MasterPlanSoftware:

Jeff S:

Yes, first time here.  My mistake, I didn't realize this was "humorous".  In retrospect, my sides are splitting, this is all very clever stuff!

OK, back on topic.

 

So we are supposed to not mind month old threads being resurrected, but you can't handle a little humor being thrown around?

Humor is great.  But it has to be somewhat funny, and not derail the entire thread, not be intended only to annoy, and not be offensive (e.g., posting insults about people's mothers, calling them "retards", and so on)

Sadly, none of that criteria is being met in this particular thread and many others I've seen around here lately.

OK, enough -- I am guilty of de-railing this topic myself.   back to your scheduled programming and let's all try have a little respect for your fellow posters.

 

cconroy:

Staten Island landfill

Heh, I grew up one mile from there in Eltingville, back when it was just a big hole on the East side of Richmond Ave. I finally moved away when they closed the last dumping mound on the West shore. I remember the rivers-of-runoff, the flying trash landing across from the mall, and the swarms of seagulls.

snoofle:

It used to be carboard boxes, then paper bags, now trashcan-sized plastic bags.

Just further proof of the obesity epidemic sweeping the nation...

Jeff S:

(e.g., posting insults about people's mothers, calling them "retards", and so on)

 

Where has anyone insulted anyone's mother or called anyone a retard in this thread?

Sounds like you are just making things up now...

Just because you cannot find something funny, doesn't mean other people don't enjoy it. Since I don't see anyone else complaining, this sounds like your personal problem.

Jeff S:

OK, enough -- I am guilty of de-railing this topic myself.  

More so than anyone else.

Jeff S:

let's all try have a little respect for your fellow posters.

Indeed, stop moderating threads that are not in need of it.

 

MasterPlanSoftware:

Jeff S:

(e.g., posting insults about people's mothers, calling them "retards", and so on)

 

Where has anyone insulted anyone's mother or called anyone a retard in this thread?

Sounds like you are just making things up now...

Just because you cannot find something funny, doesn't mean other people don't enjoy it. Since I don't see anyone else complaining, this sounds like your personal problem.

Jeff S:

OK, enough -- I am guilty of de-railing this topic myself.  

More so than anyone else.

Jeff S:

let's all try have a little respect for your fellow posters.

Indeed, stop moderating threads that are not in need of it.

The mother post was deleted.  And people are complaining.  End of discussion on this.  Thanks!

 

snoofle:

They don't give us anything. It's a big place with a pay-as-you-go corporate cafeteria. Most folks grab some food and bring it back to their desks. You have to carry it in something. It used to be carboard boxes, then paper bags, now trashcan-sized plastic bags. And I'm absolutely certain that they make a profit on the cost of the bags (included in the cost of the food).

 

Oh... ok.. for a minute there I thought you worked at a shoe factory in Indonesia and got paid with food. 

morbiuswilters:

The Vicar:

Plastic bags (being so thin) have different thermodynamics than thicker objects, so unless you recycle them separately from everything else, they start to burn up in the process of being melted down and cause impurities in the end product

Who said anything about recycling?  I sure as hell don't recycle my plastic bags.

 

The Vicar:

Plastic bags are extremely likely to break free from waste containers because they are sheetlike and lightweight, meaning that even when properly disposed of they can end up as litter

Really?  I haven't notice a large number of plastic bags compared to other types of litter.

 

 

The environazis like to show pictures of people in third world countries absolutely BURIED in piles of plastic bags-- even choking off streams and the like.  Unless there is some special universal force we don't know about that causes all plastic bags in the world to congregate in countries with GDPs smaller than O. J. Simpson's monthly stipend, all those pictures prove is that third world countries have huge sanitation problems.  What news!

operagost:

The environazis like to show pictures of people in third world countries absolutely BURIED in piles of plastic bags-- even choking off streams and the like.

Oh, come on. Don't you remember those autumn days where you'd help your dad rake up all the fallen plastic bags into a pile, and maybe if you were really lucky, he'd let you jump in it?

morbiuswilters:

Who said anything about recycling? I sure as hell don't recycle my plastic bags.

morbiuswilters:

Hell, you're required by law to do it here, but I just throw my garbage in with a few hundred other peoples' so nobody is going to be able to track it back to me.

morbiuswilters:

Meanwhile, landfills can be filled in and the land used for something else, but this tends to work better with the landfills that aren't full of toxic sludge created by biodegradable materials.

morbiuswilters:

Biodegrading is bad. And how long do you think bugs, worms and bacteria survive in a modern landfill? The toxins from decomposing non-plastic and non-glass materials tend to be pretty harsh.

So let me get this straight. You don't separate your trash because plastic isn't harmful to landfills, but segregated landfills would be work better because the products of decomposition in mixed landfills kill off all the decomposer organisms. Are you admitting to purposefully contributing to the inefficiency of landfills because you like to be a dick or because you have only a superficial understanding of the processes going on in landfills. I think that you should answer your own question:

morbiuswilters:

How much do you actually know about ecology and waste management?

If I may, I would like to paraphrase something you once said to me: "Thank God he's not out in the [waste management] workforce (yet)..." Finally, I'd like to point out that the plastic bags in the United States are different from those in other parts of the world. The bags that you're used to are thicker and easier to contain than most.

DKNewsham:

So let me get this straight. You don't separate your trash because plastic isn't harmful to landfills, but segregated landfills would be work better because the products of decomposition in mixed landfills kill off all the decomposer organisms. Are you admitting to purposefully contributing to the inefficiency of landfills because you like to be a dick or because you have only a superficial understanding of the processes going on in landfills.

What?  Plastic doesn't contribute anything to the problem is what I said.  It's biodegradable materials that cause the biggest problems in landfills.  Therefore I prefer non-biodegradable materials when given the choice.  I don't recycle (except valuable metals and actual toxins) but that really has nothing to do with landfills.  My argument was that plastic bags are better than paper bags and that the move away from plastic, glass and styrofoam and towards biodegradable containers was a bad one.

 

DKNewsham:

If I may, I would like to paraphrase something you once said to me: "Thank God he's not out in the [waste management] workforce (yet)..."

Still bitter about your ignorance?  I don't plan on ever going into waste management, although I guess your failures in life have reduced you to taking a job as a garbageman, eh?

 

DKNewsham:

Finally, I'd like to point out that the plastic bags in the United States are different from those in other parts of the world. The bags that you're used to are thicker and easier to contain than most.

This is because we are smarter, richer and sexier than everyone else, obviously.

morbiuswilters:

My argument was that plastic bags are better than paper bags and that the move away from plastic, glass and styrofoam and towards biodegradable containers was a bad one.

so do you count paper as 'biodegradable container' or do you see an actual difference between paper and biodegradable plastic? where i live there is no uninhabited space you could use for landfills and the garbage is mostly burnt in waste utilization plants (the call it thermic recycling, maybe they are actually using the thermal energy for something, i don't know) and paper burns cleaner and better than plastic and humid waste, thus improving the 'recycling' process by making it possible to burn at the optimal temperature and saving effort for cleaning the exhaust gases.

morbiuswilters:

It's never been anything I've noticed, so I guess you just live in a place with a bunch of jackasses. 

Yup, I do live in a place with a bunch of jackasses - but that's not related to plastic bags. Whether here in Prague, the Gobi desert or (clean, green) New Zealand, getting rid of plastic bags (among other things) IS a problem. Maybe you live somewhere without a supermarket, maybe you just don't notice.

morbiuswilters:

How much land do you think landfills take up?  It's a very, very tiny amount.  Meanwhile, landfills can be filled in and the land used for something else, but this tends to work better with the landfills that aren't full of toxic sludge created by biodegradable materials.

You're right - the land can *sometimes* be used for something else, *sometime*. Usually after a long time and a lot of money. Even if, as you suggest, oil is an unlimited resource, land isn't. Suitable land *will* run out - assuming we still want some to live and play on, untouched environments to enjoy, and maybe even a bird or animal or two. Oddly enough, there was a similar discussion today on /. (yeah, bash away). Someone pointed out this article which I found interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_Patch. In the scheme of things though, you're right. You using plastic bags, or snoofle's company using them, make all that much difference. The problem is when that becomes everyone using the plastic bags (personally, I go for reusable - a hell of a lot easier to carry home from the supermarket), leaving lights on overnight, having a 20-minute shower every day, or driving everywhere instead of walking/biking/catching a bus. They're all small things in themselves, but they do add up. I know your argument is that plastic bags are better for the environment and bio-degradable is bad, but I don't buy it. It just doesn't make sense. Once a plastic bag is made, *something* has to be done with it, and at the moment we don't have many good choices for plastic. But with paper we do have more choices - burn it, recycle, or even stick it in your own compost. And there is always reusable... snoofle, why don't you set an example, and take your own tray/box to work? :)

bstorer:

Now that's low. We don't have to fear muggers stealing our ID so as to rob us at our home address later. Incidentally, does that even make sense? Are the robbers in Mexico City so indecisive that they cannot pick a house to rob without some outside help?

First Robber: Hey, man. What house should we rob?
Second Robber: I don't know, homes. I can't decide.
First Robber (looking at ID from a recent mugging): It says here that there's some houses over on First Street, ese.
Second Robber: Awesome! Good thing this strategy isn't common, because then the police would know exactly where we plan to strike.

I'm sure you can add your own accents. Most people would go with something out of East LA, but I'm thinking more along the lines of Speedy Gonzales.

 

I know this is petty, but this particular misuse of words irritates me, and you were pretty rough on someone earlier for their grammar.  But you do not rob houses.  You rob people.   A person entering a house to take things from it would be a burglar, and they would be burglarizing the house.

tster:

I know this is petty, but this particular misuse of words irritates me, and you were pretty rough on someone earlier for their grammar.  But you do not rob houses.  You rob people.   A person entering a house to take things from it would be a burglar, and they would be burglarizing the house.

You're right (although Merriam-Webster includes as a definition of rob: "to remove valuables without right from (a place)", but I think that's mostly about robbing 7-11s). The key difference is that robbery requires the use or threat of force. Thanks for pointing it out; I should know better.

snoofle:

They don't give us anything. It's a big place with a pay-as-you-go corporate cafeteria. Most folks grab some food and bring it back to their desks. You have to carry it in something. It used to be carboard boxes, then paper bags, now trashcan-sized plastic bags. And I'm absolutely certain that they make a profit on the cost of the bags (included in the cost of the food).

 

 

They almost certainly do make a profit.That's pretty much the main goal of any business. 

Mel:

You're right - the land can *sometimes* be used for something else, *sometime*. Usually after a long time and a lot of money

 

You're talking out your ass.  The city I live in is neither rich, nor am I a century old.  When I was born, we had a landfill.  That landfill was closed, and now, 30 years later, we have homes beside it.  The landfill has been covered with grass, and a natural gas recovery facility placed beside it.  The landfill not only doesn't smell, or cause any problems whatsoever, it provides heat for homes here, and provides a lovely park and great sledding experience for children.  Nobody would know it is a landfill without having been told about it.  I wouldn't be surprised if with the sale of the land for houses and the natural gas production facility, the city has, in fact, turned a profit from it.

 Please! Everyone here who thinks landfills are poisonous and will cover the earth, watch Penn and Teller's Bullshit episode on the topic.  Please!  Just do it!  ALL the landfill in the US from the past CENTURY would cover no more area than one reasonably large city.  Put that crap up north, where NOBODY lives, and you can create JOBS, you can stop worrying about pollution (just keep the polar bears out), and the best part?  In a few decades, when oil is ridiculously expensive, and other materials are hard to find, you can create a mining operation to recover the material for even more profit.

 To really make this sound good, don't forget that recycling many materials, right now, actually produces more pollution (from the energy sources and water required) than just processing the raw materials.  In the future, this will get better.  We should keep that stuff in a landfill so it can be mined later and recycled using lower pollution processes, *and* we can actually find a way to make recycling MAKE money, rather than having it drain my taxes to help destroy the environment so some feel-goodies can, well, feel good.

 Read the book "Stuff white people like".  It has a great description on how stupid these bullshit "non-plastic" plastic bags are.  Because nobody will be carrying their groceries back home in paper bags when plastic bags are banned.  They'll be using expensive hippie bags that get lost all the time, need replacing a lot, and end up using more resources because of how much plastic they use!  ARGH!

BTW:  I live beside a city that forces garbage separation.  Several people I've spoken with agree:  People just don't want to buy a house there because it's too much hassle.  Renting is okay, as apartments don't "partitipate".  Oh, and because the city doesn't want to put tax money into the recylcing half of the equation, for the past few years since the recycling companies decided to give up on trying to make money, the trash gets recombined.  AT THE CITY DUMP.  :-D

Mel:

In the scheme of things though, you're right. You using plastic bags, or snoofle's company using them, make all that much difference. The problem is when that becomes everyone using the plastic bags (personally, I go for reusable - a hell of a lot easier to carry home from the supermarket), leaving lights on overnight, having a 20-minute shower every day, or driving everywhere instead of walking/biking/catching a bus. They're all small things in themselves, but they do add up. I know your argument is that plastic bags are better for the environment and bio-degradable is bad, but I don't buy it. It just doesn't make sense. Once a plastic bag is made, *something* has to be done with it, and at the moment we don't have many good choices for plastic. But with paper we do have more choices - burn it, recycle, or even stick it in your own compost. And there is always reusable... snoofle, why don't you set an example, and take your own tray/box to work? :)

<deleted by mod> Recycling paper or burning it is worse for the environment than throwing it away, which I already pointed out was worse than throwing away plastic.  You really think that putting an extremely stable polymer in the ground is somehow worse than burning wood products?  Finally, when it comes to reusable, who really gives a shit?  At the end of the day, everyone on Earth could use canvas bags instead of plastic or paper and the results would be unnoticable. 

The Vicar:

Actually, they've discovered that plastic bags (and similar things made from plastic, such as those thin transparent wrappers on practically everything in a modern grocery store) are dramatically worse for the environment than paper bags are, and are also dramatically worse than other recyclable plastic objects. I'll go look for the article where I read this -- it was published less than a year ago, but I can't remember where

Found the article, for those few remaining who aren't using this board as a way to pretend they're sixth graders: Plastic Bags are Killing Us.

morbiuswilters:

Still bitter about your ignorance? I guess your failures in life have reduced you to taking a job as a garbageman, eh?

I tried really hard to think of a thoughtful and informative response, but I was just too ignorant. You, sir, have won at the internet. Bravo.

(Yes, I'm being a twat, but you're still a dick for looking down on garbage men.)

snoofle:

cconroy:

Staten Island landfill

Heh, I grew up one mile from there in Eltingville, back when it was just a big hole on the East side of Richmond Ave. I finally moved away when they closed the last dumping mound on the West shore. I remember the rivers-of-runoff, the flying trash landing across from the mall, and the swarms of seagulls.

 

 

That was the last straw, was it?

 

morbiuswilters:

snoofle:

On one side, as a general rule, most plastic is made from the byproducts of refining oil, which in most cases, is not a renewable resource.

The Sun isn't a renewable resource either, but it's still vast enough for me to not worry about running out.

I think the fact that he attempted to equate over five billion years of solar power to fifty years of oil should discredit everything he ever says, ever. One is called "renewable" because your grandchildren will enjoy it and it's lifespan is eight orders of magnitude greater than something comparatively "non-renewable."

Another thing: on one hand you say waste that degrades fast is bad for the surrounding area, and on the other you claim landfills don't occupy much area. Given their small area, does it really matter if the soil in the immediate vascinity is toxic?

Arctic_Panda:

I think the fact that he attempted to equate over five billion years of solar power to fifty years of oil should discredit everything he ever says, ever.

I don't know where you got 50 years from, because that's more pessimistic than any report I've ever read. Perhaps you meant 50 years of near-peak production?

Like it or not, morbiuswilters is essentially correct: estimates put the amount of oil pumped out ever at between 10 and 12.5 percent of oil in the ground. The question is more whether we can actually get to all the remaining oil. Morbius says yes because the need for it will result in the technology necessary to get at it, you say no, presumably because you're an alarmist, and I say meh because I expect we'll reduce our dependence on oil in the next few decades.