Comments on: Recycling Myths

By: stop spam plugin

stop spam plugin — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:58:06 +0000

Valuable wordpress plugin…

[...]we came across a cool site that you might enjoy. Take a look if you are looking for a way to clean your blog from spam links.[...]……

By: Jude Richardson

Jude Richardson — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:13:39 +0000

Of course there are myths that justify recycling: like, saving a tree, as if trees do not replace themselves. I propose that the more we recycle the less space that is needed for landfills and, that is a necessary consideration.

By: SUSAN in CA

SUSAN in CA — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:48:44 +0000

I disagree with you Serena. I would assume almost all landfills have disposable diapers in them and are equipped to handle them. Again, out west where drinking water is very scarce, I wouldn’t recommend using 5-10 gallons of water to clean a cloth diaper. I don’t know how many it would take, but using drinking water to get rid of fecal matter doesn’t make good sense out here. They may be biodegradable, but I think disposables are now too. Yes, much has changed in 15 years since this article was written, but the water shortage in the west isn’t one of them.

By: Serena

Serena — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:32:57 +0000

I was nodding and agreeing with this article up until cloth diapers get mentioned. The advantages of cloth diapers are very clear, both for the family (in monetary savings), for the environment. Cotton, hemp and bamboo cloth diapers are biodegradable (you can even compost them once you’re done) and they ensure we don’t send human waste to the landfills which are usually not equipped to handle it.

Was this article really published in ’95? Quite a lot has changed since then.

By: Dr.Steve

Dr.Steve — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:15:43 +0000

Perhaps it is the recycling of bad ideas that is the most wasteful and expensive.

By: Lilly Blor

Lilly Blor — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:33:09 +0000

These myths are absolutly horrible! There is no way anyone who was smart like me would believe this!

By: Lawrence Reed

Lawrence Reed — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:48:27 +0000

Thanks. I think you’re spot-on. — L. Reed

By: October Jones

October Jones — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:01:13 +0000

Great article. I would suspect that recycling over all has been sluggish to become accepted in our economy, because the value is not entirely proven. As you noted, aluminum cans have a clear payoff, thus states have been recycling cans for a while now. I also think that current efforts of recycling seem to be counter to the goal of a good economy. I suspect that recycling is actually dangerous to the economy, if it is allowed to redistribute resources in a way that devalues the existing resources. Buy a stapler for 4 bucks, use it for a year, and then donate it. That stapler will naturally compete against a new stapler. Thus compromising a product that a market value is set to. There has to be a way of planning recycling in such a way that fosters our economy, so that the market can accept it.