|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stars Flying Vice Captain
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:19 am
knivesanpurtythings Instead of landfills couldn't they just make an incinerator (fun fire) which gives off a lot of CO2, but to counteract that you plant a bunch of trees around it to soak up the CO2. There's probably a lot of flaws in that neutral but increased CO2 levels does make trees grow faster so they wouldn't take as much time to mature But wouldn't incinerators take up a lot of space, just like landfills do? Also, if there were trees around the incinerators, they could (possibly) catch on fire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 2:47 pm
swimmingstar987 knivesanpurtythings Instead of landfills couldn't they just make an incinerator (fun fire) which gives off a lot of CO2, but to counteract that you plant a bunch of trees around it to soak up the CO2. There's probably a lot of flaws in that neutral but increased CO2 levels does make trees grow faster so they wouldn't take as much time to mature But wouldn't incinerators take up a lot of space, just like landfills do? Also, if there were trees around the incinerators, they could (possibly) catch on fire. Exactly. And not only that, the incinerators could release toxins into the air. That's why burning all the products are out of the question. Some things are burnable. Some....not so much. @_@"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:02 pm
that was a hard one......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:41 am
swimmingstar987 knivesanpurtythings Instead of landfills couldn't they just make an incinerator (fun fire) which gives off a lot of CO2, but to counteract that you plant a bunch of trees around it to soak up the CO2. There's probably a lot of flaws in that neutral but increased CO2 levels does make trees grow faster so they wouldn't take as much time to mature But wouldn't incinerators take up a lot of space, just like landfills do? Also, if there were trees around the incinerators, they could (possibly) catch on fire. We could put the incinerators underground and filter out the more harmful gases emitted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 4:03 pm
Burning our waste is completely out of the question, because the burning releases massive amounts of CO2, which is then radiated back to the earth by the greenhouse effect, which of course raises the temperature of the earth. And then you've got more global warming to worry about.
I think one of the best things we can do is to reuse more than we recycle, because of course recycling requires materials to be used up to manufacture these recycled goods. If you find ways to re-purpose and reuse the things you already have, you're doing that much more to keep them out of the landfills.
As for building a golf course over a landfill, wtf? Golf courses take up huge amounts of resources just to keep the grass green and pretty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:30 pm
knivesanpurtythings swimmingstar987 knivesanpurtythings Instead of landfills couldn't they just make an incinerator (fun fire) which gives off a lot of CO2, but to counteract that you plant a bunch of trees around it to soak up the CO2. There's probably a lot of flaws in that neutral but increased CO2 levels does make trees grow faster so they wouldn't take as much time to mature But wouldn't incinerators take up a lot of space, just like landfills do? Also, if there were trees around the incinerators, they could (possibly) catch on fire. We could put the incinerators underground and filter out the more harmful gases emitted Great thinking! The members of this guild have such great ideas! You guys are wonderful! 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:49 pm
at the nasa on langly in my area they get alot of their energy from the landfill by my school that burns trash. just thought i would share that bit of info
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:00 am
I definitley recycle and reduce as much as I can. lol mrgreen
Peace and Love,
Sazzie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:27 pm
I don't think this is the right way to look at it.
Landfills are a pretty obvious response to overflowing waste. A lot of plastics can't be recycled, so in a way it makes sense.
I don't agree with using non-biodegradable materials, or materials that can't be reused.
And burning isn't the way to go, generally.
A lot of plastic is full of toxins.
There was this proposal to use plastic to generate electricity, but it doesn't seem to have gone anywhere.
We should look into using less toxin-containing plastic and instead shift toward plant-based plastics. Use tote bags for grocery shopping, buy things that contain less plastic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
