| Technofix solutions. 08:06 - Nov 20 with 666 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
If we can't manage to burn waste 'cleanly' what chance sticking CO2 into holes in the ground?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/20/uk-pension-fund-loses-350m-wast
Rudy Schulkind, a political campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “We can’t burn our way out of this growing waste problem. Nearly half the rubbish from UK homes is now being sent to incinerators, and even more of them are being planned.
“This isn’t an issue just for the disproportionately poor communities whose lives are blighted by the traffic, smell, noise and air pollution from these facilities. Partly thanks to the growing amount of plastic ending up in our bins, incinerators are also a major source of planet-heating emissions, with some experts branding them the country’s dirtiest form of power generation.”
He added that the “real solution” to Britain’s waste problem was producing less waste in the first place.
|  |
| |  |
| Technofix solutions. on 08:55 - Nov 20 with 590 views | surreyblue |
This feels a little bit like letting perfect be the enemy of better.
These plants are not perfect. He is right to say that the best approach is to produce less waste in the first place. But we can't do that overnight - and this is better than the alternative.
Waste taken to Incineration produces less co2 than waste taken to landfill. In addition, it produces power on top of that. Yes it's not particularly clean, but the alternative is to let it decompose naturally (more co2) and then get energy from somewhere else (even more co2).
Technology improves things further - filtering systems are improving all the time to minimise the impact of air quality around these plants. There are some which are strategically built next to rivers so waste can be transported on barges rather than by road. Excess heat from the process can also be used to heat local facilities. They can filter out plastics and other precious metals for recycling. And the ash that remains can be used for cinderblocks.
So yes, not perfect. But better. |  | | |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:04 - Nov 20 with 574 views | Dubtractor |
| Technofix solutions. on 08:55 - Nov 20 by surreyblue |
This feels a little bit like letting perfect be the enemy of better.
These plants are not perfect. He is right to say that the best approach is to produce less waste in the first place. But we can't do that overnight - and this is better than the alternative.
Waste taken to Incineration produces less co2 than waste taken to landfill. In addition, it produces power on top of that. Yes it's not particularly clean, but the alternative is to let it decompose naturally (more co2) and then get energy from somewhere else (even more co2).
Technology improves things further - filtering systems are improving all the time to minimise the impact of air quality around these plants. There are some which are strategically built next to rivers so waste can be transported on barges rather than by road. Excess heat from the process can also be used to heat local facilities. They can filter out plastics and other precious metals for recycling. And the ash that remains can be used for cinderblocks.
So yes, not perfect. But better. |
Exactly this.
I would consider myself as fairly knowledgeable on this subject, and the way this story was presented by the BBC a few weeks ago was dreadful, and missed the point about what to compare it to (landfill rather than other energy generation).
Until we solve the global problem of consumerism, we need to manage our waste in the least harmful way possible, but there isn't a solution that produces no consequences. |  |
| |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:13 - Nov 20 with 552 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:04 - Nov 20 by Dubtractor |
Exactly this.
I would consider myself as fairly knowledgeable on this subject, and the way this story was presented by the BBC a few weeks ago was dreadful, and missed the point about what to compare it to (landfill rather than other energy generation).
Until we solve the global problem of consumerism, we need to manage our waste in the least harmful way possible, but there isn't a solution that produces no consequences. |
Fair points from both of you but I think your consumerism point nails it Dubbers as there are absolutely no signs of our global society heading that way and all these technofix 'solutions' just serve to excuse and draw a veil over more of the same. To date technofix hasn't really cut it has it? | |
| |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:16 - Nov 20 with 547 views | Dubtractor |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:13 - Nov 20 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Fair points from both of you but I think your consumerism point nails it Dubbers as there are absolutely no signs of our global society heading that way and all these technofix 'solutions' just serve to excuse and draw a veil over more of the same. To date technofix hasn't really cut it has it? |
Not to date, no.
Obviously this is a subject close to my heart, but it's a good example of symptom getting the blame, rather than the cause. | |
| |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:39 - Nov 20 with 487 views | Guthrum |
| Technofix solutions. on 09:13 - Nov 20 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Fair points from both of you but I think your consumerism point nails it Dubbers as there are absolutely no signs of our global society heading that way and all these technofix 'solutions' just serve to excuse and draw a veil over more of the same. To date technofix hasn't really cut it has it? |
I'd argue yes, vastly, albeit perhaps inadvertantly.
For power generation, lighting and heating, the move from coal to natural gas and now on to renewables has been massively beneficial, in terms of greenhouse gases, acid rain (you don't hear that term any more), particulates, toxic/radioactive* waste and environmental damage from extraction.
* Ash from coal-fired power stations is radioactive. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
