Doesn't recycling produce gases and wastes too?
Science teachers.please answer!!..And specify if you are one or have something to do with science(except that you learnt it...)
Answer:
There are benefits and disadvantages to all things... yes recycling does require the input of energy and there is some pollution to create the new out of the old... but with the human population increasing the amount of garbage also increases. Imagine we stop recycling today and everything goes into a land fill and new things are created... how long until we run out of realistic places to dump. In addition, we would be using more resources to create new products rather than reusing. Not all environmental answers are to stop air pollution or water pollution it is also to save space and use less resources.
Yes, recycling produces greenhouse gasses but no waste. It is still better than just throwing things away.
recycling does produce gases, but it is much less because recycling a product, such as plastic, requires less energy than if it is not recycled
Yes, recycling does but the benefit is that less energy/waste is required to recycle than is needed to create a wholly new product (for most recycling). Also, the items that are recycled are kept out of landfills that way.
Well the gas thing is not called recycling...I can't remember what it's called but it's something else. What happens is that al the garbage throughout time starts to make gases by bacterias and animal poo. What the do is bury all that stuff and capture those gases cause the gas in fact is ammonia NH4 and later you use that gas for pipes and to boil your water and stuff. The problem is digging out the garbage so they investigate better ways to do that.
Some recycling produces pollution and waste. Recycling is about being efficient with our natural resources, it is not about acheiving impossible perfection.
Using old milk containers to make furniture is an example of this. The machines that transport and convert the containers to usable material will use fuel and produce pollution, but one can argue that this is better than throwing the containers into a land fill and cutting down trees to make furniture which would also pollute.
If you use a second hand item from someone nearby this is recycling also and does not significantly pollute.
yes it does but in smaller amounts unlike not having to recyle those things at all.
Recycling doesn't save energy. It takes energy to transport, sort, and clean things before they an be recycled. It takes more energy to recycle a plastic bottle than it does to make a new one from scratch.
In almost all communities, it's more expensive to recycle than it is to landfill. $8 billion US taxdollars are wasted on recycling every year. It costs fifty or sixty dollars to throw away a ton of regular garbage. It costs $150 per ton to pay someone to handle the recycling.
A common misonception is that we harvest lumber from endangered rainforests. We don't. We have special treefarms specifically for that. We do the same for the vegatables that we eat. We use potatoes, but obviously, they're not endangered.
Recycling doesn't save trees. For every one tree that's cut down, two are planted in its place. We have three times the amount of trees now than we did at the begining of the 19th century. In fact, by recycling paper and wood, you decrease the demand for lumber, and therefore, decrease the demand for more trees. Recycling paper is an energy-consuming manufactoring process, and it's actually bad for the environment. It's actually more environmentally friendly to just throw all of you paper trash on the ground.
The process of recycling creates unnecessary, dirty, dangerous work for people who could instead be doing something more worthwhile that pays better.
Recycling doesn't save landfill space. If you could multiply the volume of all the garbage the USA produces a year 1,000 times, you would still be able to fit it within a 35 square mile space, and it would be a pile only 200 feet high. Thirty-five Square miles may sound like a big space, but it's just a pixel-sized dot on the map. No one is actually proposing a 35 sq mile landfill, but that's just for perspective: to show that we are not running our of space.
There's nothing wrong with having many landfills. The largest landfill in America is located in Whittier, California. Landfills today are perfectly sanitary, and the garbage in them doesn't permiate the ground and contaminate water tables, or anything like that, since there are strict rules governing where to build them, and they're built over at least three feet of impermiable clay. Any gasses that come out of the landfills are collected and used as fuel. The gas that comes out of this landfill produces enough energy to power 60,000 average American homes for 30 years.
Once a landfill is full, it's covered over and trees are planted. They become nice parks, golf courses, etc.
Basically, recycling is pointless. The only thing worth recycling is aluminum cans. Everything else only hurts the economy and the environment.
the benefits out weigh the bad by a long shot trust me greenhouse gases are emitted but a whole lot more are released if you throw it away. RECYCLE!
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: