If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Government Technology)   Fort Wayne, Ind. residents recycle so little the city will actually save $2 million by eliminating recycle bins. With photo of what a bin may look like   (govtech.com) divider line 84
    More: Amusing, Fort Wayne, Ind, Internet applications, solid wastes, GIS  
•       •       •

5760 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Dec 2010 at 12:15 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



84 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-12-02 12:18:46 PM  
Think how much more they'd save cutting garbage pickup altogether!
 
2010-12-02 12:19:36 PM  
Where I live in St. Louis, if your recycle bin isn't full enough, they just dump it in the regular trash truck so they don't have to send another truck. Tax dollars at work.
 
2010-12-02 12:22:31 PM  
I'm recycling an earlier comment.
 
2010-12-02 12:23:31 PM  
Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling
 
2010-12-02 12:25:43 PM  
Hooray, my home city is mentioned! Wait, it's because we're lazy and hate the environment? Never mind.
 
2010-12-02 12:28:35 PM  
Recylcing programs are BS to begin with. The products made from reccycled material are poor quality, cost more to produce than new products, and cost more in labor than new products. Recycling programs cost taxpayers billions per year and yeild no positive gain. In fact, if designed correctly, entire cities could be powered from the methane production of the land fills from the garbage they make, making power cheaper. The only thing recycling does is make people feel good about themselves.

Penn and Teller did a good expose' on the subject and was very insightful...
 
2010-12-02 12:29:12 PM  
I think that is Jim Shortz house? That's good...
 
2010-12-02 12:29:44 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


yeah, what he said...
 
2010-12-02 12:32:05 PM  
CeroX: Recylcing programs are BS to begin with. The products made from reccycled material are poor quality, cost more to produce than new products, and cost more in labor than new products. Recycling programs cost taxpayers billions per year and yeild no positive gain. In fact, if designed correctly, entire cities could be powered from the methane production of the land fills from the garbage they make, making power cheaper. The only thing recycling does is make people feel good about themselves.

Penn and Teller did a good expose' on the subject and was very insightful...


Came here to say this. Recycling is 50% good intentions, 40% wasted effort, and 10% valid, economically and environmentally feasible effort.
 
2010-12-02 12:32:56 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


I'm not disagreeing with their findings, as I haven't watched the show, but my town recently sent out notices begging all residents to recycle as much as possible because it saves we the taxpayers a significant amount of money in waste disposal.

Of course, this may be a lie. I guess I'll never know without doing my own digging into the city budget and waste disposal contracts, etc., which I'm not likely to ever do. So I fill my bins because I'm a dirty conservative hippie.
 
2010-12-02 12:34:19 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


Well if one magician says it, it must be true!
 
2010-12-02 12:35:43 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


I believe you so does that mean I can't watch that?
 
2010-12-02 12:35:50 PM  
forteblast: Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

I suppose it depends where you place "less landfill space used" and "fewer mining operations needed" on the value spectrum. But yes, some forms of recycling produce output product that costs as much as or more than the raw material would. It's just that this output product is not the only benefit produced via recycling.
 
2010-12-02 12:36:43 PM  
Of course the city will save money regardless of how much recycling people do. Were you under the impression that if people recycle more, it would become profitable?

It operates at a loss, paid for with taxes.
 
2010-12-02 12:37:48 PM  
CeroX: people

I'd need to see data on this from something other than a pair of albeit bright entertainers, but still, entertainers with an unquestionable agenda.

There's little question that some recycled products are of low quality, but we can't just keep on creating the garbage we do. Those little plastic grocery bags are a great example of the problem we're accruing.
 
2010-12-02 12:37:49 PM  
El Chode: forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling

Well if one magician says it, it must be true!


0/10
Too obvious... your use of backhanded commentary is too ambiguous.
 
2010-12-02 12:38:18 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


I've often heard that recycling, while good for keeping trash out of a landfill, isn't economically feasible, etc.

Most people that recycle aren't worried about the financial aspect of it.

We've got a consolidated recycling facility nearby, the largest trash company in our area picks up all of your trash and recycles, unsorted, and removes anything and everythign that CAN be sorted.

Why would a huge company do such a thing if it ddidn't have some benefit? they didn't get huge by doing this, they were already the largest trash disposal company in the area.
 
2010-12-02 12:42:25 PM  
someguy945: Of course the city will save money regardless of how much recycling people do. Were you under the impression that if people recycle more, it would become profitable?

It operates at a loss, paid for with taxes.


I don't get your point. The notice issued by the city said something to the effect of (I have no idea what the actual numbers were but the ratio is in the right ballpark):

Cost to dispose of 1 ton of solid waste = $5
Cost to dispose of 1 ton of recyclable goods = $3

It still costs money, obviously paid for by taxes. I'm not implying it was a profitable venture, but it doesn't cost as much. At least that's what they said.
 
2010-12-02 12:44:05 PM  
BobCumbers: I think that is Jim Shortz house? That's good...

Any relation to BooBoo?
Is it wrong to have a naked lawn boy?
 
2010-12-02 12:45:59 PM  
gulogulo: some recycled

i don't know if that link provided shows the entire show or just clippets (video no work at work) but they exposed the actual paperwork of the cost of doing the business of recycling. If i remember correctly NYC taxpayers pay over 2 billion a year in their city alone.

This show isn't JUST entertainment. They go to great lengths to expose a lot of bullshiat in our society. They don't make false claims and show the evidence. They've tackled some pretty big topics and honestly i wish their show was longer so they had more time to cover those subjects.

I'm not trying to attack your position, because i think if you sat and watched the show and looked at the actual content, while they DO make their show highly entertaining, they are also straight forward and honest about what they are all about, unlike some political blowhacks who are paid by huge corporations to make listeners/viewers vote in favor of more corporate power and less consumer protection in the name of conservatism.
 
2010-12-02 12:47:08 PM  
Recycling is dumb. Also, even though they say otherwise, paint and oil are just fine to dispose of in the regular trash bin.
 
2010-12-02 12:47:44 PM  
They will use technology to determine who uses it? Why not look in the can to see what's in it instead of spending another $700,000 to buy brother-in-laws software.
Here, we use lo-tech sorting, prisoners work at the dump and sort trash, then they use the money to build more prisons.
 
2010-12-02 12:49:44 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.
CeroX:
derp
Penn and Teller did a good expose' on the subject and was very insightful...

In my town, recycling is a revenue stream for the town council. a big one- the waste management company pretty much pays the town's parks and playgrounds maintenance costs, thanks to my empty farking Campbell's cans.

Trash pickup, on the other hand, costs us a shiatload of money.

I would be very, very angry if the town did anything other than expand its recycling efforts because I do not need to pay more taxes to pay for the stupidly expensive trash bill. I would even pay a bag fee, since that would cost out in my favor by lowering trash bills for town.

So you and that fat gasbag Penn can take your aerial derpstrike and get farked.
 
2010-12-02 12:51:00 PM  
That stuff will all be in the landfill when we run out. Landfill mining will be the boom industry of the 2100's.
 
2010-12-02 12:51:40 PM  
in nyc and jersey you get a ticket for not recycling. you betta find something for the bin!

/dumpster baby
 
2010-12-02 12:53:50 PM  
CeroX: If i remember correctly NYC taxpayers pay over 2 billion a year in their city alone.

Again, whether or not this is worth it to you depends on more than the simple cost of the recycling operation, and whether it can be profitable based on the sale of the recycled goods. How much is saved in landfill space? How much is saved in landfill operation cost? How much is saved in land use and cost via reduced mining/harvesting/growing?

Recycled material can cost more than new raw material-- but this cost may be worth it to a community for the simple reason that there will be fewer landfills in their area.

In a place like NYC, that $2 billion is about $100 per person per year. I think they'll manage.
 
2010-12-02 12:56:00 PM  
CeroX: gulogulo: some recycled

i don't know if that link provided shows the entire show or just clippets (video no work at work) but they exposed the actual paperwork of the cost of doing the business of recycling. If i remember correctly NYC taxpayers pay over 2 billion a year in their city alone.

This show isn't JUST entertainment. They go to great lengths to expose a lot of bullshiat in our society. They don't make false claims and show the evidence. They've tackled some pretty big topics and honestly i wish their show was longer so they had more time to cover those subjects.

I'm not trying to attack your position, because i think if you sat and watched the show and looked at the actual content, while they DO make their show highly entertaining, they are also straight forward and honest about what they are all about, unlike some political blowhacks who are paid by huge corporations to make listeners/viewers vote in favor of more corporate power and less consumer protection in the name of conservatism.


You know what's more awesome though? Actually reading the political theorists who have come up with the ideas that people like Penn rely on, as well as other talking heads.

The greatest fault with our society is that we've replaced philosophers with "pundits"
 
2010-12-02 12:56:31 PM  
willfullyobscure: forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.
CeroX:
derp
Penn and Teller did a good expose' on the subject and was very insightful...

In my town, recycling is a revenue stream for the town council. a big one- the waste management company pretty much pays the town's parks and playgrounds maintenance costs, thanks to my empty farking Campbell's cans.

Trash pickup, on the other hand, costs us a shiatload of money.

I would be very, very angry if the town did anything other than expand its recycling efforts because I do not need to pay more taxes to pay for the stupidly expensive trash bill. I would even pay a bag fee, since that would cost out in my favor by lowering trash bills for town.

So you and that fat gasbag Penn can take your aerial derpstrike and get farked.


Links to their public paperwork or your just frothing to froth... Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money, not makes money... How about you take a bayer asperin before you have a stroke...
 
2010-12-02 01:02:22 PM  
CeroX: Links to their public paperwork or your just frothing to froth... Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money, not makes money... How about you take a bayer asperin before you have a stroke...

So what about my point earlier where my town said it costs less to dispose of recyclable waste than non-recyclable waste? No one's claiming it makes money for the city, just that it costs less.

I don't have the paperwork to back it up. I'm just trusting their math on this one.

And I'm not claiming that this holds true universally. Just that I believe that it's true for my city.
 
2010-12-02 01:11:07 PM  
CeroX: Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money, not makes money...

my town SELLS all the recyclables we turn in. metal, glass, paper, plastic, people buy that shiat.
 
2010-12-02 01:11:38 PM  
El Chode: CeroX: gulogulo: some recycled

i don't know if that link provided shows the entire show or just clippets (video no work at work) but they exposed the actual paperwork of the cost of doing the business of recycling. If i remember correctly NYC taxpayers pay over 2 billion a year in their city alone.

This show isn't JUST entertainment. They go to great lengths to expose a lot of bullshiat in our society. They don't make false claims and show the evidence. They've tackled some pretty big topics and honestly i wish their show was longer so they had more time to cover those subjects.

I'm not trying to attack your position, because i think if you sat and watched the show and looked at the actual content, while they DO make their show highly entertaining, they are also straight forward and honest about what they are all about, unlike some political blowhacks who are paid by huge corporations to make listeners/viewers vote in favor of more corporate power and less consumer protection in the name of conservatism.

You know what's more awesome though? Actually reading the political theorists who have come up with the ideas that people like Penn rely on, as well as other talking heads.

The greatest fault with our society is that we've replaced philosophers with "pundits"


I can almost agree with your statement except that philosphy is just that, philosphy. It doesn't require proof, like we as a society demand these days. I could sit and speculate all day about a subject and then write up a great philosophy paper on it (i know, i got A's in philosophy in college by doing exactly that) and never have to provide proof because i'm being philosphical... No im not totally in disagreement with you on the pundit thing, but the P&T:BS show doesn't try and tell you who to vote for, or slander politicians, they ID a topic they think smells like BS and go after it
 
2010-12-02 01:12:12 PM  
forteblast: Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


Very interesting. I can't say I'm too surprised, though.
 
2010-12-02 01:14:47 PM  
doublesecretprobation: CeroX: Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money, not makes money...

my town SELLS all the recyclables we turn in. metal, glass, paper, plastic, people buy that shiat.


It still costs more than what they can sell it unless they are selling it to the dumbest manufacturers on the earth...
 
2010-12-02 01:14:48 PM  
My hometown gets a shoutout, and it's about...garbage.

/sounds about right.
//not much happening in ft. fun.
 
2010-12-02 01:15:10 PM  
raygundan: In a place like NYC, that $2 billion is about $100 per person per year. I think they'll manage.

It's a typical conservative tactic. Environmental measures are expected to pay for themselves, even if the alternative ends up costing more. And of course any non-monetary benefits to recycling count for absolutely nothing.
 
2010-12-02 01:17:37 PM  
CeroX: Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money

Even if we assume this is universally true, you're still ignoring the other benefits recycling provides-- less landfill, less mining, and lower land use. The question is better phrased "Is the reduction in landfill, mining, and land-use costs worth the net price paid to recycle the material." Using your citation of $2bn per year for NYC, it's about $100 per person per year to cut landfill use by a substantial amount. Whether that's "worth it" is going to be subjective, although I suspect the subjective value goes up the closer your house is to a potential landfill site.
 
2010-12-02 01:18:37 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


That was seriously stupid... I am dumber for watching it
 
2010-12-02 01:22:31 PM  
sxacho: CeroX: Links to their public paperwork or your just frothing to froth... Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money, not makes money... How about you take a bayer asperin before you have a stroke...

So what about my point earlier where my town said it costs less to dispose of recyclable waste than non-recyclable waste? No one's claiming it makes money for the city, just that it costs less.

I don't have the paperwork to back it up. I'm just trusting their math on this one.

And I'm not claiming that this holds true universally. Just that I believe that it's true for my city.


Well you have to look at the operating terminology here... They are disposing (throwing away) of recyclable waste (the left overs from that which is not recycled). So yes, if you are throwing away 20% less junk, then it will cost 20% less to throw away, but it doesn't sound like they are factoring in what it costs in labor to seperate/sort, the energy consumption of the recycling facility, transportation costs, and what the return is compared to those other costs...
 
2010-12-02 01:23:36 PM  
CeroX: It still costs more than what they can sell it unless they are selling it to the dumbest manufacturers on the earth...

they don't come and get it, we bring it to the transfer station. we pay a bag fee for trash. trust me, if it cost the town money, we'd have to pay for it.
 
2010-12-02 01:23:37 PM  
raygundan: CeroX: Recycling anything except aluminum COSTS money

Even if we assume this is universally true, you're still ignoring the other benefits recycling provides-- less landfill, less mining, and lower land use. The question is better phrased "Is the reduction in landfill, mining, and land-use costs worth the net price paid to recycle the material." Using your citation of $2bn per year for NYC, it's about $100 per person per year to cut landfill use by a substantial amount. Whether that's "worth it" is going to be subjective, although I suspect the subjective value goes up the closer your house is to a potential landfill site.


Yeah and NYC doesn't have space to dump all that trash. They ship it down here to Virginia and we get their garbage.
 
2010-12-02 01:23:42 PM  
So am I just an idiot, missing some obvious truth about how my city doesn't actually spend less money to dispose of recyclables than they do on other solid waste?
 
2010-12-02 01:28:39 PM  
CeroX: Well you have to look at the operating terminology here... They are disposing (throwing away) of recyclable waste (the left overs from that which is not recycled). So yes, if you are throwing away 20% less junk, then it will cost 20% less to throw away, but it doesn't sound like they are factoring in what it costs in labor to seperate/sort, the energy consumption of the recycling facility, transportation costs, and what the return is compared to those other costs...

OK, but trusting the city, like the shill that I am, they say that their (and my) bottom line cost is reduced by people putting their recyclables into the recycling bins rather than in the trash cans. If that's true, as they claimed, it's kind of irrelevant to the discussion what happens from there.
 
2010-12-02 01:28:44 PM  
Somehow the city of Dallas manages to have a voluntary recycling program that the RECYCLING COMPANY PAYS THE CITY $2 million a year for, just to get access to the raw materials.

Granted, it's a large metro area, but the economics will scale down to most towns with populations over 100k people.

And for those who claim most municipalities are wasting money by not converting their garbage into methane, and recycling only costs them money, etc..

Do glass, plastic, and other metals actually break down to create methane? How so?

Explain yourselves...
 
2010-12-02 01:29:50 PM  
forteblast: Good for them, I say. Recycling most things is a huge waste of time and money.

Don't believe me, watch this.
Penn & Teller Bullshiat: Recycling


It's often a waste of money, except for metal. But glass and plastic will stick around a long time, so for landfill purposes there's at least something positive being done. Paper however is the worst thing to recycle and I can't believe people still do it.
 
2010-12-02 01:30:05 PM  
CeroX:
It still costs more than what they can sell it unless they are selling it to the dumbest manufacturers on the earth...


Yes, unlike the huge profit of regular trash pickup...

/stupid
 
2010-12-02 01:35:45 PM  
markie_farkie: Do glass, plastic, and other metals actually break down to create methane? How so?

Explain yourselves...


Glass (silicon) and metals... no. Plastic might eventually, but it has a biodegrade age of hundreds if not thousands of years. I would guess most of the methane from landfills used to be food and paper.
 
2010-12-02 01:36:50 PM  
CeroX: So yes, if you are throwing away 20% less junk, then it will cost 20% less to throw away, but it doesn't sound like they are factoring in what it costs in labor to seperate/sort, the energy consumption of the recycling facility, transportation costs, and what the return is compared to those other costs...

It's obviously a complex cost, but don't forget to include the offsets from reduced land use, mining, logging, refining and their associated energy consumption, labor, and transportation costs.
 
2010-12-02 01:40:26 PM  
sxacho: So am I just an idiot, missing some obvious truth about how my city doesn't actually spend less money to dispose of recyclables than they do on other solid waste?

Assuming CeroX is universally correct about the relative values of recycled material vs. new, and that none of the other savings from recycling can make up the difference... it's STILL possible that the aluminum recycling that he admits is profitable is enough so to cover the remaining cost of the rest, which would make your city's recycling profitable as a whole without contradicting him.

/I suspect he's wrong on several points, but still
 
2010-12-02 01:41:40 PM  
OK, I found something:

Disposal
The City of North Port Solid Waste Division utilizes Sarasota County's disposal facilities for all garbage and recyclable materials and at times, yard waste. The 2008 disposal rates are $48.34 per ton for garbage, $6.98 per ton for recycling materials and $32.53 per ton for yard waste.


This seems fairly straightforward and seems to show that recycling saves a large amount of taxpayer money in my city.
 
2010-12-02 01:42:16 PM  
raygundan: although I suspect the subjective value goes up the closer your house is to a potential landfill site

There are plenty of places on this earth that are not "precious" land space and they've calculated that a 9 square mile tract of land would be a big enough landfill to house the entire USA's waste for the next 100 years... That's not that big of space really. and like i stated before, if they designed the landfill it would actually become a methane production facility that could then be used to power the country... so now not only do we have a solution for the waste that is cost effective, but there is a return on that in the form of green and renewable energy...

I live 4 miles from Rumpke landfill in northern cincinnati so "not in my back yard" is not a problem... My problem with Rumpke is that they burn off their methane with an open flame rather than use it for energy...
 
Displayed 50 of 84 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report