There are already ways of getting rid of garbage so people won’t have to see it or smell it. For example there is incineration, in which trash that can’t be recycled is burned. Although this meets the requirements mentioned above it has a downside. The burning itself causes waste and eventually it will have a bad effect on the environment. Recycling is a good process that reuses materials so they won’t be wasted and cause waste. But many products are not recyclable, like plastics.

There are a number of ways to solve the dilemma of collection and transportation of municipal solid waste. An underground system of conveyor belts to the dump is a possibility. It would cost a lot of money to build, but then only additional costs would be keeping the conveyor belt running. Each house could be connected to one long conveyor belt dug under the road. Every time people needed to take their garbage out they could bring it through their basement through a path onto the conveyor belt.

The goal of trash compactors and sink-garbage disposals is to reduce garbage. In the end, I think it is apparent that this garbage is still there, whether or not it is compacted into a smaller space. These two methods of disposal do not rid the person of the act of actually removing the garbage, and it eventually gets into everyday life instead of being taken away. If it were up to me, instead of just compacting the garbage in the home, I would probably find a way to rid the home of the garbage altogether. But that raises other questions. Obviously, it is evident that this form of disposal does not even dispose of the garbage as much as just simply putting the trash in a garbage can.

I think the average person would say that it would be a lot easier to, instead of mining ourselves out of our resources, that it would be more efficient to recycle the parts in our automobiles. That is easier said than done. I think if our politicians were aware of statistics like that, then they would probably be more involved in helping our environment. Laws should be passed that instead of selling a dead car to a junkyard for a couple hundred dollars, that people should have to recycle the materials used on those cars. Maybe there would be perks for doing so, but that would definitely help out this crisis. Before all that can happen though, research needs to be made on how to successfully recycle these materials. Once this can be done, through the cooperation of politicians, scientists, and automobile owners, we will soon be living in a better environment.

One of the problems with saying that people need to use more decomposable material is that most family members will not let their kin be buried unless they’re buried with class. Decomposable materials, like wood and certain chemicals, would not be considered “classy”. Simply put, once people decompose, they do not really need a coffin. If we are able to fashion these decomposable materials into better-looking coffins, I think it will be easier to use these materials in coffins, thus making that part of the environment safer.

I am very aware of pyrolysis and its very important uses, but I also know that it is not very useful in the immediate area. In the worldwide community, it is a highly regarded type of recycling. Using biodegradable bags and other biodegradable products are very common in our environmentally safe community. IN order to keep up the ideas and safety that is ensured by this practice, I think education is key. I have been educated in recycling, and waste management in my home. Hopefully, one day these unusual to some, yet practical practices will be commonplace and the earth will be safer.

Category: Miscellaneous