It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Would you be opposed?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I've been thinking about our dying planet lately. One of the biggest issues we have is our garbage disposal. We have mounds of garbage like pimples all over the planet, and it's so bad that our waters are infested with garbage.



If the technology were available to make it super cheap and easy, would you be opposed to sending our garbage to the moon or Mars? Both are dead. Our planet is alive with millions of different kinds of plants and animals. Does that justify, to you, that our planet is more important than Mars? The moon? Sure, there are still mysteries to be learned about both celestial objects, but our planet also holds many secrets.

Just curious if anyone would be in favor of putting our garbage somewhere else.




posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I would be in favor of creating less garbage and reusing, recycling more. Big Corps are the ones who need to foot the bill for delivering off planet. They push the over consumption propoganda on us so they should rocket it off planet.

I seriously think that as human beings we can learn to survive without all this unecessary packaging BS!
edit on 1-7-2011 by Zippidee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I have thought about this myself and to be honest, as soon as its financially viable, and the tech allows us to do it, I can see people either sticking it all on the moon/mars or just sending it out into space. There will always be people who are opposed to it, and i think its a pretty crappy thing to do, but if you imagine the size of either the moon, mars or just space in general, i very much doubt the amount of rubbish we could send up there would have any impact on anything.
I think we dont understand how the universe works well enough to start pumping rubbish out there though. Think of the poor space wildlife

edit on 1-7-2011 by 2012king because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2012king
There will always be people who are opposed to it


Or maybe lifeforms other than people



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I don't see it ever being inexpensive enough to do it. The rockets it would take it their will never be cheaper than just recycling or burning it. The fuel alone would not make it worth it.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zippidee
I would be in favor of creating less garbage and reusing, recycling more. Big Corps are the ones who need to foot the bill for delivering off planet. They push the over consumption propoganda on us so they should rocket it off planet.

I seriously think that as human beings we can learn to survive without all this unecessary packaging BS!
edit on 1-7-2011 by Zippidee because: (no reason given)


So is there anything in the world you don't blame corporations for?

Blaming them for the amount of trash you create is just ridiculous.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I would not be opposed, there are just lifeless rocks as far as we know.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Schmidt1989
 


Do you have any idea of the size of a payload on a rocket that can achieve earth escape velocity? Take even a 300-some-foot tall Apollo Saturn 5 rocket even if it was 100% garbage do you think that makes any significant difference to the amount of world garbage, abandoned towns and cities, and landfill dumps? I'm curious to know why you think it is important to land the garbage on another planet or moon, *scratches head*.

I'll help you out, Saturn 5 fueled mass 6,699,000 pounds.
Payload to trans Lunar Orbit, 107,000 pounds.
Apollo 15 command module 12,952 pounds at launch, including engines and fuel.
Apollo 15 lunar module 32,399 lb including lunar rover, engines, and fuel.

So it took 6.7 million pounds of fuel and engines to get a real payload including engines and fuel to the moon of only 45,351 pounds.

See how ridiculous the idea is?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Schmidt1989
Just curious if anyone would be in favor of putting our garbage somewhere else.


No, and if they were inhabited it would almost mean WAR... Refine and make it into energy..



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


You would need tens of thousands of missles launched everyday to keep up with the trash the world creates. Not only do you need to build these missles but provide the fuel and the shipment of the refuse to the launch stations.

Really just not feasible in the slightest.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
If through some 'magic process' we make it cost effective to throw junk out into space why would we not throw it into the sun? Why send it to a planet we will colonise at some point?

The sun would just eat it all up.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by justwokeup

The sun would just eat it all up.


And if for someslight possibility there are plasme beings their we just caused some serious probs. I think trash disposal is a sign of an advanced species... turn into energy



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
 


I dont actually disagree with you, I was just responding to the hypothetical that we were throwing it into space and suggesting a better destination than those posed in the OP.

In the real world its hard to imagine it ever making sense to throw junk off the planet.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
This reminds me of the Futurama episode where they blast all the rubbish into space and it hurtles back at us threatening to end humanity.

Classic episode, but can't remember what series it was.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Right, you would be throwing close to 100x times as much valuable natural resources away to get 1% of that mass of garbage out of earth escape velocity, regardless of where it went.

40 years ago products were made to last, and packaged in minimal packaging, but today its simply more economical to make throwaway products with excessive packaging, it takes me ten minutes to unwrap a dress shirt these days, just to make it look nice in the excessive store, i also never used the same computer for more than 5 years. To remedy the trash problem you have to start at the source of the methodology.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 

You have no idea how much trash I create. I have a couple of plastic water bottles that I refill from my own source. Also, I compost my organic trash. I save empty coffee cans and place dried herbs in them and this list goes on and on.

I was simply stating that commercials from the giant mega corps are to indoctrinate us into buying therefore contributing to the trash problem. Think about it. Why did Coca Cola and Pepsi and the likes go to plastic bottles instead of refillable glass bottles. Hmm....lets see, profit maybe? So my point stands validated. I doubt very seriously if those two corps would have gone out of business if they would have continued with the old business model.

So regarding the personal attack.....me thinks thou protest too much!



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Hmmm... are you implying that all those UFOs people keep seeing may actually be nothing more than interplanetary garbage scows? That would explain why they're so sneaky and never stop to talk to the landowners....



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Someone started early today. Think again before posting. Recycling and/or turning it into some form of energy or some useful by-product would be cheaper.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join