I've been doing alot of research and the argument seems to be pretty strong, and no i did not just watch that episode of Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t I've been trying to find the whole picture. Your thought on the issue?
2006-09-08 13:58:50 · 6 answers · asked by Aniatario 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
quite the opposite is true
2006-09-08 14:01:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Depends upon what is being recycled. Some things actually take more energy and material to recycle than to use new. Paper, for example, isn't really a good product to recycle. It might be argued that using different products in the manufacture of new paper would be better than recycling.
2006-09-08 21:28:54 · answer #2 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, the trucks that pick up the stuff to be recycled spew exhaust into the air, and the process to recycle paper uses water and energy --
2006-09-08 21:04:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Driving all those extra trucks around all over the country sure isn't great for the environment. It wastes more energy than sorting the garbage at the site where it will be dumped.
2006-09-08 21:05:02 · answer #4 · answered by Paul K 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you recycle, you don't have to keep using new resources like trees. And you don't keep adding more plastic, which is not biodegradable (it lasts forever) to the environment.
2006-09-08 21:03:31 · answer #5 · answered by The Gadfly 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would it be bad?
Recycling generally uses significantly less energy than extracting the raw product and then manufacturing the item.
Saves on landfills, pollution etc etc
2006-09-08 21:02:40 · answer #6 · answered by 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋