/sci/ - Science & Math

send it off into space.

>>10537073
recycle it

>>10537082
so long and thanks for all the rubbers

>>10537073
recycling (this is done very poorly in most nations and e.g. in the US most places that do recycling end up not actually recycling it), incinerators (which are bad), composting of food and biodegradable waste (this is smelly), clever ways of putting it to use (certain solid wastes can be used to mix with asphalt or concrete for paving surfaces)

also generating less garbage. requiring consumer items to be packaged intelligently [for example, who uses just one ketchup packet? it's a huge waste of packaging], not using plastic shopping bags, using paper cups and paper anything as opposed to plastic, not using disposable plates or napkins, avoiding using garbage bags, replacing paper straws with biodegradable alternatives

>>10537073
Just design the landfill properly to prevent stuff leaching out of it, etc.

People of the future will refer to them as "valuable resource mines."

>>10537073
Did whoile ded?

>>10537073
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
It's not hard to reduce our waste, the only problem is that their isn't much political will to do so.
Why spend money on recycling shit, when you can just export it to some third world country's "recycling" facilities, for a fraction of the cost whilst still meeting your required obligations.

>>10537489
No anon, that's what we call modern art.

>>10537073
The only answer is communism

>>10537073
Produce less waste.
Don't buy shit in excessive amounts of packaging.
Use reusable containers for everything.
Fix your electronics and upgrade them when possible instead of buying new ones them.
Recycle batteries correctly.
Just buy less shit in general.

>>10537073
Swarms of "nanomachines, son" which can pull apart and process the waste, down to the molecule, and fully recycle all of it

Here in Finland we sent 60 % of our waste into landfills in 2006. But we only sent 8 % in 2016 because we started burning waste and recycling it more. I bet it's getting close to 0 % by now.

So yeah, landfills are soon a thing of the past. Don't know what other countries are doing but I would imagine they will follow suit.

Make autonomous robot whales that go around cleaning shit

>>10538205
Burning waste is even worse for the environment
>toxic chemicals released into the atmosphere

>>10537073
ocean fills. You dump it in the ocean. It'll take a long time for the whole ocean to fill up with trash.

>>10538324
What are filters for.
Sun rays penetrating polymers on landfills release more harmful substances than incinerating does.
Also in civilized countries incinerating places segregate given materials into recyclable and not recyclable and only burn the latter sending former to recycling posts

>>10538324
The stuff that is emitted from burning is mostly sulphur and nitrogen oxides. Also CO2 of course.

Waste burning has been replacing fossil fuel use so CO2 emissions have actually dropped (since waste is not 100 % fossil). The amount of CO2 emissions kinda depends on how the stuff being burned was made in the first place. If a fossil fuel like crude oil is used to make a plastic object that is then burned, sure, there will be CO2 emissions. But if you use biomass to make oil to make the plastic object, then you might not get (net positive) CO2 emissions at all (assuming that biomass growth equals or exceeds biomass use).

I don't know how good the particle filters are these days but I don't see why those emissions couldn't be eliminated altogether.

>>10538324
that's just a myth, probably perpetuated by jews, japan burns all it's trash instead of using landfills and they're country is cleanest in the world

Why can't we create a black hole somewhere in the solar system and throw the trash into it??

>>10538522
To take something into the space costs hundreds of million dollars.
How many million dollars would you pay for takeing your trash-can into the space?

>>10537073
thermal power

Throw into the sun

>>10538488
Yeah, and who has to deal with the aftermath of their burning? Japanese air doesn't stay over Japan

>>10538923
Their air doesn't go anywhere you moron, China's air is their own fucking problem and they know it, LAs air is entirely their fault and they fucking know it, imagine putting the blame on the only country with enough sense to realize land is valuable and burning helps preserve the most important parts of the environment

>>10538659
Yes.
This is the main problem with an artificial black hole garbage can orbiting close to our star.

>>10537082
Earth will lose mass and get closer to sun. We'd burn. No thanks.

>>10537619
Then you are contemplating the wrong question.

>>10542333
give back your trips you moron

>>10538659

>>10541946
>Their air doesn't go anywhere you moron,

>>10537073
>>10538205
>>10538324
>>10538423
>>10538488
>>10538923
>>10541946
>>10542384

Trash burning (like the kind done in sweden for example) is done in enclosed furnaces. The only "output" in thermal energy, which is then used to pump a steam turbine and generate electricity for the grid.

All the soot, ash, and carbon is captured in filters and none of it escapes. Infact, any resident Co2 generated by the flames is compressed and bottled for applications that require Co2 (like certain types of welding fabrication, etc).

Ash and soot created by the flames is also used in construction by being mixed with concrete for things like roads (the Romans mixed volcanic ash with their concrete and we have only just made concrete as strong as theirs as that recipe was lost with the fall of the empire)

Albeit a lot of these furnaces rely on tax money to function (like any power generation method) they end up being cheaper then landfills because they are able to produce and sell the aforementioned commodities (energy, co2, and ash) as well as the fact that landfills cost money even after they fill up.

Landfills need constant pollution monitoring and upkeep, meaning you're paying for expensive biologists to constantly study the local effects of landfills on the ecosystem, like if they are polluting the ground water, causing harm to wildlife, fauna, etc.

There's really no reason to. Its not like Trash Burning is an open pit bonfire.

burn it

>>10537629
This. That's all there is too it, eliminate consumerism, make good products that last a long time and punish cheap production/consumption. Except it won't happen because the world economy relies on you constantly buying shit.

>>10537088
>he doesn't put them in the dishwasher to reuse
Cucked by the rubberjew

>>10538097
inb4 we lose control and they process us alive.

>>10541946
>The air doesn't go anywhere you moron,

If only we had some kind of recyclable material that we could make bottles out of.

>>10542384
>>10545012
Imagine posting pictures in the hopes that we fill are planet with refuse and convinced that the one race on the planet that has it's shit together tho is somehow doing it wrong, I can't think of anything more anti-human and anti-planet than trying to perpetuate the idea that dumping over burning is viable or sustainable, honestly I can't thing of anything that fills me with more disgust

>>10542365
Also rotation will slow down. Longer days.

>>10537073
Throw into a volcano

>>10537090
Paper is biodegradable. There's no reason to recycle it beyond savin' da twees. The issue is polymers and rare Earth minerals. And nuclear waste, but to that >>10537082

>>10537090
>requiring
What are the solutions that dont require governmental micromanagement down to the level of ketchup packet size?

>>10537073
>modern art it literally trash
how can non Stem degrees ever recover

>>10545521
Public awareness campaigns, naming and shaming, and some kind of public certification group that ranks how "green" companies are. Rather than use government authority to ban stuff, it should give financial incentives (small tax breaks for example) to companies and businesses that follow eco-friendly guidelines along with adding things like a recycling/landfill tax to items that are packaged poorly or have a low level of recyclable materials. There's literally no need for everything to come wrapped in plastic these days.

I don't know how we can punish companies and consumers that make and buy the cheapest, shittiest, shortest-lived products and appliances though. We need a paradigm shift in the way the economy works for that to be possible.

I feel like money spent on green laws/initiatives would be better spent on developing arcologies(domed cities).

>>10547904
Care to elaborate?

>>10537073
Plasma waste converters.

Landfills aren't the problem. Brown people dumping trash into rivers is the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVnMBGXVVUI

>>10548535
We need fusion power to make this economical.

>>10549323
We have fusion power. It is very uneconomical.
>>10547992
No. Basically just build habitats on Earth to live in and tell the rest of the biosphere to sod off or get over themselves already.

>>10537073
burn it obviously

>>10537073
Storing our waste in handy living whale-receptacles

>>10537618
who the fuck is "we"? did you mean to say

>(((them)))

>>10538795
but then the solar wind will just blow the toxic smoke back to earth

>>10548894
and to think this is a country (Peru) with a relatively moderate population size...

just try and comprehend the many tons of shit that high-population brown shitholes like indonesia and *ndia dump in their many rivers and coastlines

poor brown countries need to have their population growth seriously cut back. through force if necessary.

>>10549336
Fusion power that gives a net positive energy output, you bingus.