Good Guy Amazon??

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

Where I live E-waste is free. in fact everything recyclable (except tires, refrigerants and mattresses) is free (even paint and engine oil is free),  However I like to offer the stuff to charity before just dumping it.

 

 

Problem is e-waste really isn't actually recyclable. It just gets put in a shipping container and shipped to China etc then put through a furnace or the poor and destitute sit over a flame with a heat pan killing themselves from the fumes and heavy metal leeching in to their skin. 

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Problem is e-waste really isn't actually recyclable. It just gets put in a shipping container and shipped to China etc then put through a furnace or the poor and destitute sit over a flame with a heat pan killing themselves from the fumes and heavy metal leeching in to their skin. 

I dare say most of it goes into landfill where I am (cheaper than sending it to china).  But there really isn't much more I can do beyond hoard it in the backyard.

[williamcll]

Maybe donate it to those overworked folks in fulfillment centers?

[Curufinwe_wins]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

Problem is e-waste really isn't actually recyclable. It just gets put in a shipping container and shipped to China etc then put through a furnace or the poor and destitute sit over a flame with a heat pan killing themselves from the fumes and heavy metal leeching in to their skin. 

What??? I swear I hear solar panels are recyclable 24/7. (Yes I know and agree. Actual frustration point)

[Flying Sausages]

Dear Amazon,

 

Please donate a full AMD Ryzen rig parts to me.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

What??? I swear I hear solar panels are recyclable 24/7. (Yes I know and agree. Actual frustration point)

It's fucking stupid isn't it?    Something might be green while it's in use and working,  but that doesn't make it environmentally friendly or recyclable on the whole.

[Dabombinable]

22 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

In other words. They have found a way of getting rid of "trash" while looking like a good guy.

 

Its great as long as that project doesnt turn charity into a landfill

Considering everyday people already do a good enough job of that (especially with increased tariff on rubbish disposal)...

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

It's fucking stupid isn't it?    Something might be green while it's in use and working,  but that doesn't make it environmentally friendly or recyclable on the whole.

At least solar panels get used for 10+ years, unlike a lot of TVs and nearly all smartphones. I'm sure it's possible to reprocess the silicon in the panels it's just that nothing is setup to do it hence it's way to costly to consider it right now, effectively making them non-recyclable. One of those bigger fish to fry things.

[ARikozuM]

3 hours ago, leadeater said:

At least solar panels get used for 10+ years, unlike a lot of TVs and nearly all smartphones. I'm sure it's possible to reprocess the silicon in the panels it's just that nothing is setup to do it hence it's way to costly to consider it right now, effectively making them non-recyclable. One of those bigger fish to fry things.

The benefit in using the solar panels is worth the recycling cost, of lack thereof, unlike smartphones. Smartphones are quickly becoming a problem. Not a day goes by that I don't see the e-waste bin at Best Buy being full of otherwise useful stuff like A/V receivers, phones, and old TVs. 

 

The problem with e-waste and its R³ lies squarely on the manufacturers of those products, especially since they're the ones producing and expecting users to toss their old phone after a year or two. 

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

The benefit in using the solar panels is worth the recycling cost,

 

What if that recycling cost (both financial and environmental) is the same as  building and using a nuclear power station that can provide the same amount of power plus more. 

[ARikozuM]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

What if that recycling cost (both financial and environmental) is the same as  building and using a nuclear power station that can provide the same amount of power plus more. 

Why not both? Are we to eschew viable power sources because a better one is available? Diversity is key. If something happens to your coal plant or wind turbines, you have solar. If it’s a rainy day, you have wind and coal. If you have a hurricane, you might have a battery at home for a week’s reserve.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

Why not both? Are we to eschew viable power sources because a better one is available? Diversity is key. If something happens to your coal plant or wind turbines, you have solar. If it’s a rainy day, you have wind and coal. If you have a hurricane, you might have a battery at home for a week’s reserve.

I do have solar, my point is that we are facing what appears to be a serious issue with the environment and a clear winner for power generation across the board (at the very least as an interim solution) yet everyone wants to scare us away from it.   That and everyone is keen to jump on the solar is proven perfect without addressing even some of the unknowns regarding what happens when they all need replacing/upgrading and the true cost of production.  

[ARikozuM]

10 hours ago, mr moose said:

I do have solar, my point is that we are facing what appears to be a serious issue with the environment and a clear winner for power generation across the board (at the very least as an interim solution) yet everyone wants to scare us away from it.   That and everyone is keen to jump on the solar is proven perfect without addressing even some of the unknowns regarding what happens when they all need replacing/upgrading and the true cost of production.  

Nearly every coal plant should be converted to nuclear. There’s no reason to not go that route. There’s also a very real necessity to allow/subsidize each home solar panels. We are heavily reliant on gas/coal in the US and it will eventually hurt us if it hasn’t already. 

 

The topic isn’t about energy production but about e-waste and the difference between a decade or two of solar panel’s lifetime vs the expected upgrade cycle of a new smartphone. These companies aren’t investing enough money and time to recycling and reduction. It’s like plastic, recycling is possible but there are toxic materials and solvents that can’t be recycled or reduced to inert substances.

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

Nearly every coal plant should be converted to nuclear. There’s no reason to not go that route.

This I agree with. At least for the tech we have now until other solutions are made possible.

 

Quote

There’s also a very real necessity to allow/subsidize each home solar panels.

We tried that here in Australia, unfortunately it didn't work that well,  All that happened was that the rich that could afford panels ended up having their panels and subsequent power bills subsidized by those who can't afford it.   A very unfair system.

 

 

Quote

We are heavily reliant on gas/coal in the US and it will eventually hurt us if it hasn’t already. 

We don't even have nuclear here, it's all coal/gas and a bit hydro.

 

Quote

The topic isn’t about energy production but about e-waste and the difference between a decade or two of solar panel’s lifetime vs the expected upgrade cycle of a new smartphone. These companies aren’t investing enough money and time to recycling and reduction. It’s like plastic, recycling is possible but there are toxic materials and solvents that can’t be recycled or reduced to inert substances.

 

I never said the topic was about anything else.

EDIT: actually the topic is about amazon donating to charities, but it morphed into other things.  We can discuss them all.