For purposes of security of technical and financial information as well as appearing environmentally conscious, new management replaced our old recycling bins with locked 50 gallon buckets with insertion-slits, the contents of which are destined for Iron Mountain's secure shredder, and subsequent recycling...

Over every one of these beasts is a large printed sign that states, in part (these were all over the page, but I put the relevant ones next to each other):

Recycle	DoNOT Recycle
plain white paper	paper with pen or pencil on it
printer paper	paper with printer ink/toner
notepad paper
schematics	plotter paper

So, we can shred and recycle unused printer paper and unused notepad paper, but not anything that's been printed or written on - that stuff is just to be tossed with the lunch-trash.

And of course, we can shred/recycle all those Visio's that were printed after the printer ran out of toner, but not the ones that are visible!

God I love working in this place - it's got even more WTFs than the previous owners!

 

Maybe they just hate recycling as much as I do.

 

Still, that is shockingly retarded.  Like a sign over the toilet that says "FLUSH - Plain Toilet Paper  --  DO NOT FLUSH - Soiled Plain Toilet Paper".

A true classic.  Once again, thank you snoofle

The only thing I can figure is that they tried to merge the old recylcing rules (recycle-this-stuff) with the stuff that the new company will not accept, and didn't bother to do a sanity check before publishing it.

Mindless drones...

 

morbiuswilters:

"FLUSH - Plain Toilet Paper  --  DO NOT FLUSH - Soiled Plain Toilet Paper".

OMG - may I use that for our restroom?

 

morbiuswilters:

Still, that is shockingly retarded.  Like a sign over the toilet that says "FLUSH - Plain Toilet Paper  --  DO NOT FLUSH - Soiled Plain Toilet Paper".

A toilet I encounter frequently has a sign saying 'Please do not flush anything except paper towels down this toilet as it will cause a blockage'.

snoofle:

morbiuswilters:

"FLUSH - Plain Toilet Paper  --  DO NOT FLUSH - Soiled Plain Toilet Paper".

OMG - may I use that for our restroom? 

Of course, just don't hold me responsible when a pile of soiled toilet paper accumulates in the men's room. 

snoofle:

plain white paper	paper with pen or pencil on it
printer paper	paper with printer ink/toner
notepad paper
schematics	plotter paper

 

Either they mean that you should not recycle paper that still has a pen clipped to it, paper that has a toner cartridge, uh, taped to it or, um...hmm. Nope, can't make this make sense. Sorry.

So, just coat the whole page in White-out or Liquid Paper, then recycle it. Remember: It's up to people like you and me to protect our environment!

snoofle:

 

ecycle	DoNOT Recycle
plain white paper	paper with pen or pencil on it
printer paper	paper with printer ink/toner
notepad paper
schematics	plotter paper

So, we can shred and recycle unused printer paper and unused notepad paper, but not anything that's been printed or written on - that stuff is just to be tossed with the lunch-trash.

And of course, we can shred/recycle all those Visio's that were printed after the printer ran out of toner, but not the ones that are visible!

 

 

It's possible that the original intention of that list was to tell people not to recycle those materials and instead to SHRED them... and once shredded, recycling would be done from that point. (e.g. Shredded Paper is to be recycled... dedicated bin or whatnot). Or.... maybe I'm just foolishly trying to apply logic where there really isn't any.

morbiuswilters:

Maybe they just hate recycling as much as I do.

 

Still, that is shockingly retarded.

Yes, hating recycling is shockingly retarded.

NSCoder:

morbiuswilters:

Maybe they just hate recycling as much as I do.

 

Still, that is shockingly retarded.

Yes, hating recycling is shockingly retarded.

 

Why?  I like the environment, and therefore I am anti-recycling

tster:

NSCoder:

morbiuswilters:

Maybe they just hate recycling as much as I do.

 

Still, that is shockingly retarded.

Yes, hating recycling is shockingly retarded.

 

Why?  I like the environment, and therefore I am anti-recycling

Why? Do you prefer to reduce, or reuse?

NSCoder:

tster:

NSCoder:

morbiuswilters:

Maybe they just hate recycling as much as I do.

 

Still, that is shockingly retarded.

Yes, hating recycling is shockingly retarded.

 

Why?  I like the environment, and therefore I am anti-recycling

Why? Do you prefer to reduce, or reuse?

I do reduce.  I do reuse (hell, I use the disposable trays at work for a month or two when most people use them once).  However, recycling is bad for the environment.  Except for aluminum cans.

Can I inject a note of science to this discussion before we start flaming the crap out of Morb? Not recycling paper and cardboard is not as huge a deal a, say, plastic; it biodegrades quite well, and is generally eaten by anaerobic micro-organisms so it actually takes CO2 out of the atmosphere, albeit a lot less efficiently than photosynthesis. It's still a lot more energy-efficient to pulp and reuse paper that's already been processed as well, but waste paper that goes to landfill won't hang around in the environment the way synthetic materials do.

And even I, a regular Guardian reader, have to admit recycling can be a pain in the rear; it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees or being held to ransom by OPEC and/or Big Oil.

 

Alright, I'll shut up now. 

Jake Grey:

paper and cardboard...is generally eaten by anaerobic micro-organisms so it actually takes CO2 out of the atmosphere...

We should avoid anything that removes CO2 from the atmosphere.  We're seriously helping out the biosphere by getting all of the CO2 that's been trapped under ground back into circulation.

Jake Grey:

...recycling can be a pain in the rear; it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees.

That's like saying that recycling corn flakes is just marginally preferable to running out of corn.

 

Jake Grey:

Can I inject a note of science to this discussion before we start flaming the crap out of Morb? Not recycling paper and cardboard is not as huge a deal a, say, plastic; it biodegrades quite well, and is generally eaten by anaerobic micro-organisms so it actually takes CO2 out of the atmosphere, albeit a lot less efficiently than photosynthesis. It's still a lot more energy-efficient to pulp and reuse paper that's already been processed as well, but waste paper that goes to landfill won't hang around in the environment the way synthetic materials do.

And even I, a regular Guardian reader, have to admit recycling can be a pain in the rear; it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees or being held to ransom by OPEC and/or Big Oil.

 

Alright, I'll shut up now. 

 

Landfills create methane which is more global warming causing than CO2.  Not that that's a problem.  Second, they use the gases released in landfills to create energy so it's fine.  3.  Landfills are not bad for the environment.  4.  Many places (where I live included) burn the trash to create electricity.  Much better to burn paper than to recycle it.  

Jake Grey:

it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees or being held to ransom by OPEC and/or Big Oil.

 

1. Paper is created from tree farms not old-growth forests so there is no threat of running out. 
2. In many industrialized countries (including the US, I don't know about GB) there are actually more forested acres now than 100 years ago.

boomzilla:

Jake Grey:

...recycling can be a pain in the rear; it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees.

That's like saying that recycling corn flakes is just marginally preferable to running out of corn.

Hardly.  Once Corn flakes have been consumed, they become poop.  Once paper has been consumed, it becomes used paper.

belgariontheking:

Once paper has been consumed, it becomes used paper.

 

belgariontheking:

boomzilla:

Jake Grey:

...recycling can be a pain in the rear; it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees.

That's like saying that recycling corn flakes is just marginally preferable to running out of corn.

Hardly.  Once Corn flakes have been consumed, they become poop.  Once paper has been consumed, it becomes used paper.

Yes, but aside from an exuse to say 'poop', how was your reply relevant to what I said?

boomzilla:

belgariontheking:

boomzilla:

Jake Grey:

...recycling can be a pain in the rear; it's just marginally preferable to running out of trees.

That's like saying that recycling corn flakes is just marginally preferable to running out of corn.

Hardly.  Once Corn flakes have been consumed, they become poop.  Once paper has been consumed, it becomes used paper.

Yes, but aside from an exuse to say 'poop', how was your reply relevant to what I said?

Oh that's just me thinking you should come up with similies that make sense.  No big whoop.

belgariontheking:

Oh that's just me thinking you should come up with similies that make sense.  No big whoop.

Tell me about it. People who use bad similes are like airline pilots without uniforms.