[Khrushchev's Other Shoe]

Originally Posted by Dragon Star

This is similar to saying that a Asteroid is on a collision course with Earth and has 23 years before impact, it could miss, but then again it might hit us, but the problem is it is coming from behind the Sun and we can't tell exactly one way or the other until it gets very close. Do we wait 10 of the 23 years to find the definite answer?

In your analogy, it is not possible to determine whether a problem exists or not. I have no problem coming up with a quick and dirty estimate of the magnitude of the waste disposal crisis. The facts (or at least some of the facts) are not hard to determine in this case.

Practice Makes Perfect.

Maybe, but did the alchemists fail to turn lead into gold because they didn't practice enough? Some things do become perfect with practice. Some don't work no matter how much you practice. Into which category does recycling fall? And if practice does make perfect, why not practice alternative methods of handling the waste? Why does this argument apply to recycling, and only recycling?

Just like everything else, recycling is something that is going to half to be refined and manipulated until it works, but if you don't try how can you get any better? The first time you tied your shoe, were you being efficient? The answer is no, but you got better with practice didn't you?

It's been a long time since I learned to tie my shoes, but I think it likely that during this learning process, I abandoned some techniques that just weren't working, and adopted alternative techniques that worked better. But again, why would this argument apply to recycling and only recycling, but not also to alternative methods of handling waste?

I agree that there is a lack of study and analysis in the effects of recycling, there is a quote that says "The worst things imaginable have been done with the best intentions" which is very true, but so many great things have been done with the best intentions as well. This is something that needs to be tried, and utilized until it is known if it is indeed a non efficient way of dealing with our waste from my point of view.

It (recycling) is being tried. Is there a reason why alternative waste treatment methods should not also be tried?

The real issue here is not whether recycling should be tried or not. The question is whether it should be mandated. The author proposes a market allocation mechanism - let people dispose of their waste in any non-environmentally damaging way they like. If recycling is the most cost-effective method, it will win in the marketplace. If it isn't, it won't. And if it isn't, why would you want to mandate it?