Sunday, January 6, 2008

The art of diversion

Green bins, mandatory recycling compliance, stricter garbage container limits, reduced pick-up service, and user fees are all among the proposals being considered as London hauls its taxpayers towards the promised land of 60 per cent waste diversion or more. When most Londoners are either happy or at least willing to concede their money, time and convenience to the perceived environmental benefit of a completely arbitrary target set by the province to reduce demand for a resource made scarce purely by its own political obstructions, then it really ought to be said that maximum diversion has already been achieved.

In all fairness, implementation of each and every one of the city's suggestions is a fail-safe strategy for diverting waste… from ever being counted in the first place.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

"MAXIMUM DIVERSION" perfectly describes the motivation behind our governments' recycling programs.

Canadian Infidel said...

I know I'm overly realistic and logical but. We are the second largest country on the planet, we have one of the lowest population densities and 85% of our population lives along the U.S. border.

How can we possibly be running out of room for garbage when the vast majority of the nation is not populated OR used in any other manner other then being "wild". Most of our province, anything north of Barrie anyway, is uninhabited, could we not put some of our refuse there?

Why do I need to go back to living like my great, great grandparents, Oh Ya right, to "SAVE" the trees. Which we'll soon be cutting down because we won't be able to afford to heat our homes, but then, that's the whole purpose isn't it?

NIAC said...

LOL, we haven't "run out of space", we've no space that is fiscally prudent to deliver to.

The answer isn't to hide it as much as it is to use it. Energy-From-Waste is not a joke: London's energy-from-waste was. Recycling is actually smart. Recycling does not 'reduce emissions', in fact, you don't save much, for example, reconstituting aluminium cans, plastic bottles, newsprint or cardboard: You DO, however, reduce the new raw materials needed to produce the items that recycled materials can make.

Keep in mind, our great, great grandparents got cookies in tins (reusable), made their own pickles and canned veggies (in reusable, glass jars) and got meat from the steer or boar, not from a plastic-covered styrofoam tray.

They recycled more 'back then' than we do now.

Cyclical Global Climate Changes are going to happen, and it doesn't matter if carbon emissions are zero (impossible, btw) or we each burn 50 cancer-causing, carbon-spewing kilos of black coking coal every day at sunset.

Elaine said...

Why can't they just put it in a big rocket and shoot it to outer space. Aim for one of those black holes Hawkins is always going on about.

That is more and likely how the earth formed, and the beings on it. The human race could be the byproduct of discarded junk not wanted on some alien planet.