Recycle! Positive Comments Welcome

[Space]

Once I've chucked paper, card, cardboard in the blue-lidded bin and cans, cartons, tins in the grey and put stuff in the compost, I'b be surprised if the usually presented black bag has much left in it, even after 2 weeks.

I have relatives in Europe. They have to separate their waste much more before collection, e.g. newspapers stacked and tied in a certain way, to very specific dimensions so they can be efficiently loaded onto a lorry. Glass, plastic, tins much better separated. The way we are being asked to present waste means more processing at the other end. i would be very happy to separate waste as much as possible to help any future recycling efforts.

Have you ever ordered something small off say Amazon (e.g. toothpicks) and they send it in a box 20+ times the size with masses of bubble wrap or crumples brown paper padding, when an envelope would have done the job just as well... annoyance!

Edited February 15, 2018 by Space

[Guest tiodylb17]

Be good to see Shetland Dairy go back to the old school glass milk bottles you can return

[ETLerwick]

Today I are mostly would be seeing our Council-provided wheelie bins avec their two bungee straps flying through the air with greatest of ease pass my windows on their way to Norway!

Was there something about how you attached them/ secured them that could have contributed to this flight(s)?

[ETLerwick]

There is/was a scheme where a youth club got paid (some of the Miserati’s money) for cleaning up a beach. Not exactly sure who paid, but would have the amenity trust or council. The kids used the money to subsidise a sports trip

Maybe a Go-Fund-Me scheme set up by the kids' group(s)?

[ETLerwick]

 

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

 

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and  believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

Don't refer me to the cherry picked waffling piece of spin and propoganda that's been waved around so far either, its devoid of accuracy and fluffily light on data quantified in numbers and hard facts to the point its more unhelpful than helpful.

 

Prove this is an environmentally beneficial change and I'll back it, otherwise it IS just a box ticking political exercise that deserves contempt.

 

Just because 'Zero Waste Scotland' aka. Holyrood says it is, most certainly does not make it so - if for no other reason than they are political, and by default of being so operate primarily to a political agenda.

 

Your single question deserves an answer. Please attend a Carbon Literacy seminar and teach yourself about how to answer your own question.

 

Further, what will you do to recycle?

 

 

Stop side stepping the question by moving the goalposts.

 

The EU, via the Scottish Government via the SIC expects me to expend the time and effort to required, to comply with their new refuse collection and disposal model.

 

I do not believe their new model to be less damaging to the planet's resources and the environment than the current model in use, in fact I believe their new model will consume more of the planet's resources and cause greater enviornmental damage that the current model. The onus is on the EU, via the Scottish Government, via the SIC to provide proof their new model consumes less of the planet's resource and causes less environmental damage than the current model if they're expecting folk's cooperation, not on each individual to go and seek on that answer for themselves. They're proposing the change, they're implementing the change, its their responsibility to convince people its the right one.

 

I'll skip over the patronising arrogance of your reply, which in and of itself marks you down as very probably an SIC employee. But I will point out that I have disabilities which prevent me from attending most events. What provision is there to make reasonable adjustments so that someone with disabilities is not excluded from these seminars you mention?

 

Finally, regardless what may be on offer at any seminar, it is not going to answer my questions, which are case specific to the SIC's new waste collection, management and disposal proposals, as they have not revealed/quantified the amounts involved.

 

What tonnage of combustible material will their proposal remove from the incinerator, and what is the loss of thermal capacity to SHEAP by default of that removal of fuel? How many tonnes of material will be shipped to Aberdeen and onward haulage, and what is the carbon footprint in transportation terms of each of those tonnes to reach its reprocessing destination? What are the current/historical emissions of the incinerator, and what are they expected to be once teh new model is up and running? I could go on all night, and I'd still not e done, but you get the gist....

 

ALL of the above questions and their answers, and dozens more factor in to the big picture equation of whether or not the new model is an 'improvement' over the current model, or not. Where are those questions answered, where is the data to do so with, why has it not been published in full? They surely wouldn't have something to hide, would they.

 

Blind us with science, stop trying to baffle us with bovine excrement.

 

As to what I do to recycle - and I'm getting a little tired answering this question on here. I do what I've always done, and most Shetlanders used to do. Pretty much anything I own, or have ever owned was obtained used. When something breaks, I fix it. When something is unfixable, it gets broken up and component parts 're-purposed', and if SIC - Housing had had the midder wit to provide every house they own with at least one lum, instead of everything run on diesel guzzling over-priced electric, I could carry in both hands with room to spare all I'd actually throw away each week, as the rest would be helping keep me warm.

 

Thank you again for your opinion -- and for all you do to recycle/ reuse/ in Shetland. Every little bit helps

[ETLerwick]

 

". . .

Have you ever ordered something small off say Amazon (e.g. toothpicks) and they send it in a box 20+ times the size with masses of bubble wrap or crumples brown paper padding, when an envelope would have done the job just as well... annoyance!

 

You could contact your vendor and explain that you're most interested in the most economical/ green  shipping scheme, and yes, you're willing to assume some liability for a few broken toothpicks.

[ETLerwick]

Thanks again to all, for these contributions.

 

I'm looking f'w'd to helping make this scheme -- and its improvements work for Shetland. Every program of this type has to start somewhere, and yes, there will be growing pains. But let's do whatever we can to get from here to there as quickly as possible. 

[mikeyboy]

 

 

". . .

Have you ever ordered something small off say Amazon (e.g. toothpicks) and they send it in a box 20+ times the size with masses of bubble wrap or crumples brown paper padding, when an envelope would have done the job just as well... annoyance!

 

You could contact your vendor and explain that you're most interested in the most economical/ green  shipping scheme, and yes, you're willing to assume some liability for a few broken toothpicks.

 

I seem to remember Amazon had a feedback button specifically for packaging, will check my account.

 

Yes if you go into your orders you can leave packaging feedback on each order.

Edited February 15, 2018 by mikeyboy

[Frances144]

OOh interesting and good to know, Mikeyboy. I had some earphones delivered and they came in plastic in plastic in plastic that involved me finding a knife to try and stab my through.

[Ghostrider]

 

 

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

 

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and  believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

Don't refer me to the cherry picked waffling piece of spin and propoganda that's been waved around so far either, its devoid of accuracy and fluffily light on data quantified in numbers and hard facts to the point its more unhelpful than helpful.

 

Prove this is an environmentally beneficial change and I'll back it, otherwise it IS just a box ticking political exercise that deserves contempt.

 

Just because 'Zero Waste Scotland' aka. Holyrood says it is, most certainly does not make it so - if for no other reason than they are political, and by default of being so operate primarily to a political agenda.

 

Your single question deserves an answer. Please attend a Carbon Literacy seminar and teach yourself about how to answer your own question.

 

Further, what will you do to recycle?

 

 

Stop side stepping the question by moving the goalposts.

 

The EU, via the Scottish Government via the SIC expects me to expend the time and effort to required, to comply with their new refuse collection and disposal model.

 

I do not believe their new model to be less damaging to the planet's resources and the environment than the current model in use, in fact I believe their new model will consume more of the planet's resources and cause greater enviornmental damage that the current model. The onus is on the EU, via the Scottish Government, via the SIC to provide proof their new model consumes less of the planet's resource and causes less environmental damage than the current model if they're expecting folk's cooperation, not on each individual to go and seek on that answer for themselves. They're proposing the change, they're implementing the change, its their responsibility to convince people its the right one.

 

I'll skip over the patronising arrogance of your reply, which in and of itself marks you down as very probably an SIC employee. But I will point out that I have disabilities which prevent me from attending most events. What provision is there to make reasonable adjustments so that someone with disabilities is not excluded from these seminars you mention?

 

Finally, regardless what may be on offer at any seminar, it is not going to answer my questions, which are case specific to the SIC's new waste collection, management and disposal proposals, as they have not revealed/quantified the amounts involved.

 

What tonnage of combustible material will their proposal remove from the incinerator, and what is the loss of thermal capacity to SHEAP by default of that removal of fuel? How many tonnes of material will be shipped to Aberdeen and onward haulage, and what is the carbon footprint in transportation terms of each of those tonnes to reach its reprocessing destination? What are the current/historical emissions of the incinerator, and what are they expected to be once teh new model is up and running? I could go on all night, and I'd still not e done, but you get the gist....

 

ALL of the above questions and their answers, and dozens more factor in to the big picture equation of whether or not the new model is an 'improvement' over the current model, or not. Where are those questions answered, where is the data to do so with, why has it not been published in full? They surely wouldn't have something to hide, would they.

 

Blind us with science, stop trying to baffle us with bovine excrement.

 

As to what I do to recycle - and I'm getting a little tired answering this question on here. I do what I've always done, and most Shetlanders used to do. Pretty much anything I own, or have ever owned was obtained used. When something breaks, I fix it. When something is unfixable, it gets broken up and component parts 're-purposed', and if SIC - Housing had had the midder wit to provide every house they own with at least one lum, instead of everything run on diesel guzzling over-priced electric, I could carry in both hands with room to spare all I'd actually throw away each week, as the rest would be helping keep me warm.

 

Why are you under the impression that the OP has to answer your questions?

 

If in any doubt here is here post below:

 

Who Ray! Looking forward to recycle efforts in Shetland. 

 

Help spread the word to locals, tourists, and everyone who can do this responsible bit, to clean up after one's-self. Let's do all we can to make this work.

 

Read the Shetland Times and review the SIC link that leads to the 'how-to' page, so that you can understand how to sort, manage, curb and otherwise support recycling isle-wide.

 

Please, let's use this thread to support the effort, answer questions, support each other -- if you want to post negative responses, please start another thread.

 

Thank you in advance! 

 

 

I'm not, and never said I was. The OP said to use it to 'answer questions' (see emboldened in your copy and paste), questions need to be asked before they can be answered, and I'm asking mine. I don't mind who answers them, although it would be encuraging to see the OP at least try to seeing as they started this.

[Ghostrider]

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

 

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and  believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

 

 

Just had a looks at zero waste Scotlands page under: improving recycling performance>local authorities... "We can work with local authorities to ensure their projects are evaluated and monitored to show their impact."... so it's quite likely that there is no detailed, comprehensive etc. evidence. I didn't see any local authority schemes in the case studies. So perhaps the answer is to be evaluated when up and running.

 

 

You very well may be completely correct, but if you are it just raises a whole other problem, as another way to put what you've just suggested, is that the SIC are crashing ahead with a new refuse collection and disposal model without having the first clue whether what comes out the other end of it is any better or worse than the current model, or creates no actual change at all.

 

That kind of behaviour is usually considered irresponsible, careless, incompetent and several other similar terms, and could probably be argued to constitute a form of 'maladminsitration'.

 

The actual model being proposed isn't the problem, within a reasonable distance of centres of population and reprocessing facilities, where those populations have until now consigned all refuse to landfill, its almost impossible to find much fault with it.

 

However the smaller the population volume and the greater the travelling distance to reprocessing facilities their waste must travel, the less and less the benefit of doing it becomes, until ultimately if you have to transport it over a certain distance, you're actually worse off in the end. Add in to that equation that what you're proposing to transport is already being recycled in to usage energy, and the point at which transporting the waste actually leaves you worse off dramatically shortens, and then shortens considerably more when you allow for transporting in other waste to do the same job as the waste you just transported out.

 

We are the furthest distance away to transport waste from, we are recycling it already in to used energy, we have declared an intent to ship in other waste to replace what we plan shipping out. If your suggestion were to turn out to be true, the SIC 'Officiers' presiding over this would arguably be guilty of not doing their jobs by proving the new model is actualy fit for purpose, as if it there's any place the numbers just don't add up and it won't be beneficial to adopt, we are going to be top of the list.

[Ghostrider]

 

 

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

 

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and  believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

Don't refer me to the cherry picked waffling piece of spin and propoganda that's been waved around so far either, its devoid of accuracy and fluffily light on data quantified in numbers and hard facts to the point its more unhelpful than helpful.

 

Prove this is an environmentally beneficial change and I'll back it, otherwise it IS just a box ticking political exercise that deserves contempt.

 

Just because 'Zero Waste Scotland' aka. Holyrood says it is, most certainly does not make it so - if for no other reason than they are political, and by default of being so operate primarily to a political agenda.

 

Your single question deserves an answer. Please attend a Carbon Literacy seminar and teach yourself about how to answer your own question.

 

Further, what will you do to recycle?

 

 

Stop side stepping the question by moving the goalposts.

 

The EU, via the Scottish Government via the SIC expects me to expend the time and effort to required, to comply with their new refuse collection and disposal model.

 

I do not believe their new model to be less damaging to the planet's resources and the environment than the current model in use, in fact I believe their new model will consume more of the planet's resources and cause greater enviornmental damage that the current model. The onus is on the EU, via the Scottish Government, via the SIC to provide proof their new model consumes less of the planet's resource and causes less environmental damage than the current model if they're expecting folk's cooperation, not on each individual to go and seek on that answer for themselves. They're proposing the change, they're implementing the change, its their responsibility to convince people its the right one.

 

I'll skip over the patronising arrogance of your reply, which in and of itself marks you down as very probably an SIC employee. But I will point out that I have disabilities which prevent me from attending most events. What provision is there to make reasonable adjustments so that someone with disabilities is not excluded from these seminars you mention?

 

Finally, regardless what may be on offer at any seminar, it is not going to answer my questions, which are case specific to the SIC's new waste collection, management and disposal proposals, as they have not revealed/quantified the amounts involved.

 

What tonnage of combustible material will their proposal remove from the incinerator, and what is the loss of thermal capacity to SHEAP by default of that removal of fuel? How many tonnes of material will be shipped to Aberdeen and onward haulage, and what is the carbon footprint in transportation terms of each of those tonnes to reach its reprocessing destination? What are the current/historical emissions of the incinerator, and what are they expected to be once teh new model is up and running? I could go on all night, and I'd still not e done, but you get the gist....

 

ALL of the above questions and their answers, and dozens more factor in to the big picture equation of whether or not the new model is an 'improvement' over the current model, or not. Where are those questions answered, where is the data to do so with, why has it not been published in full? They surely wouldn't have something to hide, would they.

 

Blind us with science, stop trying to baffle us with bovine excrement.

 

As to what I do to recycle - and I'm getting a little tired answering this question on here. I do what I've always done, and most Shetlanders used to do. Pretty much anything I own, or have ever owned was obtained used. When something breaks, I fix it. When something is unfixable, it gets broken up and component parts 're-purposed', and if SIC - Housing had had the midder wit to provide every house they own with at least one lum, instead of everything run on diesel guzzling over-priced electric, I could carry in both hands with room to spare all I'd actually throw away each week, as the rest would be helping keep me warm.

 

Thank you again for your opinion -- and for all you do to recycle/ reuse/ in Shetland. Every little bit helps

 

 

....and Thankyou, for making no attempt whatsoever to address any of the points and issues raised.

 

Simply ignoring them does not make them go away. Its the same kind of thing as thinking repeating a falsehood often enough will make it fact.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Ghostrider

[Space]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

Just had a looks at zero waste Scotlands page under: improving recycling performance>local authorities... "We can work with local authorities to ensure their projects are evaluated and monitored to show their impact."... so it's quite likely that there is no detailed, comprehensive etc. evidence. I didn't see any local authority schemes in the case studies. So perhaps the answer is to be evaluated when up and running.

You very well may be completely correct, but if you are it just raises a whole other problem, as another way to put what you've just suggested, is that the SIC are crashing ahead with a new refuse collection and disposal model without having the first clue whether what comes out the other end of it is any better or worse than the current model, or creates no actual change at all.

 

That kind of behaviour is usually considered irresponsible, careless, incompetent and several other similar terms, and could probably be argued to constitute a form of 'maladminsitration'.

 

The actual model being proposed isn't the problem, within a reasonable distance of centres of population and reprocessing facilities, where those populations have until now consigned all refuse to landfill, its almost impossible to find much fault with it.

 

However the smaller the population volume and the greater the travelling distance to reprocessing facilities their waste must travel, the less and less the benefit of doing it becomes, until ultimately if you have to transport it over a certain distance, you're actually worse off in the end. Add in to that equation that what you're proposing to transport is already being recycled in to usage energy, and the point at which transporting the waste actually leaves you worse off dramatically shortens, and then shortens considerably more when you allow for transporting in other waste to do the same job as the waste you just transported out.

 

We are the furthest distance away to transport waste from, we are recycling it already in to used energy, we have declared an intent to ship in other waste to replace what we plan shipping out. If your suggestion were to turn out to be true, the SIC 'Officiers' presiding over this would arguably be guilty of not doing their jobs by proving the new model is actualy fit for purpose, as if it there's any place the numbers just don't add up and it won't be beneficial to adopt, we are going to be top of the list.

 

I agree with you in that remoteness make the effectiveness of this scheme at best a challenge in Shetland. Not sure I'd be so hard on SIC officers (btw I'm not an sic employee or defending anyone).

It might be that they have just got to implement the one size fits all government policy.

 

http://www.zerowastescotland.org.uk/content/charter-household-recycling

[mikeyboy]

so that you can understand how to sort, manage, curb and otherwise support recycling isle-wide.

 

 

I think the OP was looking for a positive discussion on how we actually are going to go about recycling or producing less waste in Shetland.

Your questions are outside of that context.

Is there not another thread discussing the merits or otherwise of recycling?

[Space]

so that you can understand how to sort, manage, curb and otherwise support recycling isle-wide.

 

 

I think the OP was looking for a positive discussion on how we actually are going to go about recycling or producing less waste in Shetland.

Your questions are outside of that context.

Is there not another thread discussing the merits or otherwise of recycling?

Agreed. I can choose what I buy, e.g. choose non-prepacked or single use stuff, I make my opinion known through feedback if I receive unnecessarily wasteful packaging in the post etc. As customers we have got to put pressure on suppliers to reduce or prevent waste at source? How little waste can we put out in the first place? Edited February 16, 2018 by Space