NationStates Jolt Archive

I repeal this resolution because it must be re-written in order for paper to be illegal to recycle for these reasons:

Paper can be produced from renewable resources. By recycling these items it has been proven that it takes more money, more harmful chemicals are emitted into the air, more energy is used and FEWER trees are created as a result. Fewer trees are grown because by not throwing out the paper there is no demand to plant more trees. It is more efficient to make new products from raw materials because less harmful elements deplete the ozone layer. Deforestation occurs in third world countries where poor people need to clear land, not companies cutting down trees for paper. When paper is thrown away it creates methane gas which I purpose should be collected and used as an alternative fuel from now on. Finally I also purpose that for every tree cut down 3 trees must replace it.

Vote yes and do not prepetuate a myth.

Research based partly on Eight Great Myths of Recycling By Daniel K. Benjamin.

I repeal this resolution because it must be re-written in order for paper to be illegal to recycle for these reasons:

Paper can be produced from renewable resources. By recycling these items it has been proven that it takes more money, more harmful chemicals are emitted into the air, more energy is used and FEWER trees are created as a result. Fewer trees are grown because by not throwing out the paper there is no demand to plant more trees. It is more efficient to make new products from raw materials because less harmful elements deplete the ozone layer. Deforestation occurs in third world countries where poor people need to clear land, not companies cutting down trees for paper. When paper is thrown away it creates methane gas which I purpose should be collected and used as an alternative fuel from now on. Finally I also purpose that for every tree cut down 3 trees must replace it.

Vote yes and do not prepetuate a myth.

Research based partly on Eight Great Myths of Recycling By Daniel K. Benjamin.


Indeed a must read - I haven't laughed harder about an attempt to repeal resolution #13 in my life.

Seriously:

1) Deforestation is a continuing problem throughout the world. The prospect of not only removing a point to help LOWER the use of trees (and therefore slow deforestation), but wishing to make it ILLEGAL to do something that would help slow deforestation is laughable. Recycling paper reduces reduces the use of new trees for the same amount of end-product paper to 17% compared to if you were ONLY creating new paper.

BTW - before you start trying to claim that deforestation is a 3rd world issue, British Colombia, Canada is suffering from such a severe issue of deforestation that many areas of the province have or continue to be under logging bans. There are several companies who have (over the past decade) decided to go to neighboring Alberta to do most of their logging because of all the difficulties of logging in BC.

IT IS NOT A 3RD WORLD ISSUE

2) A repeal CANNOT legislate anything - PERIOD. All it does is toss the old resolution

3) WE ALREADY HAVE a tree replanting resolution (Resolution 23 - check it out sometime, a lot of people dislike it)

4) There are SERIOUS issues with resolution 23 because of its requirements of replacing every single tree cut down makes it difficult to do many things - particularly....expanding cities

5) Considering the world is sitting in a fricking big deficit of trees lost to trees replaced, recycling paper does not slow the process of replanting.

6) Alright - you sit over the garbage dump, collect the methane gas (along with whatever other crap gets spread from the dump - I dare not ask) and somehow find a way to get it seperated from everything so that it can be used as a fuel to dump more CO2 and ruin the environment even further.

7) Research of works from outside the game not allowed as part of one's proposal.

I shall vote no and stop perpetuating the BS.

NEXT

Apologies for the rather......hard edge to this response.....you kinda take the brunt of my frustration towards MOST repeals to resolution 13.

Thank you, forgottenlands (I think..) for say that so well, I agree that however hilarious the idea of making recycling illegal is, we still do have to put it down harshly, before people start getting ahead of themselves. Anyways have a good one pal, Peace & Love.

Uhm.... we make paper out of hemp, so this is meaningless to us.

Uhm.... we make paper out of hemp, so this is meaningless to us.

Lanquassia will have to ask for some research and papers on hemp, as that plant does not naturally grow in Lanquassia. When the question of marijuana came up, the government was confused - we weren't aware that it could even be growing.

Lanquassia will have to ask for some research and papers on hemp, as that plant does not naturally grow in Lanquassia. When the question of marijuana came up, the government was confused - we weren't aware that it could even be growing.
Looks like you'll have to start trading with the "Smoke-filled republic of Vans Down By The River" :D






I don't think that's an actual nationstate...but it should be!

Greetings.

We of Roathin have given a firm negative to the photosynthetic sentient among our people who have wanted to support the repeal, illegal or not.

They wish to support the repeal because of the methane clause. They would love a greater percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, an increase over the existing 380 ppm in our part of the universe.

They are also quite confident of evading paper-making machinery by sacrificing their non-sentient relatives.

We have required recycling of used but useless animal-hide surfaces ('palimpsests') for some time. Residual thaumaturgic energies, however, pose a safety risk.

it takes moer than 20 years to regrow a tree to how big they were.


If you only have one forest, you chop down that entire forest in one year, replant the trees, and you have run out of paper. What do you do? You will HAVE to reuse and recycle the paper till the trees you have planted are big enough to cut down. So in turn you SAVE money by recycling than you do by just chopping down all the trees in your nation.

read the eight great myths about recycling and then watch Penn and tellers bs on the subject of recycling (the dvd is out). Its a scientific fact recycling paper is bad. We have 3 times as many trees as in 1920 and thats not the result of recycling. This happened when paper became a major industry.

read the eight great myths about recycling and then watch Penn and tellers bs on the subject of recycling (the dvd is out). Its a scientific fact recycling paper is bad. We have 3 times as many trees as in 1920 and thats not the result of recycling. This happened when paper became a major industry.

Pfft - give me a locational specification. World wide we don't have 3 times as many trees. I'm pretty damn sure Canada doesn't have three times as many tress. I can believe Britain does - because quite frankly, they had a massive problem of cutting trees down without thinking of the consequences during the industrial revolution (and previously, but not to the same extent). I can believe that since we started having a better understanding of planting trees, they may have worked further to try and deal with the situation.

US I REALLY have a hard time believing it (though I admit, it is possible). Unless you have the stats to back that up, I can't take your word for it (or the documentary's for that matter). I'm not claiming there ISN'T a pollution issue (partly because I don't know the paper recycling method used - and perhaps certain methods of recycling paper are proven to be more enviro-friendly than others and this "myth" was targetting a less enviro-friendly method).

What I can believe is that 3 times as many trees have been planted as have been logged.....but that's one heck of a huge list of other ifs, buts, etc to deal with.

Lanquassia will have to ask for some research and papers on hemp, as that plant does not naturally grow in Lanquassia. When the question of marijuana came up, the government was confused - we weren't aware that it could even be growing.If we're not mistaken, Vastiva grows hemp inside sealed environments (they're in Antarctica). We're in the West Pacific, and grow hemp for a wide variety of purposes (paper, cloth, rope fibre, hempseed oil, and methanol distillation [our Formula One racers are powered by hemp!]). We'll be happy to share our data with you.