On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:03:49 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 15, 10:59*am, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:57:58 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:00:10 -0400, KotP-A
wrote:

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:38:27 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 14:33:09 -0400, KotP-A
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:20:21 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:10:15 -0400, KotP-A
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:02:11 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:36:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

My son sent me this. I think it would be an excellent way to help
eliminate land fills and pollution by efficiently turning crap into
"clean" carbon for various uses.

http://www.mantria.com/mantria_industries.shtml

click below the vid. I kept hitting the arrow on the screen and
nothing happened. then I clicked below it where it says "Click
here....."

Oh, never mind

Ft Myers is burning their trash for electricity. I think that is an
excellent use. It is certainly a reliable fuel source.
I think they should be burning the paper and plastic "recycle" too.
Nobody has even convinced me trucking this stuff 500-1500 miles was
good for the environment or economically viable.
My neighbor, VP of Raymond Lumber, thought it might be a valuable
marketing tool to be able to say those recycled bottles you throw in
the blue tubs come back as the Trex he sells and add some gee whiz
info about the process.. In that little quest for knowledge he found
out we were trucking the plastic to a plant in New York.
The paper was being processed in Georgia.

I think the sale of water in plastic bottles should be outlawed. If
water must be sold, it should be done in glass and returned for a
deposit.

Why not just burn them in the waste to energy plant?

Do you know how much energy it takes to ship glass?
There is also the hazard broken glass poses in the whole retail to
recycle chain.
We got away from glass bottles for a reason.

OK, OK. Require a deposit for all plastic bottles. That way most will
get returned and recycled. Hopefully fewer will end up in the dump or
Chesapeake Bay.

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.

They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

make it high enough and people will be importing them in from out of
state.

Make it high everywhere!

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:03:42 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.


They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.

So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Soda and water bottles only. That's where most of the trash is. My
plastic bottles are being picked up now, and transported, and sorted
and on and on.

The store could have a dumpster for empty water and soda bottles. One
pickup, then burn 'em. No handling charge, no sorting. 5-10% sounds
good. Or more. People would get their money back when they returned
the plastic bottles.

Wouldn't bother me a bit.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:53:49 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:41:51 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:03:42 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.


They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.

So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Soda and water bottles only. That's where most of the trash is. My
plastic bottles are being picked up now, and transported, and sorted
and on and on.

The store could have a dumpster for empty water and soda bottles. One
pickup, then burn 'em. No handling charge, no sorting. 5-10% sounds
good. Or more. People would get their money back when they returned
the plastic bottles.

Wouldn't bother me a bit.

The places that have deposits pay 2 or 3 cents apiece to the retailer
for handling the bottle.
It is still not enough to pay for handling them.
That money comes from the consumer.

I am pretty surprised that a small government conservative like you
wants this government boondoggle.

Finished? Good.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.


They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.

So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Up here...ten cents deposit on every bottle, can or carton...including milk.
If you haul them back to the recycle depot, you get a nickel for each
bottle/carton.
Most people don't bother and just put the empties out in a 'blue bag'. This
had caused an army of characters to roam around all garbage night digging in
those blue bags for their treasure. They carry half a dozen full leaf type
bags on their 'borrowed' grocery store carts to cash in.
This has been going on for years .

Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.

They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.
I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.
You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.
So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Up here...ten cents deposit on every bottle, can or carton...including milk.
If you haul them back to the recycle depot, you get a nickel for each
bottle/carton.
Most people don't bother and just put the empties out in a 'blue bag'. This
had caused an army of characters to roam around all garbage night digging in
those blue bags for their treasure. They carry half a dozen full leaf type
bags on their 'borrowed' grocery store carts to cash in.
This has been going on for years .



Good system, eh? The Obama administration will be all over that and it
might be Moore's next documentary!

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:00:53 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.


They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.

So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Up here...ten cents deposit on every bottle, can or carton...including
milk.
If you haul them back to the recycle depot, you get a nickel for each
bottle/carton.
Most people don't bother and just put the empties out in a 'blue bag'.
This
had caused an army of characters to roam around all garbage night digging
in
those blue bags for their treasure. They carry half a dozen full leaf type
bags on their 'borrowed' grocery store carts to cash in.
This has been going on for years .


What do the stores do with the bottles that are returned?

They don't go back to the stores anymore. You have to take them to an
official recycling depot.
They are then put in hugh containers and shipped out to be melted down and
the material re-used.

On Oct 15, 6:00*pm, "Don White" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.

They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.

So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Up here...ten cents deposit on every bottle, can or carton...including milk.
If you haul them back to the recycle depot, you get a nickel for each
bottle/carton.
Most people don't bother and just put the empties out in a 'blue bag'. *This
had caused an army of characters to roam around all garbage night digging in
those blue bags for their treasure. They carry half a dozen full leaf type
bags on their 'borrowed' grocery store carts to cash in.
This has been going on for years .- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How do you think the FAGGOT SCOTTY INGERSOLL finances his junk
boats??????
Obviously, the money aint going in to that ****house he lives
in........ The poor Wife.

On Oct 15, 7:37*pm, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:00:53 -0300, "Don White"





wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.

They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.

I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying..

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.

You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.

So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.

Up here...ten cents deposit on every bottle, can or carton...including milk.
If you haul them back to the recycle depot, you get a nickel for each
bottle/carton.
Most people don't bother and just put the empties out in a 'blue bag'. *This
had caused an army of characters to roam around all garbage night digging in
those blue bags for their treasure. They carry half a dozen full leaf type
bags on their 'borrowed' grocery store carts to cash in.
This has been going on for years .

What do the stores do with the bottles that are returned?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A typical "stupid Herring " response. Shows complete ignorance.
Herrings head is up his ass, AGAIN.

Don White wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:00:53 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:59:39 -0400, John H.
wrote:

You missed the point, these things get burned here, not put in the
dump. Deposits are just a tax. It may be a handy way to employ
unskilled labor in a make work job but that is the only redeeming
thing.

They could be burnt after being returned to the store. The stores
would just be centralized collection points. I'll bet a lot fewer
empties would be in the ditches, on the golf courses, or floating in
the bay.
I suppose that might make a lot of sense if you live in a place where
they have a huge litter problem but I bet it would be cheaper in the
long run to pay people to pick up the trash. I know you think that is
"free" in a place with a deposit law but I would compare the cost of
product before the deposit is added and show you where you are paying.

To start with, most places where this happens pay the merchant 2 cents
a bottle or so, just for handling them. That money comes from you
somewhere.
You missed the point. The deposit should be steep enough that people
want to bring them back - or, better yet, not buy them at all. Then
the energy used to make the damn things could be saved.
So you don't care if everything delivered in a bottle got a 5-10%
price increase or that the price increase got spread out across the
whole grocery store inventory?
Even if the deposit was a one for one swap with no real cost
(fantasy), there is still a handling charge on the empties.
They stopped using deposit bottles for a reason., It is very expensive
and uses almost fuel to return them as it does to deliver the product
in the first place.
If you simply burn the plastic bottles to produce electricity it is
simply a one way fuel delivery charge with the use as a container as a
bonus.
Up here...ten cents deposit on every bottle, can or carton...including
milk.
If you haul them back to the recycle depot, you get a nickel for each
bottle/carton.
Most people don't bother and just put the empties out in a 'blue bag'.
This
had caused an army of characters to roam around all garbage night digging
in
those blue bags for their treasure. They carry half a dozen full leaf type
bags on their 'borrowed' grocery store carts to cash in.
This has been going on for years .

What do the stores do with the bottles that are returned?

They don't go back to the stores anymore. You have to take them to an
official recycling depot.
They are then put in hugh containers and shipped out to be melted down and
the material re-used.



Can you post a pic of a "hugh container", dummy? I've never heard of
one here in the states.

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:55:46 -0400, wrote:

Can you post a pic of a "hugh container", dummy? I've never heard of
one here in the states.

At first there was the Dempster Dumpster but now there are just
dumpsters. Guy named Hugh came up with the idea of containerized
shipping, but he is as forgotten as Dempster.

Casady