In message , Andy Hall writes
On 2006-12-28 16:05:19 +0000, John Beardmore said:
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 ?

The difference between something happening or not. If services were
available to sort and deal with recycling, as I've said I would be
willing to consider them, even at extra cost. When they are not, the
recyling won't happen.

OK, but this is your personal position. A lot of other people see the
value in recycling and are willing to make some minimum level of
personal sacrifice to organise things so that it's quick and easy to do.


The real question is then whether the recycling was worth doing in the
first place.

Well - we've done that one to death, but in general it seems likely
that it is. You won't get a much higher standard of evidence than that
unless you want to dedicate your life to data collection so that you can
do rigorous LCA.


If it is, and the customer is willing to pay as well, then there
should be no issue.

Assuming it is left to the consumer to choose, any more than it's left
to drivers to pick speed limits.


Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore