what if this happened to your break?

[beached]

i think the responses to my original comment proved my point. ok, it's my personal opinion that climate change is a hoax and therefore i believe those who adhere to it are morons. but i'm not here to debate climate change...you want to believe it's science, fine, believe in Santa Claus, too, for all i care.

the real point is that almost NO ONE would argue in favor of plain ole pollution. And that's what this is really all about. If you can only get 25% of the population to believe in climate change, but nearly 100% of the population are anti-pollution, why take the more divisive climate change route?  In other words, if we stopped all pollution, i'd be happy, and the climate change folks would be happy..why dicker about what exactly it is we're happy about?!       

[loosehead]

all that said .i`m still wondering where all the recyclables go and why we don`t see more recycled products.follow the money.

[eastbound]

http://www.alternet.org/environment/why-innovative-tech-solutions-clean-oceanic-plastic-trash-are-simply-not-enough

Decent piece re plastics and our oceans.

In recent years i have developed new consumer criteria. I actually consider that I will ultimately throw away what I buy, in addition to normal assessment of cost, utility, longevity etc.

Laughable is that i try not to use plastic shopping bags, and can be seen walking the streets with armloads of groceries, at risk of dropping, breakage, waste, etc. So far no big drops, but some day this will backfire.

[SpaceCoastPaul]

Some numbers to consider when making purchase decisions.

I am attempting to locate the source study to validate the below info, but am accepting the numbers at this point as the source is frequently quoted. If I find conflicting numbers, I'll post them.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Time it takes for garbage to decompose in the environment:

Glass Bottle.......................... 1 million years
Monofilament Fishing Line… 600 years
Plastic Beverage Bottles…… 450 years[/b]
Disposable Diapers………… 450 years
Aluminum Can..................... 80-200 years
Foamed Plastic Buoy……… 80 years
Foamed Plastic Cups……… 50 years
Rubber-Boot Sole............... 50-80 years
Tin Cans……………………. 50 years
Leather................................. 50 years
Nylon Fabric........................ 30-40 years
Plastic Film Container........ 20-30 years
Plastic Bag.......................... 10-20 years
Cigarette Butt...................... 1-5 years
Wool Sock............................ 1-5 years
Plywood…………………….. 1-3 years
Waxed Milk Carton………… 3 months
Apple Core…………………. 2 months
Newspaper………………….. 6 weeks
Orange or Banana Peel...... 2-5 weeks
Paper Towel……………….. 2-4 weeks

Information Source: U.S. National Park Service; Mote Marine Lab, Sarasota, FL

[supthecreek]

It's so funny to read through this thread from start to finish.
It showcases what much of the problem is..... one side assumes the role of "moral authority" in everything ECO, then blames the other half for being the problem.
Pushback is the result.... not solutions.
It becomes a pissing war, which divides people into opposing camps.
Nothing gets accomplished..... except lying politicians get elected promising to fight the other half.

The issue of avoidable pollution, is in the best interest of all life on earth, but it is leveraged for political advantage and moral superiority.... that's a loser.

It is crucial to understand that the modernization around the world, is prone to some pretty severe unintended consequences.
Every polluter began as a solution to a problem.

Example:
Doctors recommend drinking water for good health
Studies show that well water/Muni water is full of pollutants
Yuppies turn to Perrier Water
ATTACK THE BOTTLE .... it killing the world!
Bottle bill is enacted
Yuppies complain about the bottle deposit
Perrier moves to plastic bottles
Yuppies are happy..... they drink billions of bottles a year. They throw them away
They end up in a fishes stomach.
LET"S ATTACK THE YUPPIES... THEY ARE NOT DOING ENOUGH TO RECYCLE


LETS ATTACK SOMEONE!
THIS IS SERIOUS!! THE PLANET WILL DIE!

Our responsibility is to manage a reasonable solution when bad things happen. And they will ALWAYS happen. Give up the "perfect world" approach.

When a problem arises, work together towards a solution...... no blame, no victims, no villains... just keep adjusting the sails.

[eastbound]

the best way to care about the planet is to start with one's own behavior.

[robon]

all that said .i`m still wondering where all the recyclables go and why we don`t see more recycled products.follow the money.

Hundreds of examples exist of recycled products. My waterproof snow pants are made out of recycled polyester. Patagonia has recycled products sourced from plastic bottles. Glass gets reused for jars, food packaging, sand substitutes, insulation, etc. Recycled bags for groceries, recycled paper and bags, aluminum cans continually get reused for a myriad of uses after getting melted down into blocks.

[SUP Leave]

One of my offices is in Thurston County, WA. They have a plastic bag ban by regulation.

It has been in place for 2 years. They are just now commissioning the study to see what it did.

So, if you go to the store and forget your own bags, you are forced to use tiny paper bags which cost $.05 each, and/or just put everything in your cart unbagged. I am not sure where the bag money goes, or if the store just gets it. I can safely say the baggers and checkers hate the new rules. There are a lot of people who require these guys to stuff their personal bags to the breaking point to avoid the $.05 bag fee. As someone who forgets his bags 50% of the time, I wind up with a bunch of small paper bags, but I never sweat that kind of thing. PDXMike's post reminded me of a Portlandia skit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d545PS_AkOw

[eastbound]

SUP Leave, pls post the results of the study. my hope is that, in spite of the change challenges, TC, WA is using few or none of the offensive bags.

[Fog City Rider]

SUP Leave, pls post the results of the study. my hope is that, in spite of the change challenges, TC, WA is using few or none of the offensive bags.

San Francisco was the first to enact a single-use plastic bag ban in 2007, and currently there are 118 local ordinances in California that have followed suit.  Generally they look like this:

single-use plastic bags are no longer offered, and are replaced by re-usable and/or recycled paper bags which cost a minimum of 10 cents.  If customers wish to avoid the charge, they can bring their own re-usable bags.  The 10 cent charge goes directly to retailers to offset the additional cost of paper bags over plastic. 

IMO it's an example of well-crafted legislation that addresses the concerns of all parties, including retailers.  SF has seen over a 75% reduction in bags being given out by supermarkets, etc. 

Sure, many people still won't give a sh*t.  But most people get with the program pretty quickly, because once they understand the problem, they want to do what's right.  They just need that little nudge to start changing their behaviors to more sustainable practices. 

[SlatchJim]

all that said .i`m still wondering where all the recyclables go and why we don`t see more recycled products.follow the money.

As a VP of a recycling company I can say that the answer is almost universally China.  To the highest bidder, and in recent history, it's been the chinese, but Viet Nam, Taiwan, and other asian locals have moved in a bit. 

At one time, the Chinese would take nearly everything, no matter the state of grime and gunk that went with the material.  Now it's different.  Send clean plastic, metal, glass etc. or don't waste your time, they'll ship it back.

[PonoBill]

I agree Creek. It's mostly focus, and yes, it gets used to stir people up. A current meme on facebook is the guy who dragged a shark out of the shallows to get a selfie and people who handled a baby dolphin until it died to do the same. Huge outrage. In the meantime, about a hundred million sharks die every year from barbaric practices like finning.

Go figure.

To me that kind of stuff is just air. Righteous indignation and a way to judge yourself as better than those people.

I only escape that because I don't need that kind of stuff to judge myself as better. My copious ego manages that.

[clay]

Interesting and funny thread, great stuff!

For myself I find I am much happier when I stop looking for the problem "out there" and focus on changing myself for the better, do the best I can to clean up myself and the planet and try not to get pulled into the drama of what others are doing.

My 2 cents worth of understanding is that all beings on this planet are hard wired natural born litterers.  The survival of our planet is dependent upon us discarding our grown or born "trash" so the animal scavengers and microorganisms can eat it and dispose of it in a sustainable way, and it's been this way for billions of years.  The problem started when we became disconnected from nature and saw the earth as stuff or a commodity.

[pdxmike]

PDXMike's post reminded me of a Portlandia skit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d545PS_AkOw

That's what I'm talkin' about!  Here's another (not fictional)--Seattle's new "recycling police":

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-recycle-seattle-lawsuit-murray-garbage-collection-edit-0801-bd-20150731-story.html

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/01/26/381586856/tossing-out-food-in-the-trash-in-seattle-you-ll-be-fined-for-that

..and the lawsuit:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/14/trash-talk-seattle-war-on-waste.html

Point is, recycle, don't litter, etc. but don't go to extremes that turn people off who'd otherwise be happy to do their part.

[Kaihoe]

i think the responses to my original comment proved my point. ok, it's my personal opinion that climate change is a hoax and therefore i believe those who adhere to it are morons. but i'm not here to debate climate change...you want to believe it's science, fine, believe in Santa Claus, too, for all i care.

the real point is that almost NO ONE would argue in favor of plain ole pollution. And that's what this is really all about. If you can only get 25% of the population to believe in climate change, but nearly 100% of the population are anti-pollution, why take the more divisive climate change route?  In other words, if we stopped all pollution, i'd be happy, and the climate change folks would be happy..why dicker about what exactly it is we're happy about?!     

So true. 

With the complexities of the science , butterfly's flapping their wings, politics and vested interests in climate change it would take me a Phd level of research to develop a well reasoned position.  I just pain don't know because I don't trust a huge amount of what is being taken for gospel.

It's much easier to agree that we should have as minimal impact on where we are living.