting time is just as bad as wasting water or electricity. How is incremental squandering of time any different? |
It's not actually a drain on resources. This utilizes waste time, and moreover it utilizes incredibly tiny amounts of it. No one doesn't have a few minutes of waste time each week to sort their rubbish. No one. As such, there is no loss of resources. If an individual does consider those scant few moments a valuable resource, they can pay someone else a pittance to do their sorting for them.
| Senior wrote: |
| Again you are making an individual judgment call, and applying it to everyone. Stop doing it. |
I'm sorry Senior, but I'm not going to comply with your demands. You can keep pretending that people exist who simply don't have a spare minute or two a week to ensure their rubbish is properly sorted, but it won't make you more correct.
| Senior wrote: |
| Taken in isolation, this probably isn't a big deal. But, where does it end? |
Slippery slope arguments are generally acts of intellectual desparation.
| Senior wrote: |
| The govt monopoly crowds out true competition. Who wants to compete against a firm who has an unlimited bank roll? |
Come on Senior. You could hire a local kid for a few bucks a week to do your rubbish sorting for you if you wanted. People do it all the time for lawn care.
| Senior wrote: |
| Maybe you have trouble taking reality seriously, but thankfully the rest of the populace is coming around to all the bull that is being piled on them. You're probably right, in that sorting your recyclables is a very small thing, but it's one of thousands of small things that are unnecessarily put in citizens way. |
Citizens should, of course, stand up against anything they feel is unreasonable. If enough people in a given community feel like you do, then it will be discontinued.
| Senior wrote: |
| In any case, this whole debate is moot. Recycling is nothing more than a make work scheme for political cronies. The govt subsidized part of recycling is WORSE for the environment than just throwing the trash in the ground. This being a fact, why are we doing it? |
Evidence sufficient to convince someone like you must be irrefutably persuasive. I'm sure if you just show it around a bit, people will stop recycling right away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Why would people stop recycling? At least in my experience, it's cheaper (out of pocket) to recycle, than put your can/bottles/plastic in the trash. It would be irrational to stop recycling. I certainly recycle. The true cost is hidden, though, and that is where the problem arises. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
