In article ,
aemeijers wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
(Don Klipstein) wrote:

In .com, Pete C.
wrote in part:
On that last part, yes it is naive to think that much of any of these
recycling efforts makes any real difference. Some of the stuff we have
been recycling for the longest time such as glass is a net negative
environmentally to recycle, but it makes folks who don't look at the
details feel better.
I think that the bottom line for recycling glass is positive, since
doing so conserves landfill space. Can you imagine the hassle from the
NIMBYs each time we need to start a new landfill?

- Don Klipstein )
When I was a kid, we took our coke bottles back to the store to get our
2 cent deposit back. They washed 'em out and refilled 'em. Makes sense
to me.

Yes, however they aren't allowed to do that anymore. Now the glass has
to be remelted and remolded into new bottles to ensure there are no
post-consumer cooties left, which uses more energy (when you include the
transportation), than just making new bottles from raw materials.

Sure they are ALLOWED to do it, but almost nobody does any more, because
it isn't cost-effective. I think there are still maybe five CC bottling
plants in US. Long-neck beer bottles are still routinely refilled.

--
aem sends...

I did not know this. So it's cheaper to make a new bottle than it is to
wash out an old one for re-use? And if so, why would the beer companies
still do it?