evolgen

AT THE CONVERGENCE OF EVOLUTION AND GENETICS

About evolgen

3Dside_view_toon_small.JPG=20 =20 We talk about molecular population and=20 evolutionary GENETICS and GENOMICS. You know, the = caliper=20 measurement of a gene's evolvability in moles.

Search This Blog

Subscribe via Email or RSS

Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via = e-mail or RSS=20 -- select a daily digest or instant updates and never miss a post = again.

=20 Subscribe to the evolgen RSS feed

All = ScienceBlogs=20 RSS feeds

Support Science Education

Convergent Resouces

Blogs at=20 the Convergence=20

Other Blogs

ScienceBlogs=20
3 Quarks Daily=20
A Somewhat Old, = But=20 Capacious Handbag=20
Adaptive = Complexity=20
The Austringer=20
Bad Astronomy=20
badscience=20
Bearcastle=20
Behavioral = Ecology=20 Blog=20
BioCurious=20
BioEthics=20
Bioinformatics = Blog=20
bootstrap analysis =
Buridan's Ass=20
Butterflies and=20 Wheels=20
Chris Miller=20
Complex Medium=20
Cosmic Variance=20
Creek Running North=20
Culture Dish=20
De Rerum Natura=20
Declan Butler=20
The Digruntled = Chemist=20
The Dubious = Biologist=20
El Gentraso=20
Element = List=20
Endangered Ugly = Things=20
Epigenetics News=20
ESA News & Views=20
Fighting for = Science=20
Flags and = Lollipops=20
FrinkTank=20
Genetics and = Health=20
Give Up Blog=20
Grey Thumb=20
Hairy Museum of Natural = History=20
I'm a chordata, = urochordata=20
Improbable Research=20
In the Pipeline=20
The = Infinite=20 Sphere=20
Inky Circus=20
Invasive=20 Species=20
Law,=20 Evolution, Science, and Junk Science=20
Life of a lab = rat=20
Migrations=20
My = Corner of the=20 Universe=20
Nascent=20
Nice Shoes, Wanna = Fock?=20
Niches=20
Nightlight=20
Nobel = Intent=20
nodalpoint=20
Notes from the Biomass=20
Olduvai George=20
Omics! = Omics!=20
Ontogeny=20
Open Reading Frame=20
open...=20
Ouroborus=20
The Personal = Genome=20
Pooflingers = Anonymous=20
Post-Genomics =
Postbloggery=20
Profgrrrl=20
Public Rambling=20
Rationally = Speaking=20
Real Climate=20
Recursivity=20
Red State = Rabble=20
Rhosgobel=20
Salamander Candy=20
Sandwalk=20
Sarkar Lab=20
Savage Minds=20
Science Blog=20
Science Creative Quarterly=20
Science = Musings=20
SciGuy=20
Snail's Tales=20
Sunbeams From = Cucumbers=20
Syaffolee=20
Tetrapod Zoology=20
The force that = through...=20
Unscrewing the = Inscrutible=20
Velcro City Tourist = Board=20
What the=20 hell is wrong with you?=20
What You're Doing is = Rather=20 Desperate=20
Young Female = Scientist=20
Your bones = got a=20 little machine

Science Carnivals

Journals at the Convergence

=C2=AB=20 The Vulva as a Child's Toy | Main | Ploidy=20 and Sex Determination =C2=BB

R= ecycling:=20 Wasteful?

Category: Science
Posted = on:=20 January 14, 2007 12:00 PM, by RPM

I'm a big fan of recycling. I try to recycle whatever I can -- paper, = plastics, glass, aluminum -- whenever I can. I was under the impression = that=20 recycling produces less waste than dumping in landfills and is better = for the=20 environment in general. Because of this, I was willing to pay the extra = costs=20 (indirectly through taxes) to support municipal recycling programs. Penn = and=20 Teller beg to differ:

If you don't want to watch the entire thing, here's the take home = message:=20 recycling paper and plastic is wasteful and costs a lot more than = landfilling.=20 Penn and Teller linger a lot on the wasted money -- which I don't find = to be=20 convincing on its own -- but they also point out how energy intensive = recycling=20 is. They point out that aluminum cans are the only items that make = economic=20 sense to recycle.

What they fail to mention (and what are much more important) are the = other=20 two R's: reducing and reusing. Recycling leads to a fair amount of waste = production. To truly make a contribution towards environmental = protection we=20 must decrease the amount of packaging we purchase and reuse whatever we = can. All=20 those plastic bottles of water you buy? Why not drink tap water? You can = even=20 filter it if you don't like the idea of drinking it straight from the = tap, even=20 though municipal tap water must meet higher standards of purity than = bottled=20 water.

(Via the Skepchicks.)

Send this entry to: =20

Email=20 this entry to a friend View the = Technorati=20 Link Cosmos for this entry

Comments

There is one advantage to recycling.

Here in Rhode Island our central landfill is now the highest point in = the=20 state. Jerimoth Hill used to be the highest at 812 feet.

If it weren't for some recycling that landfill would be exhausted = that much=20 sooner. So it does serve some purpose.

Posted by: Tony P | January=20 14, 2007 01:01 PM

I can't speak for the US, but in the UK we have pretty much run out = of space=20 for landfills, and that has always been the point of recycling things = like paper=20 and plastic as far as I was aware.

Posted by: Chris Hyland | January=20 14, 2007 01:27 PM

I blogged about this episode a while ago. Not the most coherent or well-researched = rebuttal=20 in history, but still.
It's good to get people thinking about this = sort of=20 thing, though. People harming the environment while thinking they're = helping is=20 more painful than people just harming the environment.

On the whole, landfill space isn't really a problem, even in the UK, = as far=20 as I know. With all the regulations they're subject to, I'd rather live = next to=20 a landfill than a recycling center (or centre), and empty space isn't = that hard=20 to find, but the problem is that landfills have a terrible image, and = thus a=20 heavier impact on property values.
I might be mistaken, though.

Posted by: Cairnarvon | January=20 14, 2007 02:46 PM

I am so glad to see someone else pondering this episode too. Penn = &=20 Teller's show is quite funny, but after I saw this episode a few weeks = ago,=20 every time I go to recycle paper or plastic I can't help but think I'm = being=20 more wasteful than if I just threw it away. I'm not sure if this is the = truth,=20 but where do we get better information? Environmentalists use scare = tactics and=20 lies worse than anyone, so I hesitate to believe any of their "facts." = Everyone=20 has an agenda.

Cairnarvon - I had also noticed Penn & Teller didn't really touch = on=20 glass. I wonder why that was. Glass makes up the largest percentage of = my=20 recycled goods.

For now, it looks like reduce and reuse are my mottos.

Posted by: Sacha | January=20 14, 2007 03:41 PM

Recycling is a good idea, unquestionably, BUT...
The main problem = with the=20 heavy emphasis on recycling as a sort of mea culpa for other = environmental=20 misbehaviors is its complete failure to challenge consumerism.
It's = OK to buy=20 as much as you want, no matter how it's packaged, as long as you = "recycle" it -=20 instead of throwing it away. Of course, the poor way in which most = people carry=20 out their recycling (mixing different materials together, adding in=20 non-recyclables, etc), as well as the lack of demand by businesses for = recycled=20 materials, have made recycling a costly and wasteful endeavor.
The = fact that=20 it enables people to feel good about their environmental behavior, even = as they=20 consume energy and resources with wild abandon, is even more of a = problem.

Posted by: Seth Needler | January=20 14, 2007 04:03 PM

Definitely sounds like on of those no-win situations. I'm rather fond = of=20 recycling but I can certainly see where the process needs improvement if = at all=20 possible. But I would expect landfill space to be a consideration over = time.

I've long since come to the conclusion that living in a more = environmentally=20 friendly manner means picking and choosing. Everything you do is going = to have=20 an impact; you just have to figure out which impacts make the most sense = to=20 you.

Posted by: Stephanie | January=20 14, 2007 04:43 PM

Generally, anything on Bullshit! should be taken with a grain of = salt. I like=20 to think of Penn and Teller as psuedo-skeptics, they talk the talk, but = don't=20 walk the walk. Their definition of BS is basically anything that doesn't = agree=20 with their libertarian beliefs. Take the episodes on climate change and=20 secondhand smoke, for instance, where they called into doubt the real = science on=20 both and supported the junk science instead. Penn and Teller, I think, = are=20 skeptics in the same way creationists are "skeptical" of evolution -- = they just=20 want the facts to fit their worldview.

Hey, I'm glad they're calling BS on UFOs, psychics and ghosts when = most other=20 channels just pander to audiences, but until they realize skepticism = isn't about=20 cherry-picking those facts that support their beliefs, they really = belong in the=20 same category as Ken Ham, Steve Milloy and dozens of others who claim = the title=20 "skeptic" but are really nothing of the sort.

Posted by: Mr Willi | January=20 14, 2007 05:24 PM

Yeah. Many "skeptics" follow the P&T libertarian formula. The = recipe is=20 you measure everything in dollars and the cheapest wins.

Posted by: jeffk | January=20 15, 2007 10:00 AM

Penn & Teller (according to Sourcewatch) are fellows at the Cato=20 Institute and apparently like to debunk 'junk science'(where have we = heard that=20 phrase before?). I think we know where they are coming from when we = consider the=20 reaction to their spot about global warming. What's worrying is that so = many=20 people thought they might have a point when it comes to recycling - = perhaps a=20 look at this http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/611_ACF17F.h= tm=20 (admittedly old) article might show what they are saying to be BS.
As = far as=20 the UK is concerned, I agree with Chris, our landfill sites are getting = fewer=20 and fewer, they do nothing for the groundwater, and are increasingly = expensive.=20 I would frankly rather not wish to live next to a landfill...

However, local councils seem to be increasingly in love with = incineration=20 rather than recycling (because asking people to be responsible is sooo=20 difficult) - another example of an attempted techological fix to a = social,=20 environmental and economic problem.

Posted by: Mike Bunter | January=20 15, 2007 11:19 AM

The US isn't low on landfill space - we actually import trash from=20 Canada.

Posted by: MattXIV | January=20 15, 2007 11:42 AM

Havin= g=20 problems commenting?

ScienceBlogs=20 home=20
Last=20 24 Hours=20
About=20 ScienceBlogs=20
Syndication=20 Feeds (RSS)=20
Email=20 Subscriptions

Search All Blogs

=20

Blogs in the Network

= All Blogs Aardvarchaeology=20 Aetiology Afarensis Chaotic Utopia = The Cheerful=20 Oncologist Cognitive = Daily The Corpus = Callosum=20 Deltoid Developing=20 Intelligence Discovering Biology in a = Digital=20 World Dr. Joan Bushwell's = Chimpanzee=20 Refuge evolgen EvolutionBlog = Evolving = Thoughts=20 Framing = Science=20 =20 = Good Math, Bad Math = Integrity of=20 Science Living the Scientific = Life=20 (Scientist, Interrupted) The Loom Mike the Mad=20 Biologist Molecule of the = Day=20 = Neurotopia (version = 2.0)=20 = Omni Brain Pharyngula = Pure Pedantry = The Questionable = Authority=20 =20 The Scientific=20 Activist Smooth Pebbles = - Stoat Stranger Fruit = Terra Sigillata = Thoughts from Kansas = Thus Spake = Zuska=20