In message , Arnold Walker
writes
"John Beardmore" wrote in message
...
In message , Andy Hall writes
On 2006-12-18 02:38:05 +0000, John Beardmore
said:
In message , Andy Hall writes
On 2006-12-04 13:06:00 +0000, David Hansen
said:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 12:22:26 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall
wrote this:-

Perhaps like most things we're not looking for the place to draw a
line,
but rather painting subtle shades of grey across a wide area :-)
The
competent and concerned get to do more, the rest follow according
to
inclination, ability and legislation.
surelt the competent have far more useful and important things to
with their time, like try to crack technological problems for one
example.
Precisely....
I doubt if even ten minutes a week would make any difference to the
solving of problems by the competent, especially as they can still
think about these problems as they do the sorting.
You are missing the points...
Idleness and pride ?

Delegation.

But at what environmental cost ?

That has yet to be determined......

I think it's pretty clear that sorting your own domestic waste at source
always has a lower environmental impact than sorting it after further
mixing.

If you can think of any circumstance where this would be wrong, I'd
certainly be interested. Please share.


let see Sierra group does legal action to
save the wetlands on the Mississppi.
Targets levees to save the planet with responsible action.....pockets half
the money with little shown on wetlands recovery money.
Levees are delayed and in some cases downgraded.......then Kitrina hits and
nobody remembers the actions that screwed the levee system.

Sierra club and Greenpeace decide to save the forest preserves........sues
over debrushing and much of anything that is forest management.
Pockets half the money and has little to show on wilderness or any other
forest restoration money.
Under growth sparks some of the biggest fires in US forestry history
.Estimates are, it will take 50yrs to thin underbrush and dead wood to safe
levels.
And nobody remembers why the forest were not managed.

Malaria outbreak in 40's kills millions in Africa Then DDT virtually killed
off malaria in Africa by 1948.......Sierra and similar groups to the recue
with pressure to ban DDT.
53million Africans die from malaria before someone notices that DDT did not
have the effects it was thought to have.
Sierra and similar groups has that covered as well and blames global warming
for the outbreak. Before anybody notices they had it banned.

One writes books on the well intended screw ups, complete with hand wringing
and death predictions.
And to date,none of the predictions have come as fore told.But you aren't
supposed to notice that
,because there is a new hand wringer out there to absorb your interest and
cover past mistakes.

Seems to me though, that many of the environment movements views have
been broadly correct, and as it is increasingly a science led, evidence
based discipline, as opposed to an activist led, sentiment motivated
protest movement, it is certainly evolving, and I think improving, all
the time. There is an interesting tension between the science and
activism camps though.

I know nothing of the Sierra club and regard Greenpeace with some
suspicion, but it seems to me that the arguments against using DDT had
some merit - the error was perhaps in simply giving up, rather than
finding better ways to use it in conjunction with other compounds.

But either way, none of this has much to do with UK waste. Did you have
any specific examples that illustrate that sorting your own domestic
waste at source has a higher environmental impact than sorting it after
further mixing, or bringing people in to do it ?


Indeed one should look at the environment cost.....and maybe ask some
accountabilitys for ones action as well.

Well yes - that's what I had in mind !


Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore