h a l f b a k e r yContrary to popular belief
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
This would certainly not be a mass consumer product, but more for those households with members interested in science.
Now you bring your old appliances to some recycling program. Then the e-waste is often shipped abroad to someplace where labour is cheap.
This seems inefficient to me. Some
of us can learn to do the labour intensive taking apart in our garage or hobby shack. I think it would be fun to do. Children can learn about how stuff works. Certain good parts can be sold online.
Needed is the information (safety measures, how to) and some specialised tools to do it, all in one kit. Certain things you can't do yourself will be listed.
There also needs to be recycling programs that accept and know how to treat and judge the materials you have seperated on another level as just 'computer', 'radio' or 'toaster'.
If you become good at it neighbours will bring their crap also to you to please you. Once every neighbourhood has a dozen volunteers like this (listed on a website) we will ship less of our waste to another continent.
This will also be more social. The retired technician in your neighbourhood can demonstrate science and ecology to the kids in the block when their parents ask them to bring the old appliance to him/her for processing.
[link]
|
| |
// can demonstrate science and ecology to
the kids in the block// Thank goodness
there's at least one person who recognises
the distinction. |
|
| |
[Maxwell] Most people (over the age of about three) understand the distinction between "animals" "cows" well enough, but "animals and cows" is still an odd thing to say. Something to do with sets and subsets. |
|
| |
[+] but it doesn't go far enough. |
|
| |
//Certain things you can't do yourself will be listed.// No such animal. Anything can be used for something. It is precisely the more creative sort of recycling that should be encouraged. |
|
| |
Forget "processing": cut the OEMs out of the loop entirely. |
|
| |
Seconded, [Ned_Ludd] - with a small reservation. It's worth spending a few moments evaluating whether any particular creative use you're considering is really more ecofiendly than any other, commercially available recycling procedure. It often will be, because you're likely to use less energy in the recycling, in transport if nothing else. |
|
| |
(Aside: I don't like the "ecofriendly" word, but I don't have a suitable alternative. Any suggestions?) |
|
| |
//I don't like the "ecofriendly" word, but I don't have a suitable alternative// Seconded, [Cosh], I've also been looking for one. |
|
| |
//ecofiendly// There is indeed such a thing, too! |
|
| |
Anything that subverts dependence on mass production warrants a bit of credit, as it helps to break the pattern whereby production in excess of real need is required to keep supposedly responsible production processes, and the organizations that perform them, going. So, blown Hemi tumble-dryer, anyone? |
|
| |
> blown Hemi tumble-dryer, anyone? < |
|
| |
Depends on your zipcode evidently... |
|
| |