Our world is facing a huge crisis today in the form of global warming. Though most recognize that it is a bomb ticking away and awaiting to explode, few of us actually make an effort to change this dangerous trend. Lots of research and methods are being discovered and discussed but very few concrete steps have been taken yet. The major culprit is the industries that contribute maximum carbon dioxide and other dangerous gases to the environment. Although it is imperative that each of us do something to reduce our carbon footprint on earth, the industries and huge factories in the developing worlds should be forced to take up real concrete methods of curtailing pollution.
With rising population, the world has to increase production of materials and goods for all. This obviously calls for more and more industries in the world, which will only add more emitting pollutants to the atmosphere. The world needs to come together to work out solutions that can both save the environment and maintain economic development.
The problem of global warming represents a serious threat to the entire world. We are running out of time as warned by many scientists around the globe. People have created this problem by greatly increasing the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere; and people working together will be the only way to stop it.
As President Obama makes an effort to introduce and promote green enterprises and industries, he will face a startling fact. Most pollution is created by China and the developing world. So no matter how much the developed world reduces their carbon emission, countries like China will compensate it with more pollutants. The per capita emission has increased six times today thanks to industrial projects which do not follow minimum environmental laws and directives.
It is imperative that Chinese President Hu Jintao and the other world leaders start to outline a plan now that will be followed by most countries, particularly China, in going green in their business practices.
However, the problem facing the world is that if we tackle this problem from a micro level, we come face to face with industrialists who are trying very hard to make their business a success and increase profit. There is nothing wrong in that because more profit would mean greater investment and a stronger economy. But most of these factory/industrial owners do not take into account the bad effects of pollution due to the emissions and discharges from their units.
Scientists across the globe are insisting that the environmental costs should also be included in the production costs. But, unfortunately, the busy industrialists do not have time to take into account the social and environmental responsibilities of the company; and, hence, little to no effort is made by them to alter the situation. Forcing the overworked staff to look into ways to follow the green norms is not cost effective in the long run.
A better way to tackle the problem is to hire a Green Consultant. The Green Consultant would look into individual business practices and suggest concrete methods to reduce pollution and reduce wastage and improper use of resources. For a nominal fee the consultant would work throughout the year to move the business toward a successful GCI Green Building certification. However, because businesses differ in nature, region, demands, budget, etc., it would make sense that one approach for all may not work well.
Consult the Green Business League website to learn more about the consultant and their expertise.
We’ve certainly seen quite a few companies come out and say that their manufacturing facilities have a zero impact on the environment, meaning zero footprint, but indeed, there is much controversy on how to determine what a zero foot print is. It’s almost impossible to get to zero, even if a company goes and plants 10,000 trees over the course of 5-years.
The other day at a Think Tank meeting, we were talking about how to establish a complete CO2 discharge chain of a product, including all its components in the process of making it. From the wrappers, card board box, printing, assembly, energy to do all that, the distance the people traveled to work in what type of cars, etc. I mean really narrowing down the actual discharges.
Not because we are Global Warming alarmists, but because we feel it is not exactly correct for a company to claim Zero Emissions. And that we must have a more realistic view of the total process, Supply chain and all.
Many companies like Dell in Texas have stated that they have finally achieved zero emissions, but they were attacked for stating that, why? Because, everyone has a different concept of what nothing is. In other words we are all out there fighting over nothing and that makes no sense to anyone, no matter how you figure it.
Indeed, we should be applauding Dell for their solar panels, LEEDs certified warehouses and assembly plant and all their hard work and meaningful dedication to do the right thing. And yet, we are not doing that are we? Instead we find people attacking businesses, even those that go out of their way, spending millions of dollars to do the right thing. I ask are we doing the right thing by allowing persnickety environmental complainers to attack America’s greatest companies?
Last week, we introduced you to the Resource Matrix, which is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
We showed you how economics leads to people maximizing their benefits in “win-lose” propositions: you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom. And how we’ve been hypnotized in believing what they want is also what we want.
But the scales have been falling from our eyes, we’re beginning to see the truth, and the power has been shifting away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd:
Do-gooders have increased our awareness and worked to change deals from “win-lose” to “win-win”
There is no “free lunch:” finite energy resources will run out; actions have consequences, and the consequences of our actions are already visible, rather scary, and quite irreversible; and that the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd hasn’t been telling the truth
We now realize we’re all in this together: we have greater awareness of our actions and the desire to change, and have ways to change.
Hallelujah and Praise the Collective!
Today, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming.
None of this is to dismiss or diminish the contribution of fossil fuels in global warming. Hey, just like the Special Olympics, if you participate, you get a medal. We just think that gold-medal winner Fossil Fuels has stolen the spotlight, letting silver-medalist Water Use keep us hypnotized in believing that water is a free lunch, and that nature will clear up polluted waters while getting away with breaking the rules.
Water, water, everywhere,
not a drop to drink.
According to our friends at How Stuff Works, who I wrote about sarcastically for their oxymoronic clean coal article in discussing how true public relations stuff really works, gives us this data:
98% of the planet’s water is in the oceans. It’s salt water - we can’t drink it or irrigate our crops with it.
2% is usable. Of that 2%:
80% is locked up in polar ice caps and glaciers
18% is underground in aquifers and wells
1.8% is in lakes and rivers
0.2% is elsewhere: either floating in the air as clouds and water vapor, locked up in plants and animals (and your body), and in foods and beverages.
Okay, so 20% of the usable water (only 0.4% of all water on Earth) is accessible, right?
Well . . . no. Many of the aquifers, wells, lakes, and rivers have been sucked dry like a once-juicy fly carcass in a spider’s web. (The 18% and 1.8% you see above is like the money in the Social Security Fund: there actually is nothing there.)
And many of those water sources that do still have a drop to drink are worse than the ocean’s salt water. Drink salt water and you’ll need to yawn into a bucket. Drink this water and you’ll kick the bucket.
And I know you aren’t asking this burning question:
“So . . . global warming to release fresh water from ice caps and glaciers is a good thing, no?”
Percentage this, percentage that.
Talk my language, will you?
I know I’m pulling the disgusting old government trick: drowning you in an ocean of water statistics.
So let’s make it plain and simple:
You bring in $10,000 a month. You’re also living high on the hog and doing your personal best to outshine every bling-bling Hip Hopster Musical Artist in materially conspicuous consumption:
$9800 goes to the McMansion mortgage and gold-plated Rolls Royce lease
$160.00 goes to investments in clothing and accessories
$0.40 has been lost in the sofa cushions
$39.60 a month is for everything else: food, phone and electric bills, income taxes, and all the other non-essentials: Don’t spend it all in one place!
Aquifers and wells and lakes and rivers:
Dry or polluted, oh my!
Fred Pearce, author of When the Rivers Run Dry, helps us quickly understand it:
We can all save water in the home. But as laudable as it is to take a shower rather than a bath and turn off the faucet while brushing our teeth, we shouldn’t get hold of the idea that regular domestic water use is what is really emptying the world’s rivers. Manufacturing goods … consumes a certain amount, but that’s not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar. (emphasis mine.) (Fred Pearce, When the Rivers Run Dry, Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. p 3)
Here are a few numbers he gives:
to grow a pound of rice: 250 to 650 gallons of water
to grow a pound of wheat: 130 gallons
to produce a quart of milk: 500 to 1000 gallons
to produce a pound of cheese: 650 gallons
to produce a 1/4 pound of burger: 3000 gallons
He kindly puts water use into perspective in annual terms:
1 ton (265 gallons) for drinking
50 to 100 tons (13,250 to 26,500 gallons) around the house
1500 to 2000 tons (397,500 to 530,000 gallons) for food and clothing
—————————————–
sidebar: How Many Gallons to Produce One Pound of Beef?
Lies, damned lies, and statistics
US Beef industry’s Cattlemen’s Association: 441 gallons
Fred Pearce: 12,000 gallons
Water Footprint Network: 1854 gallons (calculations: 15500 litres of water per kg; 4079 gallons per kg; 1854 gallons per pound)
In an industrial beef production system, it takes an average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef.
The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing.
This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing).
Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water on average.
—————————————–
Where does all that water come from?
From virtually everywhere
If it comes from imported goods (Thai rice or Egyptian cotton), the water comes from those countries.
When the water is collected from rivers or pumped from underground, as it is in much of the world, it’s:
increasingly expensive
increasingly likely to deprive someone of water (nothing to drink)
increasingly likely to empty rivers and underground water reserves
And when the rivers are running low, as they are more frequently, there is less water to grow anything at all.
The water used in growing and producing goods around the world is known as “virtual water” and the trade of these goods is known as “virtual water transfers.”
And who’s the biggest water exporting Mouseketeer of them all? The United States.
When you drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of the region, virtually taking a share of the Costa Rican rains. The same is true within a national and regional boundaries. The Colorado River is drained so Californians can eat their Big Macs and have friends over for a Sunday afternoon barbecue.
In the same way that your use of fossil fuel is measured as a “carbon footprint,” your water use, actual and through virtual water transfer, is measured as a “water footprint.”
How big is my water footprint?
I’ll show you mine if you show me yours
Arjen Y. Hoekstra, professor at the University of Twente, the Netherlands, introduced the water-footprint concept in 2002. It “shows water use related to consumption within a nation, while the traditional indicator shows water use in relation to production within a nation.” (Hoekstra and Chapagain, Globalization of Water, Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008, p. 3)
With Hoekstra and Chapagain’s water footprint calculator (waterfootprint.org), you select your country, input food, domestic water use, and industrial goods consumption, press a button, and you get your:
total water footprint for the year
bar charts for the three components
bar charts for individual food categories
For example, you’re in the US, eat only 1 pound of cereal a week (.4545 kg) and have a low-fat, low-sugar diet, use a low-flow showerhead, use a no-flush eco-toilet, and never run the tap while brushing your teeth. Two extremes:
You’re the hippiest of the hip: making $10,000 a year: Your water footprint: 245 cubic meters (65,170 gallons)
You’re the hippiest of the Yuppies: making $120,000: Your water footprint: 2979 cubic meters (792,414 gallons). Difference due to your income’s effect on industrial production.
Three notes on the calculations, because Professor Hoekstra is European and lives in the social welfare country that started birthing hippies in Amsterdam decades before they showed up in the US at Woodstock:
The higher your income, the greater your water footprint, even if you don’t personally consume anything: you’re a capitalist pig supporting the Establishment Regime, I guess
So how is Cinnamon’s capitalist water footprint? Answer: 650 cubic meters (172,900 gallons)
Water’s running out:
I get the fossil fuel analogy so far.
And what about climate change?
We return to Fred Pearce’s book to find an example, of which he has oceans:
China’s Yellow River: The fifth longest in the world, it begins high in the mountains of eastern Tibet and journeys more than 3000 miles. Almost half a billion people depend on it for drinking and crop irrigation, and it’s made China the world’s largest wheat producer and second largest corn producer. Yet more than half of the lakes it feeds have disappeared over the last 20 years, and a third of pastures have turned to desert. This desertification generates huge dust storms that choke lungs in Beijing, close schools in Koreas, dust cars in Japan, and rain dust on mountains across the Pacific and Western Canada.
State irrigation projects along the Yellow River soak up the majority of its water - the total official allocations are greater than the actual flow.
The resulting drought could be an early warning sign of global warming.
Much of the declines in moisture reaching rivers is in line with prediction of climate researchers. So how does this global warming happen?
Higher air temperatures from desertification increase evaporation from oceans and intensify the water cycle. This increases atmospheric water vapor - 8 to 10% more than today. This increases global rainfall, but the rain is being redistributed: middle latitudes (read: the US) are becoming drier. Higher temperatures increase evaporation on land, meaning soil dries out faster, meaning less rainfall is reaching rivers.
The higher temperatures melt glaciers and snowpacks. At first, this leads to unpredecented floods. After the glaciers disappear, meltwaters that feed rivers disappear. The combined decreasing rainfall and increasing evaporation will lower moisture by 40% in the southern and western states.
The Sierra Nevada snowpack could diminish by 70 to 80 percent over the next 50 years. And some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions could dry up.
Global climate is becoming more extreme: the dry areas become drier, and the wet areas become wetter. And more areas are becoming dry deserts. Loss of habitat and agricultural lands. It’s a vicious cycle.
So what can you do?
Navigating through the Resource Matrix
As Fred Pearce points out, your drinking and bathing account for 0.05% of your total water consumption. Your food and clothing weigh in at 95.00%, although I find his 12,000 gallons needed to produce a pound of burger rather wild.
As Professor Arjen Y. Joekstra shows with his Water Footprint Calculator, your consumption of meats accounts for a lot, as does your guilt by association of being in an industrialized country.
The obvious solution: eat fewer e-coli burgers from your neighborhood Salt and Fat Slop Bucket restaurant.
The wiser solution: like your choices in energy use, become more aware of the resources needed to produce anything and the consequences. Such as luxurious cotton grown in the Egyptian desert.
Next article in the water efficiency series:
How an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed
peasant on some other side of the globe affects you
We continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars.
And all of this is for one purpose:
To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you.
Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .
To your green, brighter future,
Cinnamon Alvarez,
A19
And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.
I was back in the grocery store this Saturday, but it was not the prices (although I did manage to keep it under ninety pounds once again) that caught my eye or even what other people were buying. In fact, what I noticed this Saturday did not happen until I was home and unpacking my weekly shopping. What I noticed was the amount of packaging, most of it useless, that I put into the bin. Of course, we have been using our green bags for over a year now so we are not throwing very many plastic ones away. Well, in fact we don’t really throw any away, because we try to follow the adage…Reduce, re-use, re-cycle. I want to look at how the 3 R’s of reduce, re-use, recycle fits into all of the Frugal Fam core values.
Family first. Since we are our children’s first and best teachers, I think that the time we invest in teaching them about all things environmental is an excellent investment in our futures and theirs. Isn’t it ironic that reduce, re-use, recycle could become the new 3 R’s. In fact so I don’t wear out my fingers re-typing it all over and over again, let’s us that term in the rest of the article to refer to reduce, re-use, recycle. It is never too early to begin either. At three, my daughter knows the difference between the bin and the recycle bag (sometimes better than my eighteen year old).
Saving money. In fact, in the UK most councils offer free recycling facilities to all residents, which means that recycling costs us nothing. There are examples too of how recycling can actually save you money though, such as my wormary, which produces organic liquid fertiliser and compost or reducing your energy consumption by turning down the thermostat. And as I have shown in past post about Freecycle, charity shops and similar services, you can save a great deal of money by re-using items that someone else may no long need.
But in the USA recycling too can actually pay money. Although not as easy for many American families to place bags or special bins on the stoop (although some forward thinking counties and cities are offering curb-side recycling as in the UK), the profit from this activity can be used to fund extras or meet essential obligations. Before I left Los Angeles in 2006, there were increasingly mini-recycling centres often in the parking lots of grocery stores. Families could take their paper, metal and plastic products and turn them into paper…paper money that is. In some ways this is more incentive to recycle than the UK system. What if your family could pay for its holiday through recycling? Perhaps even clean up your street? I know that my three years old loves helping me to pick up trash in her park. Could your family do something similar?
Environmentally friendly. Like I said, the 3 R’s are among the basics of environmentally friendly. It is one of the easiest things that we can all do to save this special planet for our children and grand-children. Alright, we have all heard the pundits talk about how recycling does not make a difference. So to clear up a few of those myths:
Enough energy is saved by recycling one aluminium can to run a TV set for three hours.
A steel mill which uses recycled scrap reduces related water pollution, air pollution, and mining wastes by at least 70 percent.
Creating one ton of recycled paper uses only about 60 percent of the energy needed to make a ton of virgin paper.
Seventeen trees are saved for each ton of recycled newspaper.
Recycling steel and tin cans saves 74 percent of the energy necessary to produce them.
Today most bottles and jars contain at least 25 percent recycled glass.
Healthy living. It may not be immediately obvious how the 3 R’s can make you healthier, but I have a couple of examples:
Reduce your carbon footprint by walking to school, the store and anywhere else you can…also increases the amount of exercise you are getting. Walking is actually one of the best exercises there is.
Eating fresher often means that there is less packaging as frozen, tinned and jarred products, which produce more waste also, are likely to have more added salts, sugars and preservatives.
Reducing the carbon miles of your food by growing your own fruits and vegetables also allows you to grow them organically as well as having the benefit of reducing your stress through the pleasurable hobby of gardening.
Now that we have talked about how the 3R’s of reduce, re-use and recycle keep with the Frugal Fam core values, I hope that each of you will join me in this journey and share your ideas for Reduce, Re-use, Recycle.
Terri O’Neale is the mother of six; ranging in age from 3 to 22. She has been both a working and stay-at-home mother at various times in her life. She was also a single mother for almost five years, before re-marrying the love of her life at the age of forty. Obviously, she has a life-time of training in raising a family on a tight budget. In addition to these real life experiences, she possesses a bachelors degree in health education and a minored in environmental management in her masters programme.
Terri feels strongly that this is one of the most challenging times in history for the family, but she also believes that families with the will and resolve to address the pressing issues of saving money, becoming greener, leading healthier lifestyles and spending more time with one another can endure these challenging times and come out victorious in the end.
Through Frugal Family articles, blogs, videos and social networking, she helps modern families rediscover some lost art forms such as cooking, sewing, and gardening. The goal is not to go back in time or become fanatical, but to help all families find simple and effective ways that fit into their lifestyle to make moderate changes with huge impacts. For more information, check out her blog http://frugalfam.wordpress.com/.
Residential solid trash, also called urban solid waste and municipal solid garbage, is refuse that normally comes from households. It is either in solid or semisolid form. There are five general categories of solid garbage that include:
1) Biodegradable waste: food and kitchen
2) Recyclable material: paper, glass, bottles, cans, metals, and certain plastics.
3) Stagnant rubbish : construction, dirt, rocks, and debris.
4) Assorted waste: clothing, plastics,etc.
5) Household hazardous waste: toxic such as paints, chemicals, light bulbs, spray cans, fertilizer and pesticide containers, batteries,etc.
Cities and towns generally contracts out solid garbage removal services. They will submit bids, assess each bid, and recommend a company. The rubbish company will bill the city or town. These companies are privately owned so if a person has a lot of waste after a project such as home renovation, they can hire a garbage removal company to remove the refuse.
Because of environmental regulations and a growing demand for a cleaner environment, junk companies are now performing the following services:
Recycling Programs: Curbside recycling is usually available to all residential customers. Customers will separate their recyclables according to paper and plastics for curbside pick up. Depending on the contract, this is normally done every two weeks. There can be special recycling programs such as Christmas tree recycling. The trees are then made into mulch. Other special programs a town or city can offer are Spring and Fall Clean Ups. They are designed to encourage residents to get rid of large amounts of garbage.
Hazardous Materials: Every year, millions of people accumulate such hazardous waste products as batteries, paints and stains, cleansers and polishes, motor oil, antifreeze, pesticides and herbicides,etc. These are dangerous to the environment, people, and animals. A rubbish removal service is trained to remove these products safely and responsibly. They will sort and categorize the hazardous materials before storing them in containment units. The contracted hazardous waste hauler packs the items in drums and sends them to hazardous rubbish incinerator or other treatment facility for proper disposal. Some materials, such as used motor oil, lead-acid batteries and antifreeze, are recycled.
Compost Services: Many cities and towns offer a compost service. They will provide compost bins for people to place such items as kitchen food garbage, newspaper, and other items that can be composted. A contracted junk removal company will pick up the compost left on residential curb sides.
Energy Recovery Plants: Plants that convert rubbish to energy are popping up all over the country. These plants burn garbage to heat water which produces steam in much the same way power plants burn coal, oil, natural gas, or wood. The steam can cause a turbine to produce electricity. Junk removal companies that have energy recovery plants in their area will make use of these services.
Special Handling waste Removal Services: Cities and towns will have a contracted service to remove large items such as tires, air conditioners, household appliances, and construction debris. Tires are sent to a recycling or recovery facility and household appliances, after chlorofluorocarbon gas removal, are taken to recycling stations.
Individual Contracted waste Removal Services: There are situations where a person has too much waste to be removed by a city or town removal service. They will then enlist the services of a private company. They are trained and certified to dispose of waste, compost, and recycle residential goods. For a nominal fee, a company will come to your home and remove all of your excess trash.
Because of growing environmental concerns, most companies dispose of waste in ways that will have the least environmental impact. You will feel good knowing that you are doing your part to protect and conserve the environment.
It is important for individuals to be mindful of what is in the trash. That way, the environment can be better protected. If you are looking for a junk removal and rubbish company located in the GTA please visit us at: Garbage Removal Toronto.
Does you family recycle aluminum cans? Do they do it to get a little extra cash or because it is the responsible thing to do? How much do they, and you, know about what happens to the can after the soda is gone? Here is a quick true and false quiz on recycling. It will only take 2 or 3 minutes to find out what you know and what you need to know about the importance of families recycling.
Circle the answer for each of the 6 questions. Now test the other members of the family.
1. In the time it takes you to read this question, 50,000 12-ounce aluminum cans are made.
True or False
2. When you recycle one aluminum can you save enough energy to equal a half gallon of gasoline?
True or False
3. There is no limit to the amount of times aluminum can be recycled.
True or False
4. We use over 80,000,000,000 (billion!) cans a year.
True or False
5. At one time, aluminum was more valuable than gold.
True or False
6. More aluminum goes into beverage cans than any other product.
True or False
Surprise! All of the answers are true.
Did you know that for every $10 spent buying things $1 or 10% goes for packaging that is thrown away. Packaging, and that includes aluminum cans, represents 65% of household trash. Wow. What a waste of money and resources. We can do better than that.
Our family is making a special effort to Recycle, Reuse and Reduce. Will you join us in helping to protecting our earth and natural resources? Maybe your family could put up a special box to save aluminum cans for the recycling center.
(c) Judy H. Wright http://www.ArtichokePress.com You have permission to reprint this article in your blog, ezine or offline magazine as long as you keep the content and contact information intact. Thank You.
Artichoke Press is the home site of Judy H. Wright, family relationship coach and author. If your organization would like to schedule Auntie Artichoke, the storytelling trainer, for a workshop please call 406.549.9813.
You are also invited to visit our blog at http://www.AskAuntieArtichoke.com for answers and suggestions which will enhance your relationships. You will also find a full listing of free tele-classes and radio shows held each Thursday just for you.
Thanks for joining our community of caring parents, family members,coaches, teachers and mentors who want to help raise a generation of responsible adults.
Recycling is like exercising - everyone knows we should do it, but not all of us do it as frequently as we should and many of us don’t do it at all. However, there are tons of reasons why you must make an effort to recycle as much as feasible. If you have not been diligent about recycling, this article provides some great reasons why you should start.
1. Recycling cuts back on global warming.
2. Production of certain materials from the start can release serious amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.
3. Recycling paper saves trees - for each ton of paper recycled, 17 trees are saved. Each of these trees can extract around 250 pounds of carbon-dioxide from the air in a year.
4. Recycling makes us more energy-efficient. It frequently takes a great amount more energy to form something from nothing than to reuse it.
5. It keeps our landfills from overflowing. We are fast running out of space for landfills especially near towns.
Beach towns have been dumping trash into their seas for years to by-pass the difficulty, but with widespread sea ecological collapse, this isn’t longer a practicable option. Worse yet, it’s hard to find land in suburban and agricultural areas whose residents will permit landfills to come into their areas without a fight. The squeeze for rubbish heap land is only going to become worse in the future.
Recycling gives us some hope. Studies show that 60% to 75% of rubbish in landfills can be recycled. That suggests that if everyone recycled, we would have 60% to 75% less rubbish in our landfills, and we’d need at least that far less land for rubbish disposal. The rubbish in landfills is mostly not treated in any way it’s simply thrown in a huge hole and buried over. A lot of this rubbish isn’t environmentally friendly or readily biodegradable and it is unsurprising that contaminants can get into our water. It is also a major reason why it isn’t safe to drink from streams and brooks when you are hiking and camping even when it’s like you are in a spotless environment. It reduces air pollution. A lot of factories that produce plastics, metals, and paper products release poisons into the air.
For instance, plastics are usually burned in incinerators. Plastics are made with oil, and that oil is released into the atmosphere when the plastic burns, creating significant greenhouse-gas emissions. From manufacturing to processing, from collection to invention it’s common knowledge that recycling is an expansion industry, earning billions of bucks yearly. Our desire to recycle is only going to grow more insistent as populations grow and as technology changes. It adds to property worth. It is obvious a rubbish heap near your house can decrease your property values significantly. Recycling decreases the quantity of land required for landfills. This decreases the quantity of homes near landfills, keeping property values up and house owners cheerful. The more folks recycle, the less landfills we need and if enough folks pitch in, recycling should pay off for everyone. It is good business. Pitting business against the environment is a lose-lose situation - everyone suffers.
Commercial factories and processing plants save masses of cash on energy and extraction systems when they use recycled materials rather than virgin resources. They also make sure that basic resources don’t become a scanty commodity, keeping demand and costs down and making sure that their business can continue for years to come. One person can contribute. Many of us think this is true with recycling, too but the reality is that small acts of recycling make a giant difference.
David Sein is a freelance journalist reporting on socially conscious issues.