I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I read somewhere that aluminum is one of those things that is almost more expensive to recycle than it is to make. But, you're right about virgin resources. If we can recycle instead of tearing up more ground, then we'll probably just have to bite the bullet and pay more.
Louise
From: "Denise P" <pepabe...@hotmail.com>
To: texascavers@texascavers.com
Subject: [Texascavers] OT: Recycling
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:00:16 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Originating-IP: [70.113.3.230]
X-Originating-Email: [pepabe...@hotmail.com]
X-Sender: pepabe...@hotmail.com
Received: from raistlin.wokka.org ([69.56.185.90]) by bay0-mc5-f10.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 06:00:27 -0700
Received: (qmail 21306 invoked by uid 89); 29 Oct 2007 13:00:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 21297 invoked by uid 31338); 29 Oct 2007 13:00:28 -0000
I am not sure if anyone pointed this out in the recycling discussion, but I think one of the most important effects of recycling is conservation of virgin resources. For example, I'm not exactly sure how aluminum is produced, but most likely some mountain is ground up and we end up with coke cans. Recycling aluminum means less destruction of an in-place natural area, less waste in a landfill, and this seems extremely valuable to me whatever the exact amount of energy used to do this.
I think with our gi-hugic human population and our vast consumption of resources, preservation of existing habitats by recycling materials is a no-brainer.
My two cents,
Denise
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our website: http://texascavers.com
To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com
For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
