Now they get it - almost, possibly, maybe.
Posted: 22 Dec 2017, 10:23
It is beginning to look as though the push by Sky and all the articles everywhere about the polluted seas, as well as Blue Planet II, might have got through the skulls of MPs. They, belatedly, now want to do something to save the oceans, to save the fish, to save the world. And let us not forget that China will soon stop taking in UK plastic waste for recycling - ah!
All good stuff, or so you would think - then comes the detail. Firms using plastic packaging should pay more for the waste they create via a sliding scale of taxes. Deposit schemes for plastic bottles. A minimum 50% recycled plastic content in plastic bottles. Getting firms to simplify packaging and use fewer different types of plastics and to invest in alternatives to plastic packaging. There is a need for all this because it is 'so difficult' to separate out all the different plastics.... and landfill is so much cheaper. And the extra costs of all the MPs' schemes will not hurt the producers or first time users, those costs will filter down to..... us.
Fine, spiffing, marvellous! It will not save the oceans, though, as the UK and Europe are not massive sea polluters - in the grand scheme of things - nor is the first world in general. Plastic pollution in the seas is largely a third world phenomenon and one mainly from South America, Africa and South East Asia.
Meanwhile, over in the scientific world, there is a process known as pyrolysis, where plastic long-chain molecules can be broken down into smaller hydrocarbon molecules - oil from plastic. It has been known about since the 1980s, but a similar process turning coal to oil has been about since the 1930s.
There are various patented methods and some of them use unsorted plastics - the 'so difficult' to separate stuff - as a feedstock. This immediately cuts out the big problem for plastic recycling - black plastics. Those are the 'end of line' plastics that cannot be coloured any further, and they are in themselves a 'pollutant' to the recycling industry. Make use of them and we could recycle everything. The plants obviously require energy to operate, but some of them produce LPG, petrol, kerosene and fuel oil, in various quantities. The LPG can then be used to help fuel the energy requirements of the heat exchanger.
The big problem is that the set-up costs for an industrial scale plant are beyond all but the very largest corporations. However, there are times when some financial cost have to be put aside for the greater good, and this is where government should step in. If all large cities in the UK were to have one such facility capable of taking in plastic waste from the wider area there is the possibility of eradicating plastic to landfill (and the seas) and at the same time producing enough fuel to operate the vehicles used to collect the waste, run buses and heat buildings such as schools and council offices - a win-win.
What am I thinking? The obvious answer is to tax the problem out of existence. Silly me.
All good stuff, or so you would think - then comes the detail. Firms using plastic packaging should pay more for the waste they create via a sliding scale of taxes. Deposit schemes for plastic bottles. A minimum 50% recycled plastic content in plastic bottles. Getting firms to simplify packaging and use fewer different types of plastics and to invest in alternatives to plastic packaging. There is a need for all this because it is 'so difficult' to separate out all the different plastics.... and landfill is so much cheaper. And the extra costs of all the MPs' schemes will not hurt the producers or first time users, those costs will filter down to..... us.
Fine, spiffing, marvellous! It will not save the oceans, though, as the UK and Europe are not massive sea polluters - in the grand scheme of things - nor is the first world in general. Plastic pollution in the seas is largely a third world phenomenon and one mainly from South America, Africa and South East Asia.
Meanwhile, over in the scientific world, there is a process known as pyrolysis, where plastic long-chain molecules can be broken down into smaller hydrocarbon molecules - oil from plastic. It has been known about since the 1980s, but a similar process turning coal to oil has been about since the 1930s.
There are various patented methods and some of them use unsorted plastics - the 'so difficult' to separate stuff - as a feedstock. This immediately cuts out the big problem for plastic recycling - black plastics. Those are the 'end of line' plastics that cannot be coloured any further, and they are in themselves a 'pollutant' to the recycling industry. Make use of them and we could recycle everything. The plants obviously require energy to operate, but some of them produce LPG, petrol, kerosene and fuel oil, in various quantities. The LPG can then be used to help fuel the energy requirements of the heat exchanger.
The big problem is that the set-up costs for an industrial scale plant are beyond all but the very largest corporations. However, there are times when some financial cost have to be put aside for the greater good, and this is where government should step in. If all large cities in the UK were to have one such facility capable of taking in plastic waste from the wider area there is the possibility of eradicating plastic to landfill (and the seas) and at the same time producing enough fuel to operate the vehicles used to collect the waste, run buses and heat buildings such as schools and council offices - a win-win.
What am I thinking? The obvious answer is to tax the problem out of existence. Silly me.