Glass Recycling
RJW
I mean why not reuse a bottle that's been used once rather than crush it so
you have to make a new one?
Why cant we have standard euro sized bottles that eco friendly drinks
manufacturers will be encouraged to use as the empties are simply returned
to be refilled by anyone who wants them?
what happens to the lorries that transport all these full bottles to the
outposts of the nation do they return empty with all the bottles consigned
to bottle banks or do they take something else back?
Don
> manufacturers will be encouraged to use as the empties are simply returned
> to be refilled by anyone who wants them?
We do. Wine bottles are a standard size (70 cls) as are beer bottles (at 330
ml and 500 ml).
The problem with recycling is the economics of it. To recycle glass bottles
involves absorbing the costs of collection, cleaning, sorting, crushing and
transportation of crushed material which makes recycled crushed glass little
if at all cheaper than the raw ingredients for fresh glass (sand basically).
There is no saving in manufacturing which consumes about the same amount of
fuel to make from fresh sand as to reuse crushed glass. Some say the
viscosity of reused glass is poorer than fresh since you have more control
over the composition of the resultant glass if you don't use recycled
ingredients. New glass bottles are incredibly cheap to make and as every
schoolboy knows silica is the commonest material in the earth's crust. As
recycling bottles doesn't really make economic sense, a number of councils
simply bin the bottles which you and I have been carefully washing and
sorting in the name of recycling. The provision for sorting keeps the
eco-minded happy and satisfies the EU statistical figures.
Accordingly there really is little alternative to dumping and the bottles
are effectively inert chemically anyway and so cannot harm the environment.
cynical regards
Don
RJW
> We do. Wine bottles are a standard size (70 cls) as are beer bottles (at
330
> ml and 500 ml).
With respect there is such a diverse range of glass container sizes that
surely someone would say use our beer we use the EU standard container and
bring your bottles back so we can reuse them. The alternative is now true
with these containers just being one shot devices and they are so many
colours and types that they cant be used by just anyone.
>
> The problem with recycling is the economics of it. To recycle glass
bottles
> involves absorbing the costs of collection, cleaning, sorting, crushing
and
> transportation of crushed material which makes recycled crushed glass
little
> if at all cheaper than the raw ingredients for fresh glass (sand
basically).
Yes so why not re-use the bottles instead of just crushing them to make a
product that basically takes up less space in landfill?
> There is no saving in manufacturing which consumes about the same amount
of
> fuel to make from fresh sand as to reuse crushed glass. Some say the
> viscosity of reused glass is poorer than fresh since you have more control
> over the composition of the resultant glass if you don't use recycled
> ingredients.
If that's true why do the glass makers take crushed glass then? Why dont
they just make it with fresh sand?
New glass bottles are incredibly cheap to make and as every
> schoolboy knows silica is the commonest material in the earth's crust. As
> recycling bottles doesn't really make economic sense, a number of councils
> simply bin the bottles which you and I have been carefully washing and
> sorting in the name of recycling. The provision for sorting keeps the
> eco-minded happy and satisfies the EU statistical figures.
Yes so it is all a con then and it is actually not eco friendly after all.
The best option would be to smash the glass bottles and dump with the rest
of your household rubbish?
>
> Accordingly there really is little alternative to dumping and the bottles
> are effectively inert chemically anyway and so cannot harm the
environment.
Yep that's true they just take up a lot of space in landfill.
Don
"RJW" <ronal...@nospam.baesystems.com> wrote in message
news:4151213a$1...@baen1673807.greenlnk.net...
> With respect there is such a diverse range of glass container sizes that
> surely someone would say use our beer we use the EU standard container and
> bring your bottles back so we can reuse them. The alternative is now true
> with these containers just being one shot devices and they are so many
> colours and types that they cant be used by just anyone.
You are correct that it is now the case that glass containers are one shot
devices. That is because the costs of collection, sorting, transportation,
cleaning, due diligence (checking recycled containers for defects and
contamination) and so on is also much more costly than purchasing new ones.
As far as I am aware that last places in Europe where bottles were reused
was by the breweries in the former communist states of Central and Eastern
Europe - they did use standard 500 ml bottles. But even there this practice
has now effectively stopped over the last three years perhaps due to the
penetration of Western breweries and the importation of Western systems.
Glass reuse and recycling make no economic sense as several influential UK,
US and European studies and experiments have made clear. Nor will the
situation improve unless Landfill taxation increases drastically - by a
factor of 12 or 15 - or legislation is introduced which forces recycling
backed by hefty financial sanctions. There isn't much point though as the
tax payer will not pay the additional L250 a year per head to subsidise
glass recycling and anyway glass is an environmentally inert substance.
Even audited recycling experiments have proven that in present financial and
legislative conditions recycling can only make losses.
> Yes so why not re-use the bottles instead of just crushing them to make a
> product that basically takes up less space in landfill?
Alternative uses for crushed glass have been tried such as for making breeze
blocks or adding to asphalt but these have not been particularly successful
and in any event the costs of aggregate are pretty low too so glass cannot
compete economically.
> If that's true why do the glass makers take crushed glass then? Why dont
> they just make it with fresh sand?
It is not the case that glass makers take any material amount of crushed
glass. The only recyclable glass that's any use is clear soda glass. The
coloured stuff is pretty useless. And glass manufacturers only have control
over viscosity and melt temperature among other physical characteristics of
the glass when they produce using fresh ingredients. This is because they
only then have complete control over the chemical balance of the glass. I'm
afraid recycled glass just doesn't come into the picture.
Most of the glass painstakenly put into recycling bins by the
eco-intentional goes straight into landfill. I think this is dishonesty by
the councils which pretend they are doing something for the environment
while all the time doing no more than playing a con trick on the consumer.
> Yes so it is all a con then and it is actually not eco friendly after all.
Correct. After all the consumer can't check up on what happens to the
bottles can he?
> The best option would be to smash the glass bottles and dump with the rest
> of your household rubbish
It is certainly the most honest option. And it is more eco-friendly since it
means that people aren't then driving to bottle banks and using up
irreplaceable fossil fuels.
> Yep that's true they just take up a lot of space in landfill.
Yep and with landfill tax as low as it is it makes no holes in the tax
payers pockets. Britain does have among the cheapest landfill tax in Europe
with Austria's being about 6 times higher load for load.
I for one, having confirmed that my local council dumps into landfill the
bottles put in the recycle bins have since put all my old bottles out in the
dustbin.
It is, as you say, a con. Have you been fooled?
regards
Don
John Beardmore
writes
> There isn't much point though as the
>tax payer will not pay the additional L250 a year per head to subsidise
>glass recycling and anyway glass is an environmentally inert substance.
It my be inert, but is has to go somewhere.
>Alternative uses for crushed glass have been tried such as for making breeze
>blocks or adding to asphalt but these have not been particularly successful
>and in any event the costs of aggregate are pretty low too so glass cannot
>compete economically.
So what are the costs of reusing glass in this way ? Grinding it up ?
>Most of the glass painstakenly put into recycling bins by the
>eco-intentional goes straight into landfill. I think this is dishonesty by
>the councils which pretend they are doing something for the environment
>while all the time doing no more than playing a con trick on the consumer.
My understanding was that most bottle banks were operated by private
(for profit) comapnies. Is this not so ?
>> Yes so it is all a con then and it is actually not eco friendly after all.
>
>Correct. After all the consumer can't check up on what happens to the
>bottles can he?
Well, they can ask their local authority.
>> The best option would be to smash the glass bottles and dump with the rest
>> of your household rubbish
>
>It is certainly the most honest option. And it is more eco-friendly since it
>means that people aren't then driving to bottle banks and using up
>irreplaceable fossil fuels.
Only an issue if people make trips for the sole purpose of disposing of
glass.
>> Yep that's true they just take up a lot of space in landfill.
>
>Yep and with landfill tax as low as it is it makes no holes in the tax
>payers pockets. Britain does have among the cheapest landfill tax in Europe
>with Austria's being about 6 times higher load for load.
I'm sure the UK will increase however.
>I for one, having confirmed that my local council dumps into landfill the
>bottles put in the recycle bins have since put all my old bottles out in the
>dustbin.
>
>It is, as you say, a con.
I've certainly heard of green glass being of little use, but as you say,
white can have more value, so I'd be reluctant to propagate the view
that all glass recycling is pointless. Never does any harm to ask you
local authority about these things though.
I'm not sure about your point that the viscosity of recycled glass
causes problems. I don't see why it can't be determined and adjusted
with additives. Why need this be show stopping ?
> Have you been fooled?
And what is reality anyway ?
Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
Stewart Hargrave
<woo...@wookie.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <civb4n$rt2$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>, Don <d...@yahoo.co.uk>
>writes
>
>> There isn't much point though as the
>>tax payer will not pay the additional L250 a year per head to subsidise
>>glass recycling and anyway glass is an environmentally inert substance.
>
>It my be inert, but is has to go somewhere.
And come from somewhere. Silica sand is quarried; ask anyone who lives
in the neighbourhood of a new quarry what the impact is on the local
environment. And then there are the energy costs involved in making
sand into glass. AIUI, most silica sand is quarried abroad, and
processing involves washing, purifying, grinding, drying before
shipping to the UK. The energy required to make the processed silica
into glass is much higher than that required to process stuff that is
already glass.
'Environmentally inert' seems like the wrong phrase, implying that
there is no impact during it's life cycle. That's different to
'chemically inert'.
>>Alternative uses for crushed glass have been tried such as for making breeze
>>blocks or adding to asphalt but these have not been particularly successful
>>and in any event the costs of aggregate are pretty low too so glass cannot
>>compete economically.
>
>So what are the costs of reusing glass in this way ? Grinding it up ?
There was a much reported study of some sort a couple of years ago
that found that the energy debt involved in transporting and
processing the recycled glass outweighed the energy debt of making new
stuff. None of the reports I heard gave any analysis of the figures,
so it wasn't clear where the energy cycle for the new glass was
measured from; if it was at the factory door, it missed out the costs
involved in extraction and transport of raw materials. But of course
that part happens abroad, so doesn't affect our commitment to the
Kyoto protocol.
Googling produces any number of studies that point to energy and CO2
advantages from recycling. Some also claim that recycling many times
does not impair the quality of the glass. Of course these might all be
biased, axe-grinding propoganda. Or they might not.
>>> The best option would be to smash the glass bottles and dump with the rest
>>> of your household rubbish
>>
>>It is certainly the most honest option. And it is more eco-friendly since it
>>means that people aren't then driving to bottle banks and using up
>>irreplaceable fossil fuels.
Well, I walk to mine 400 yards away. But of course we shouldn't forget
about the additional CO2 I will expire on the way.
--
Stewart Hargrave
For email, replace 'SpamOnlyToHere' with my name
Anoid
<ronal...@nospam.baesystems.com>wrote<41503403$1...@baen1673807.greenlnk.net>
adamant that it is economic. Green glass is shipped to France and they even
export broken glass to South America.
--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
-----------------------------------------
Message sent by Excite Newsgroups.
http://www.excite.co.uk/newsgroup