The packages in question

Agriculture and soil. Pollution control, soil remediation, humus and new agricultural techniques.
melt_core
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 07/11/06, 15:52

The packages in question




by melt_core » 07/11/06, 18:24

What are the worst packaging? Plastics, aluminum, other?

Is it reasonable to compare this packaging to toxic waste?

Give me examples of soil contamination; what can we no longer do on contaminated land?
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 07/11/06, 18:35

Start by reading this little file: household waste 8)

Your questions are a bit broad if not ... contaminated by what, for example?
0 x
melt_core
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 07/11/06, 15:52




by melt_core » 07/11/06, 20:31

By packaging. By classic disposable plastic bags for example.
0 x
melt_core
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 07/11/06, 15:52




by melt_core » 07/11/06, 20:58

41% of household waste is still buried while this fate should be reserved for ultimate waste.


What is ultimate waste? What do we do with garbage if we don't bury it, what are the alternatives, I understand that incinerators were not good either ...? Is composting not landfill?

3% are still incinerated without energy recovery. Part of the slag is valued.


by valued is meant resold, or employed so as to derive an income is that right?
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 07/11/06, 22:34

melt_core wrote:
41% of household waste is still buried while this fate should be reserved for ultimate waste.
What is ultimate waste?
A waste that we can absolutely do nothing about ...

melt_core wrote:What do we do with garbage if we don't bury it, what are the alternatives, I understand that incinerators were not good either ...?
We recycle them, we make them energy, we transform them (or we let them transform) into something else.

melt_core wrote:Is composting not landfill?
Nothing to see...

melt_core wrote:
3% are still incinerated without energy recovery. Part of the slag is valued.
by valued is meant resold, or employed so as to derive an income is that right?
No.
Valued means that we use it as a component to make something. The fact that it fits into a business cycle or not is incidental, even if it can help the development of the sector.
In the case of clinker, it is currently used to manufacture underlayments of pavement. Before, clinkers were used to make concrete blocks for construction.

PS: when you ask questions and you want to have answers, it would be interesting to put SVP somewhere ... : roll:
It's like a interro! :frown:
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
melt_core
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 07/11/06, 15:52




by melt_core » 08/11/06, 12:08

Forgive me my rudeness and thank you :)
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 08/11/06, 12:10

melt_core wrote:Forgive me my rudeness and thank you :)


Nothing but just a little advice: try to pass the baton ... do not get into the ease of taking the information without giving back later ... the environment will thank you ... one day
0 x
melt_core
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 07/11/06, 15:52




by melt_core » 09/11/06, 14:27

I'm not going to start trying to understand. I think that it is useful to someone ill-informed who gives a bad image of environmentalists.

What really bothers me is that you often only present holistic effects; to understand science well, I believe, one must understand individual effects, even if it means adding them up. Un buried plastic packaging, what is it concretely, what is the danger, what are the alternatives, long-term effects, can there be spill-over effects (the problem extends to the surrounding soils) etc ...

Is there any hope to reform the incinerators? No technology, filters possible to make them clean?

Is there no more recent figure than 2002?

...please!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 09/11/06, 15:00

Uh you also have the impression of doing the job of melt_core (alia Chernobyl? : Cheesy: ) the ???

Good without laughing ... we gave you the basics there is much more we can do for you ... As far as the figures are concerned, how annoying are those of 2002? They are largely still current ... (probably slightly worse ...) ...

Again in terms of technology you seem to have not read the site ... https://www.econologie.com/articles-862.html

It's quite annoying ...
0 x
melt_core
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 22
Registration: 07/11/06, 15:52




by melt_core » 09/11/06, 15:25

Christophe wrote:Uh you also have the impression of doing the job of melt_core (alia Chernobyl? : Cheesy: ) the ???

Good without laughing ... we gave you the basics there is much more we can do for you ... As far as the figures are concerned, how annoying are those of 2002? They are largely still current ... (probably slightly worse ...) ...

Again in terms of technology you seem to have not read the site ... https://www.econologie.com/articles-862.html

It's quite annoying ...


I'm sorry ... in fact I don't really know what I'm looking for and I have trouble finding my way on the site :)
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Agriculture: problems and pollution, new techniques and solutions"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 324 guests