Garbage: Burning or dumping

**sugarbowlbaby** · 09-07-2006, 07:01 PM

I live in the city limits and we are required to have a contract with one of the garbage/recycling companies, but my in laws live in the country and they burn everything.

Which way do you suppose is better for our world. In one hand, landfills are filling up so fast with crap that will still be there long after I am gone and on the other hand, the toxins and gases that are created from burning this stuff is aweful too. What do you think?

**kabin63** · 09-07-2006, 09:21 PM

I live in the country and we burn anything that is burnable, but we do have garbage pick up and are required to recycle.

**QuilterMom** · 09-07-2006, 09:30 PM

Check out this link - http://www.swcleanair.org/properuse.html

**cozyquilter** · 09-07-2006, 09:31 PM

We had a burning barrel has a kid in our backyard in the suburbs of a major metro area...they are now banned in Minnesota. I think they are much worse for the enviornment. It goes up in the air, comes back in the rain on everything, including the food we and other animals eat and drink...

Here is a link for a brochure with lots of info...

http://www.moea.state.mn.us/publicat...-unhealthy.pdf

**miss_thrifty** · 09-07-2006, 09:32 PM

burning isnt good either " remember --- what goes up , must come down"
all those chemicals we put in the air come down in acid rain, and smog and everything else that makes people sick.
But landfills are no good either, and the palces that reuse old landfills to build new houses on them, Dear God, what were they thinking...I use to burn wood and oil 2 years ago when i owned a house in the country, and thats bad for the enviroment too, but coal is bad too.
Everything we do, is bad for the planet lately, and i dont think the goverment cares enough to really get their act in gear and make it regualtions that help us, to have cleaner enviroment, and less gas emmissions. they say they do, ours in canada when we got nre goverment, stinks at it, the money went other places, and the enviroment took the back burner again.

**paintedsky** · 09-07-2006, 10:57 PM

I think burning is worse too and more hassle. The way I figure it some of the garbage should at least biodegrade, some people or animals might get some use out of the "garbage". Burning however just pollutes the air and smells awful and contributes to the ozone and overheating of the earth and all these hurricanes we've been getting.

**frugal.lass** · 09-20-2006, 04:21 PM

In some parts of Europe munipalities burn garbage and generate power from it. Of course, I can't remember the regions but one of them had a saying along the lines of "not burning waste is a waste". But you have to keep in mind that they aren't just burning their garbage in a big bin. They have special incinerators and before the fumes/air/smoke/what have you is released into the atmosphere it is filtered to remove almost all of the pollutants. It seems to have become a good solution for them.

So, if that became an option here...I could see myself supporting that decision. "Regular" burning however isn't any good, although landfills are just as bad. That's why the "reduce" part of the three R's is so important.