Title: [GreenYes] Re: More Re: Dubner's interview on Good Morning America
At 06:33 PM 7/21/2007 -0500, Stephan Pollard wrote:
>To the Group - I'd like to say that the misunderstandings, dogma
>being promoted, and the compulsion amongst certain members of this
>group (some perhaps with vested financial and emotional interests)
>to make gross assumptions, label, ridicule, and otherwise divert
>attention from reasonable inquiry and suggestion is more than
>regretful. Similar sentiment has been expressed by at least one or
>two other contributors to this group in the not-so-distant past.
Mr. Pollard:
I beg your pardon? I haven't noticed much if any of this directed at
you. On the other hand, you write:
>" ... Driving gasoline guzzling recycling trucks around rural
>communities picking up a few pounds of PET the recycling of which
>might save a couple of pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually
>hardly seems like it makes sense when the trucks are getting around
>2 miles per gallon of gas emitting 20 lbs of (CO2) for every gallon
>of gasoline burned. ..."
Do you have in mind specific examples of this happening? I have
trouble envisioning a collection program picking up only one material
in the manner you imply. I also have trouble envisioning a
gasoline-powered 2-mpg truck because it would probably be Diesel....
I am sure that among the many thousands of collection programs
operating around the world, some are more efficient than others. But
many effective collection programs are operating in rural
areas. Nova Scotia may be a good example in some respects.
In Delaware, many suburban communities are visited twice a week by
several packer trucks (operated by different, competitive, private
haulers) and yet all of these are picking mixed waste to be dumped
without processing. None of these are picking up recyclables. This
is the absurd system resulting from the 30-year influence of the
crank-pedant Vasuki.
Regards,
Alan Muller
Green Delaware
|