Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Perfect example of regulation having the opposite impact of its stated intent.

Its 100% better to dispose of something that “maybe” recyclable, rather than “wish-recycle” it and contaminate an entire load of material.



That's a misreading of what I said about SFC regulations.

The (potential) fine is there to prevent people from throwing away e.g. corrugated cardboard boxes, glass bottles, aluminum cans. From my interactions with the solid waste dept. workers, I find it extremely unlikely that anyone would intervene if you put a "maybe recyclable" in the trash stream.


I missed this!

Perhaps you are correct. But I know where I live (Pittsburgh), if I put soiled and nasty cardboard in the trash, Pittsburgh’s sanitation people will take the cardboard out and leave it for the recycling route.

Sometimes the recycling driver notices its not “clean”, and leaves it for next weeks’ trash route.

<Cue Zaney Movie Theme>




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: