Earth Friendly Product? - Page 2

Steven Lyle Jordan · 03-07-2009, 01:08 PM

Trees sequester more carbon than paper... and the logging, milling, water-intensive chemical baths and treatment (not to mention shipping) means that much more carbon is expended making the paper than the amount of carbon stored in the paper.

Renrut5 · 03-09-2009, 11:45 AM

I really appreciate this thread. Once you think past the more obvious, such as trees and shipping costs, there are more extensions than I would have expected. Scotty1024's comments on the pluses of paper are particularly interesting -- as a major "paper collector" myself, with more books on my shelves than should be legal, I find some comfort in thinking I may be doing a good thing after all in keeping those beloved tomes. OTOH, I have been around several paper mills, and the aesthetics of papermaking itself are not so good. I wonder how the final equation of pollution versus carbon sequestering would balance, but I know that being able to reach for a paper reference volume is sometimes priceless. And reading a child stories from a well-handled favorite book is also something I'd hate to give up. I think of the Kindle not as a global replacement for my books but as an extension, though the idea of getting rid of newspapers and magazines sure has appeal!

Steven Lyle Jordan · 03-09-2009, 12:41 PM

Though you might not realize it from many of my comments, I do not advocate a complete removal of printed books from our lives. I do believe that printed volumes, as special products, gifts, or "heirlooms," will continue to have value, and can continue to be produced and cherished. I see general printing going in the same direction, being used for special and "boutique" uses almost exclusively in the future.

However, the vast bulk of paper use, for mass-market materials, periodicals and daily use--probably 99% of paper use--can and should be severely curtailed or replaced altogether, for environmental reasons. Simply put, we just cannot afford the environmental damage done by the paper producing industry at the present scale.

sirbruce · 03-09-2009, 12:47 PM

Steve, did anyone ever tell you you look like Neil Degrasse Tyson?

Steven Lyle Jordan · 03-09-2009, 12:58 PM

Who?

Just kidding... nope, first time I've heard that! Now that you mention it, though, I seem to remember this guy in the gestation pod next to mine...

dmaul1114 · 03-09-2009, 12:58 PM

Saves space was my main reason. It does save paper, though I doubt I'll convert my magazine subscriptions. A lot (like Newsweek) don't have everything in the kindle version and I like flipping through. I end up reading pretty much cover to cover and I wouldn't do that with just a list of articles (just like I don't read nearly as much of the paper online as I would if I still subscribed to the print version).

I do wonder how much the environmental help is offset by jackasses that just throw the batteries (or whole kindles away) down the road rather than recycling/proper disposal.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 03-09-2009, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

I do wonder how much the environmental help is offset by jackasses that just throw the batteries (or whole kindles away) down the road rather than recycling/proper disposal.

A lot... which is why it's been suggested that forcing owners to bring their devices in for battery replacement is one sure way to see that the majority of batteries get properly disposed of by retailers. (I'm not saying all, because we all know some places will bend the rules if it saves them money somehow...)

desertgrandma · 03-09-2009, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

A lot... which is why it's been suggested that forcing owners to bring their devices in for battery replacement is one sure way to see that the majority of batteries get properly disposed of by retailers. (I'm not saying all, because we all know some places will bend the rules if it saves them money somehow...)

I am just stunned by that remark.

pilotbob · 03-09-2009, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

A lot... which is why it's been suggested that forcing owners to bring their devices in for battery replacement is one sure way to see that the majority of batteries get properly disposed of by retailers. (I'm not saying all, because we all know some places will bend the rules if it saves them money somehow...)

This is once again an example of if you make it easy for people to do the right thing they will do it.

Many places you have to bring a battery or a device to a recycling center. We have to do that in Tampa. Any computers, or other type stuff you are supposed to bring to the collection center. Batteries too. Of course, most people don't do it. They just hide the stuff in their normal trash collection.

Just recently they allowed us to start putting rechargeable batteries that were used up into our recycle bins for normal collection. I have heard many people say how excellent this was.

BOb

Steven Lyle Jordan · 03-09-2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

I am just stunned by that remark.

Be stunned if you want... but the indisputable fact is that the majority of American consumers demonstrate a penchant for laziness, and will toss a battery into the nearest trash can before properly recycling them (see BOb's post above). Sure, if consumers would be more responsible, you wouldn't have to take such steps. But a look at the environmental situation we're in proves that it's not always enough to depend on people to be responsible and do the right thing...

dmaul1114 · 03-09-2009, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

A lot... which is why it's been suggested that forcing owners to bring their devices in for battery replacement is one sure way to see that the majority of batteries get properly disposed of by retailers. (I'm not saying all, because we all know some places will bend the rules if it saves them money somehow...)

True, that should help. But I'm sure some will just throw the whole thing away when the non-replaceable battery dies.

Alisa · 03-09-2009, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Just recently they allowed us to start putting rechargeable batteries that were used up into our recycle bins for normal collection. I have heard many people say how excellent this was.

Where I live we at least have a couple free ewaste days a year where we can set stuff out. The battery thing would be even better. I doubt most people save them for the ewaste days. They might save that old monitor, but they probably toss the batteries without even thinking of it.

I used to live in Berkeley and they decided not to offer plastics recycling with the normal curbside recycling services. Their reasoning is they didn't want to encourage people to buy plastic. They figured if it was hard to recycle, then people wouldn't buy it. Nope. It just ended up in the trash. In my current town, they take all plastics with the symbol on them regardless of number and allow us unlimited recycling without even having to sort. That's the way to get people to comply.

dmaul1114 · 03-09-2009, 02:19 PM

Here we have paper recycling and co-minglables (plastic, glass, metal). County gave out bins and they enforce recycling. They find recyclables in your trash, you get a fine.

Unfortunately nothing for batteries and electronics. Have to lug those to Best Buy and other places that recycle that kind of stuff.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 03-09-2009, 02:21 PM

The U.S. is in a bad way concerning the concept of "disposable" products, even to the point of considering products disposable when they can be easily recharged, refurbished or recycled. Electronics (including batteries) may be the single largest category of products that regularly get thrown away in perfectly good working order, and often landfilled as perfectly-functioning products. They are also renowned for the amounts of heavy metals and poisons they carry, and which end up in groundwater when landfilled, making them particularly bad to simply throw away. You'd think that would be enough of a reason for people to stop simply tossing them aside... but there you go.

It's a social phenomena, and it needs to be un-learned by Americans, or (sad to say) forced upon them by requiring them to take extra effort, like returning items to retailers/shops for battery replacement, taking batteries to proper recycling centers, or to be fined outright for their laziness--said fines to undo the damage done by improper disposal.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Confused over product codes - please help : )	traffordcentre	Which one should I buy?	4	05-14-2009 09:47 PM
Product registration	Tibor	Sony Reader	2	03-10-2009 04:48 AM
Defective product	Kakyou	iRex	14	10-23-2008 03:50 PM
iLiad Product Reviews??	oliverbogler	iRex Developer's Corner	3	11-19-2006 05:46 AM

03-07-2009, 01:08 PM	#16
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	Trees sequester more carbon than paper... and the logging, milling, water-intensive chemical baths and treatment (not to mention shipping) means that much more carbon is expended making the paper than the amount of carbon stored in the paper.

03-09-2009, 11:45 AM	#17
Renrut5 Junior Member Posts: 2 Karma: 10 Join Date: Mar 2009 Device: none	I really appreciate this thread. Once you think past the more obvious, such as trees and shipping costs, there are more extensions than I would have expected. Scotty1024's comments on the pluses of paper are particularly interesting -- as a major "paper collector" myself, with more books on my shelves than should be legal, I find some comfort in thinking I may be doing a good thing after all in keeping those beloved tomes. OTOH, I have been around several paper mills, and the aesthetics of papermaking itself are not so good. I wonder how the final equation of pollution versus carbon sequestering would balance, but I know that being able to reach for a paper reference volume is sometimes priceless. And reading a child stories from a well-handled favorite book is also something I'd hate to give up. I think of the Kindle not as a global replacement for my books but as an extension, though the idea of getting rid of newspapers and magazines sure has appeal!

03-09-2009, 12:41 PM	#18
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	Though you might not realize it from many of my comments, I do not advocate a complete removal of printed books from our lives. I do believe that printed volumes, as special products, gifts, or "heirlooms," will continue to have value, and can continue to be produced and cherished. I see general printing going in the same direction, being used for special and "boutique" uses almost exclusively in the future. However, the vast bulk of paper use, for mass-market materials, periodicals and daily use--probably 99% of paper use--can and should be severely curtailed or replaced altogether, for environmental reasons. Simply put, we just cannot afford the environmental damage done by the paper producing industry at the present scale.

03-09-2009, 12:47 PM	#19
sirbruce Provocateur Posts: 1,859 Karma: 505847 Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Columbus, OH Device: Kindle Touch, Kindle 2, Kindle DX, iPhone 3GS	Steve, did anyone ever tell you you look like Neil Degrasse Tyson?

03-09-2009, 12:58 PM	#20
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	Who? Just kidding... nope, first time I've heard that! Now that you mention it, though, I seem to remember this guy in the gestation pod next to mine...

03-09-2009, 12:58 PM	#21
dmaul1114 Wizard Posts: 2,300 Karma: 1121709 Join Date: Feb 2009 Device: Amazon Kindle 1	Saves space was my main reason. It does save paper, though I doubt I'll convert my magazine subscriptions. A lot (like Newsweek) don't have everything in the kindle version and I like flipping through. I end up reading pretty much cover to cover and I wouldn't do that with just a list of articles (just like I don't read nearly as much of the paper online as I would if I still subscribed to the print version). I do wonder how much the environmental help is offset by jackasses that just throw the batteries (or whole kindles away) down the road rather than recycling/proper disposal.

03-09-2009, 02:19 PM	#28
dmaul1114 Wizard Posts: 2,300 Karma: 1121709 Join Date: Feb 2009 Device: Amazon Kindle 1	Here we have paper recycling and co-minglables (plastic, glass, metal). County gave out bins and they enforce recycling. They find recyclables in your trash, you get a fine. Unfortunately nothing for batteries and electronics. Have to lug those to Best Buy and other places that recycle that kind of stuff.

03-09-2009, 02:21 PM	#29
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	The U.S. is in a bad way concerning the concept of "disposable" products, even to the point of considering products disposable when they can be easily recharged, refurbished or recycled. Electronics (including batteries) may be the single largest category of products that regularly get thrown away in perfectly good working order, and often landfilled as perfectly-functioning products. They are also renowned for the amounts of heavy metals and poisons they carry, and which end up in groundwater when landfilled, making them particularly bad to simply throw away. You'd think that would be enough of a reason for people to stop simply tossing them aside... but there you go. It's a social phenomena, and it needs to be un-learned by Americans, or (sad to say) forced upon them by requiring them to take extra effort, like returning items to retailers/shops for battery replacement, taking batteries to proper recycling centers, or to be fined outright for their laziness--said fines to undo the damage done by improper disposal.

Advert

Advert