BlueJohn coughed up some electrons that declared:

I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
trouble if she does ;-

Cheers

Tim

--

Anti FUD, not anti-environment

Are you saying that the benefits of recycling are overstated (re.
"good factual illustrations"), or that it's better not to produce the
stuff in the first place, or both?

The latter to a larger extent. Or to put it another way, recycling is a
pointless exercise comparatively if you're being totally wasteful to start
with. IMHO people should remain aware of the wider picture, and not be
blinkered into a limited course of action, which is what I perceive to be
happening (maybe wrongly) in a larger part of society.

I agree that it's better not to spend energy producing unnecessary
stuff, but recycling is a pragmatic thing, isn't it? At least, I
assume that persuading people to do without stuff is a lot harder than
persuading them to dispose of it in a different way.

Not quite - in the case of the plastic clam shell, I can see no reason for
it to exist. It's an annoyance to me, the cardboard box it's containing
serves the purpose very well anyway *and* I have to dispose of it. Same goes
for multiple layers of plastic on foodstuffs (sausages are just fine in a
bit of waxed paper, they do NOT require a silly polystyrene tray, cling
film and cardboard wrap).

I'd prefer products to be made to last, the antithesis of the consumerist
society. I'd prefer to telecommute part time, but my employers historically
wouldn't countenance it, despite the job (sysadmin) being eminently suited.

There's lots of things that could be made better for the environment without
giving up stuff, but none of it is quite as easy as banning GLS bulbs from
the government's POV.

Cheers

Tim