I'm guessing your friend has never heard of a landfill and probably thinks all that trash just magically disappears when the garbage man takes it away.
Actually, as an engineer, I am pretty grounded in facts. Not so much interested in magic. I am just not buying into the liberal guilt trip. They tell you it is good for the world to convince you to perform free labor. The profit is made by someone else who you did the work for. If it is actually necessary to recycle, it would be logical to put a deposit on things like cans, bottles and plastic. Recycle with my blessings. If the system changes to where it becomes worth my time and trouble to do so, I may join you.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hrSgEKTNdaI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hrSgEKTNdaI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Liberal guilt trip? wtf? Strike one. Throwing your can into a seperate bin constitutes free labor? wtf? Strike two. Profit from recycling? Hardly. The "profit" is in reduced landfill space, clutter, and environmental decay. Facts which your "analysis" fails to take into account. Strike three.
The benefit to recycling aluminum (the whole subject of this thread) is you save money because the electricity you don't spend to make new metal. It is a profitable business because the aluminum is cheaper to clean and melt then it is to make new metal.
It's not the aluminum, goofball, it the mining and smelting process that requires a ****-ton of energy. You could argue that recycling from a purely economic standpoint is not terribly productive, but such an analysis would have to ignore any potential issues related to landfill operations or ecological impact from mining operations. This is why Penn and Teller's bull**** episode on recycling was, well, bull****.
I just mentioned that a few times above but I managed to do it without personal attacks. Aluminum makes the most economic sense. Industrial recycling is much more important than paper. I am not anti recycling. Just stating the facts. Not to many people say smelt aluminum.
I did not think "goofball" constituted a personal attack. And I agree we are talking past each other. A fair statement, IMO (some would argue the economics are not as cut and dry, but I'd think them disingenuous). Your first statement, however: was totally nonsensical.
Sounds like both of you don't know how to argue... Yeah, i can't be hipocritical...I don't recycle as much as I should...I could do a lot better, but when there are recycle bins, I try to use them...btw, is she single?
Not really Aluminum is not a pollutant therefore does not hurt the environment. It just saves some energy to melt the can (recycle it) instead of make new aluminum. How is that non nonsensical?
Aluminum mining involves a great deal of pollution. Energy production involves a great deal of pollution. Cans thrown into the landfill don't dissapear without ecological impact. Your statement was kinda like saying "eating big macs all day doesn't cause heart problems, it just clogs your arteries."
Unbelievable! There are actually people waving their d!cks, pounding their chests , bragging, in this thread about how they don't recycle. Such incredibly strong, virile men. What a r****ded thing to boast about. Pull up you khakis and get back to work.
things you should get pissed about when people don't recycle them Batteries (car batteries being number one because they have valuable lead) Tires motor oil Things to let slide a 10 gram coke can
