The Hidden Truth Behind Sweden's Waste Disposal Infrastructure
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 ส.ค. 2018
- To Burn or Not to Burn: In Sweden, waste incineration plants convert excess and non-recycled rubbish into energy. The Swedish government classifies this process as recycling, but is this form of waste disposal really sustainable?
Subscribe to Journeyman here: th-cam.com/users/subscription_c...
At a waste incineration plant in Västerås, Sweden, sixty tonnes of waste are burnt every hour, converting it into energy for electricity and hot water. Sweden has 34 waste-to-energy furnaces and the country makes over $100 million a year importing and burning waste from other countries. “We see it as a kind of recycling”, says Jocke Hook, who works at the Västerås plant. Yet much of the waste burnt is plastic and, as Professor Goran Finnveden explains, "if you incinerate plastic you get carbon dioxide emissions”. Indeed Joan-Marc Simon of Zero Waste Europe believes that the number of incinerators will soon fall. "We’re going to see incinerators closing down in Europe because they’re going to have less waste to burn and recycling is going to go up.”
For more information, visit www.journeyman.tv/film/7409
Like us on Facebook: / journeymanpictures
Follow us on Twitter:
/ journeymannews
/ journeymanvod
Follow us on Instagram: / journeymanpictures
Visit our subreddit: / journeymanpictures
Say hi on tumblr: / journeymanpictures
ABC Australia - Ref. 7409
Australia complains about Sweden, *secretly* Australia sends all their recycling to offshore land fills.......
Australia sends their recycling waste to places like Malaysia. Google this or search it on TH-cam and you will see this is true.
Every country should deal with their own waste.
@@zhangruyi3153 I already know. That's why I said it....
Lol
But those countries are stopping it all now aren't they, they are banning OS waste trade..
Looks like Aus will just put it back in their own landfills again instead of investing in a means to recycle the waste.
Actually - when I was in finland, every time I mix the waste my boyfriend freaked out.
Every plastic bottle (or beer can) CAN BE returned to the grocery for money or credit. It’s amazing. Recycling It’s too integrated into their lifestyle.
Yes but almost every western country has this. Even usa has markings on the back of all plastic bottles and glass for return.
They do it in the States as well....
Same with usa
Same in Germany.
I was in a queue for a club, I asked a person next to me why the homeless were litter picking, he told me that they get money for every plastic bottle/item or glass the return
Elliot Elliot we do have that as well here even in the Philippines- it’s even a livelihood to some of the very poor. BUT this habit isn’t as toooo integrated in the daily lives as much as it’s in the Febno Scandic North.
I never thought I'd say this, but the Swedes are actually doing something sensible for a change. Human beings have always reused, repaired, and recycled. The modern innovation, driven by the current 'eco-religion', is to do it even when it doesn't make sense. It's fine recycling waste that is made from scarce elements; uses less energy than virgin material production; or has a high enough resale value to cover the recycling costs, but the recycling of lower and lower grades of waste violates all of these potential benefits. Plastic covers a wide range of different materials, with a wide range of properties. To separate them completely would be difficult bordering on impossible, and very expensive. Doing it less rigorously produces 'Franken-plastics' with sub-optimal properties. There are only so many park benches and bins we need! Since they are all hydrocarbons, made from some of the most abundant elements in the universe, it makes more sense to extract their chemical energy through burning. Even better in Sweden's case since they not only use the electricity, but also the 'waste' heat of combustion. People should remember that plastic production only comprises a small proportion of hydrocarbon use. Most hydrocarbons are used for fuel anyway, and this recycling of plastics may displace the burning of other fuels. People are concerned about the production of toxic wastes, such as dioxins, from these plants. As long as the waste is burned at a high enough temperature, and the waste gases are scrubbed, this isn't a problem.
ahjfgkjdsg can i use this in my essay lmfao
Thank you for a Very elaborate explanation. I fear that Most people watching this video does not understand this and it's a bit sad as a swede that the guy in the video did not mention any of this, and mostly looking at it in a very critical way.
@@lovehagglund3234 The thinking of many people who espouse environmentalism, has more in common with religious dogma than a cool-headed assessment of how best to deal with a problem. Environmentalism, and progressive politics, have filled the religious hole left by the retreat of Christianity in the West.
I've been thinking about this even 1 step further for a country who'd implement this in a warmer region and thus couldn't capitalize as much on transporting heat. What if the excess heat could be used to power some sort of massive compacter that crushes the waste ash in to very small very compact cubes, just to make the waste all the more manageable?
@@bobdole27 Even if the climate doesn't require space heating, there will still be a need for hot water. It can be used to heat swimming pools, or as a heat source for manufacturing purposes. Of course there would be a large initial investment required to lay the flow and return pipes for such a system.
When someone tries to pick out the tiniest imperfection of others out of insecurity.
You missed the point of the investigation. It's about where society should most efficiently invest.
There are dozens different plastics and only few can be recycled efficiently, simply because the technology to recycle them doesn't exist yet. This means many plastics end up as waste, simply because they can't be recycled, so burning them seems a good way of dealing. And instead of burning oil directly for heat generation, lets turn it first into plastic and burn it after the plastic has served its purpose. This way the oil is used twice.
Maybe more then twice???
Terracycle
There are dozens (of) different plastics and only (a) few can be recycled efficiently, [ You got the first bit right but the second bit not so much] simply because the technology to recycle them 𝘾𝙝𝙚𝙖𝙥𝙡𝙮 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙚 𝙢𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙖 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙛𝙞𝙩 , doesn't exist yet. [There fixed that for you :-) ]
@@timg6850 So it can be done if the profit is 0 and they are exactly break even?
@@timg6850 You can't keep recycling if you go out of business.
I'm an Australian living in Sweden and kind of laughed when you suggested that your Electric hire car was being charged by the recycling plant... true while some energy may be sent to the grid, a vast majority of electricity is from Hydro and then the rest is Nuclear. Nice bit of drama there too with the person not allowing you to film... I do commercial film productions in Sweden and could have told you that you most definitely need prior permission to film people - just look into the Swedish Surveillance Act. (kameraövervakningslagen). We even had drones banned for a while because of it.
Privacy is important and this idiot commentator agreed and then ignored the first request
It's perfectly legal to film on common ground, as long as a person holds the camera. Drones were banned because they were filed as surveillance since there is no one holding the camera. /swede :)
@@macjonte Not if a private citizen specifically asks to not be filmed.
DailyTact
Well it’s actually not illegal to ignore someone’s request to stop filming, but it would be very disrespectful. However sometimes there could be a valid reason to be disrespectful like in this case.
@@dailytact1370 So no freedom of the press?
I live on an Island in Canada and I am sure most of the items we separate for recycling end up in the landfill anyway. I would much rather it gets burned for electricity.
I live I Massachusetts, about 2 years ago trash truck guy told me the recycling plants have 5 years of material on hand and the recycle has been going to the landfill or incinerater so he took my recycle in the trash truck , we have separate vehicles for trash and recycle despite all going to the dump,so they don't want us to know this is happening obviously its gonna get worse because China don't take much global trash anymore and they were burning way more than Sweden I think.
The government(corporation) can afford to build warehouses to store the properly separated plastics. And not using our money
The governments want to be part of the economy so be part of it. Instead they just want to take large amounts of money for the easier jobs
I just worry about the emissions and how this will affect climate change and the holes in our ozone.
@@kellyjamsies5574 This is the problem with much of the dismissal of incineration as a practical approach to waste disposal. We've been conditioned to accept the idea that emissions will change the climate (and in a very dangerous way). Despite the lack of scientific data to support that idea, we are likely to view carbon dioxide, the main byproduct of combustion besides water vapour, as a bad thing rather than the essential thing we learned it is in the carbon cycle. It's a sad commentary on our education systems that they're capable of teaching anti-science along with real science.
No waste handling system is perfect, but Sweden's seems superior to most.
“Recycling” in Swedish does not mean the same ”återvinna” simply means “regain” like to use it again whilst the English word recycle point more to use something multiple times like in a cycle. That’s why the Swedish guy in the factory says that he recycle. He’s not aware of the difference in the word.
Yeah we refer to it as "energy recycling".
i was not even aware of that difference either.. ineresting thanks.
Jeszebel black seems that not many was :) I work at a plant like that in Sweden. “Very proud of our recycling in Sweden” No for real, are we going to burn up the world? Not a good idea. But it’s a good short therm solution. But we need to think longer.
@@franzfabel7165 well.. i think its a good solution for us, but not for everyone. the colder climates can make use of this technique just fine. the warmer climates however will need to figure out a different solution altogether.. i will always say nuclear.. but thats me :)
when a youtube comment is more informative than the youtube docutmentary
Landfills have been banned in Germany as well for a while now and now all trash is either recycled or burned (much of the plastic was sent to China for a while, an utter nonsense). Waste to Energy definitely makes sense esp. If done right. And yes, turning waste is a form of recycling since the potential energy is turned into work in the form of heat and electricity. Creating landfills is short sighted and not sustainable. Of course, reducing waste production at the front end should always be encouraged.
You can't evade landfills completely in trash handling. Banning it in Germany means that Germany shits somewhere else. Best answer for trash is "do less of it".
Germany does not "shit somewhere else", as you put it. "Municipal solid waste" landfills are banned, meaning the stuff has to be burned instead. The other types of landfills are unaffected.
Landfills produce methane. Methane can be used to run factories like the BMW one in South Carolina.
Yes... You transfer that shit to Poland.
.....
Futschikatores true
They don't claim to have a perfect solution. They're doing the best they can within our lifestyle, buying plastic and making so much waste.
Thanks to this kind of journalism, no solution can be implemented, even when it's obviously way better than the alternative, letting the waste rot in the soil or the ocean...unbelievable. What are his solutions?
ALICE PALAY Waste buried in a proper landfill doesn’t dump nearly as much emissions into the air, “obviously”. No it’s not in the “soil”, but below the soil. Tap the landfill for methane and burn that if you like, as in the US.
Landfills still polutes the ground where where they are (possibly also ground warter), and make it troublesome to build on for hundreds of years.
Besides harvesting methane gives small amounts of energy over a long period compared to burning the waste. Landfills also leak meathane to the athmosphere sometimes and even catch fire which takes a long time to put out.
Albert Skorstengaard a properly built modern landfill no more ‘pollutes’ the ground than dirt and rock pollutes the ground. Burning things in the atmosphere is over. Move on.
Mark Heslep ......And the proof in support of your statement can be found at??????? I have been involved in waste management and that is simply not true. You mimic the reporter who simply wants to do nothing other than prove his point and not support alternatives. Waste to energy is efficient, prevents (hopefully and in time) the future paralysis of marine life and our health. The calorific value of waste involving plastic is high, providing power and steam for manufacturing, hot water for heating etc., and if it helps prevent the unsightly waste around us, in cities and the countryside all the better for our kids and grandchildren. Simply sweeping the problem underground is not a solution when you consider the amount of waste build up as the population of the world continues to explode.
Man will no doubt destroy the planet eventually, let’s do what we can to delay the decay, incineration of waste is moving on, not hiding the issue from view and walking away.
Andy Capp Environmental science 101 is to contain waste and emissions as close as possible to the source. Burning spreads it around the world. You can not “sweep” the waste into the atmosphere and pretend its gone. It came from the ground and can go back there. Worse than burning dung, burning plastic and the like is simply the combustion of fossil hydrocarbons transformed and it *will* come to an end. The heat content of coal, oil, and it’s derivative plastic are indeed high but that doesn’t justify burning any of them in the air. No, saying “kids” doesn’t improve your argument but indicates you dont have one.
Wow, I thought this is how it's done in every developed country...
I'm not from Sweden btw
Those plastics are not sterile, so they can't be recycled into just anything
And there are only so many trash cans and recycling bins you can make from the plastic before you have a surplus of it building up.
Car parts can be made from 100% recycled plastic. They don't need to be sterile. Where there is a will there is a way. NASA recycles sweat and urine into drinking water
@@highstreetkillers4377 Recycling sweat and urine is a little different than plastic.
@@HammerLeaf Unlikely to be worthwhile.
@@donder172 Sterile is sterile, just saying
Makes perfect sense in a cold climate.
its not that cold,its about the level of mid atlantic area temps
Naughty Goat Farm that’s far from perfect sense. It makes very little sense actually.
Actually, I also feel this way,
TBH, I feel that cold climate environment play a huge factor in being an advantage for this waste disposal front,
Temperature can play a huge part to balance the heat from the activity
Compared to my small SEA country, which are having challenges in this
@@kennysolstrand7201 Try burning wood or oil for the houses and say that its good for the enviroment?? it does matter and if its not like 22C you kinda need heating
@@Mahtoush so you got any better ideas to heat up a house that has - 10 celisus to over - 30 celcius each winter?
I like how he avoided talking about the the metal cans & glass containers. there's a small moment where they are shown but he doesn't even acknowledge that all of that is actually.. recycled into new containers.
All thanks to people who sort the trash, and doesnt just toss it in the general (burnable) trash.
swede's: use technogoy and science to transform rubbish into energy
aussie's: let's do what dogs do
I don't get it. Dogs are literally the noblest animals.
Is it a quote from the video?
@@thirstiestvillager9233 Burry their bones (landfill)
The reporter is EVADING the fact that once garbage is burnt the exhaust gases are chemically treated. The process is EXACTLY the same with what the Catalytic Converter does to the exhaust from a car.
I didn't get this impression. He clearly asked about it and the answer seemed clear to me, aswell. It's still producing a lot of CO2, which in large amounts is a account for the greenhouse effect and as such worsens the climate warming. In the end, I still see this solution of burning to heat houses as a kind of positive solution.
@5:25 the worker clearly explains the process and even mentioned that they "wash the fumes." They arent gonna spend all that money to just gonna burn garage with no treatment processes lined up that's just minded thinking if people assume that.
Jannis, you do know that burying trash in landfills produces massive amounts of methane gas as the organic waste is broken down, right? Methane gas is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, and lasts in the environment for much longer periods of time. Burying trash is actually worse then burning it, AND its still a hole filled with trash a hundred years later.
We only bury trash because it's cheap, not because it eliminates the trash.
CO2 is the least of your problems when burning plastic, pal. You should learn more about environmentalism before jumping on bandwagons.
Oh yea, you're right, burning plastics with large variety of additives is exactly the same as burning (relatively) clean kerosene. /s
If all we needed was a catalytic converter at the tip of the fume stacks, trust me, every incinerator, production plant, flare etc. will have one of those. The reality is more complicated than that.
It is not perfect but is a great solution! And much better than the common practices in other western countries. Everything possible should be recycled and made that it can be recycled. Corporation should be forced to only produce products that can be recycled.
That's what we starting in Jamaica plastics that cant recycle are getting banned as well as styrofoam.
Fire is a solution of sorts, but it’s not so “great”.
What if Sweden started distilling the gas instead of releasing it, then they sell those distilled chemicals back to other countries? Bet you'd be fine with it then!
These "chemicals" are carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, ammonia and miscellaneous particles. So not exactly any valuable chemicals.
@@danternas Well they can be valuable, but you'll spend more compressing and packaging them than you could ever earn selling them.
The companies selling them already have it down to a science. Impossible to compete.
I think the key here is being “ open and honest about facts”
Trying to exaggerate to get the result you want is very poor .
sweden still doing much better than all other countries
Except when it comes to allowing muslims in they get an f
Where in the video is there any mention of any lie?
I watched the video, the conclusión he made was that they only recycle 30% and burn the rest for heating and electricity, i don't see how sweden are lying, they still don't have a rubbish problem, and deal with thier waste without burying it, and get energy from it, still very good if you ask me, as they said they wash the fumes from the furnaces which burn at 900 c which is hot enough to breakdown the toxic stuff anyway.
it's not a sham baby, they are even buying waste plastic from other countries, there is already a shit storm of plastic in circulation, so they are doing a good thing to get rid of it and turn it into useful energy, sure they could reduce plastic use as could any contry, but still sweden are doing better than the rest, or do you prefere landfill?
also, what do you think other countries burn to make electricity and heat?
Hey, Australia! When you have stopped burning coal you can start to complain about others...
When Japan,India,China and Indonesia does, I too will believe in Global warming.
???
We have a waste reclamation centre in Edmonton Alberta, everything is recycled not burned
Hey, zappy! When Sweden stops being hypocritical, you might have a point. Until then, STFU.
Way to combat criticism with criticism...
I'm glad that the media is now raising public awareness on waste like plastic particularly. We also need to hold companies that mass produce plastic accountable because most of them are only looking at the bottom line. For example, companies like Dole where they would put a few slices of peach into a plastic container knowing that the plastic is going to be a waste product down the road. Those kinds of habits needs to stop. Of course, there are other companies that are doing the same thing. The solution is to use close loop recycling products like aluminum, metal, etc. Also, we can use wax paper to seal sandwiches and other perishable items. There are a lot of better alternative to drastically cut back on plastic.
Thank you for sharing with us what an amazing job Sweden is doing.
In Australia the definition of recycling trash is changing the Government !
Boom! And it keeps coming back!
whooshkaboomie lol
I will have this printed, framed and hung on the wall in the living room.
would rather throw them in landfill
Australia doesn't recycle, they just send their trash to Ghana. look it up
The reporters are not educated enough to cover this topic. They didn't tell the real reason why burning trash is a good thing in sweden until at the last minutes. The reason is heating the homes. In cold climates most of the energy produced is used for heating. That is a huge ammount needed and burnging trash creates heat a lot. Electricity is only a minor reason.
The Magic Bush They mentioned it at 6 minutes in...
Maybe watch it again?
So probably this is not applicable to Australia other then our alpine regions we dont really get cold winters.
You don't reveal your punch line until the end.
just wear a long sleeved shirt lol
The argument of Journeyman Pictures is extremely subjective. Here in Australia we burn COAL for electricity and bury our waste. The waste eventually is released as CO2.
so we have both the coal AND the waste contributing to global warming. The Swedes at least harness the energy from the inevitable process and reduce the amount of other fossil fuels they use.
FACE IT!! We are NOT using less energy just because we aren't burning our waste, but instead we are burning coal....... Anyone else see the issue here?
So from my personal view.. Journeyman Pictures = Fake News.
TheTextralian There’s no CO2 from a modern landfill unless oxygen finds a away down to the waste. If that happens, it will be centuries out, which is slow enough. What can’t happen is a smokestack with tons of CO2 per second going out the stack to the big waste pile in the sky.
TheTextralian “instead we burn coal”. Yep, so don’t do that. Stop screwing around and build nuclear
@@Nill757 I agree with the "nuclear" option 100%. LSR will pave the way forward within the next 30 years.
However, microbial action, in an anaerobic environment will in fact release an extremely large amount of the carbon as CO2 from available carbohydrates and the hydrocarbons, through anaerobics will easily convert to methane which is an even greater greenhouse gas if you believe in that science. I personally do not. I used to but I've expanded my own research and listened to counter-arguments and they are extremely compelling and evidence based. My personal bias is towards "burn what you have and don't waste it... Get Thorium online as soon as possible for sustainability." All problem energy related will be solved.
TheTextralian Agreed. The carbohydrates however are not largely sourced from fossil hydrocarbons. They’re part of the biomass cycle, which is another subject and which doesn’t dump that much net matter into the air. The plastics and the like shown in the video however, I) dont have their own oxygen and will stay in place for centuries if well buried; ii) their carbon comes from fossile hydrocarbons which simply cant be allowed into the atmosphere. Capture and burn the methane bleed of course; many US landfills do.
And that is how to look at the waste-to-energy program, instead of burning a virgin resource like an oil burning power-plant you can use that oil as a plastic bag first. And with a more successful recycling program that oil can go from a plastic bottle to bubble-wrap to plastic bag and then be burnt as a fuel. All plastic recycling degrades the material a bit, so it can never be recycled forever.
Ok someone educate the journalist on the conservation of energy. This is the way to do that. Landfill is just letting that energy be dissipated in non useful way.
Well said.
For some perspective on energy use in Sweden: we spend roughly as much energy on heating our houses/water than the ENTIRE transport sector (including transports from abroad). So yeah using warm water heated by burning trash is way more efficient than heating house with electricity, which is a much more precious energy source. And considering an astonishing 60% of energy production is Australia is based on coal and 20% on natural gas I feel like he is throwing stones in a glass house.
In any way, even though i think it's a perfectly senisble solution for Sweden, he is right in that this kind of plants would probably not be a good solution for Australia.
I don't think he's throwing stones. I think he's showing that burning waste for energy, while good for Sweden, is not a good solution for Australia's waste problem.
It does seem a bit ludicrous to go to the recycling center every day or even every month. Im pretty sure they have organized waste collection, including recyclables, at least in more densely populated areas in Sweden and Scandinavia generally.
Furthermore, doesn't the deep south need lots of electricity to power those aircons? (it could be waste to 50% power, 50% heat.)
Just want to clarify: Everywhere I lived had either bins at home that get collected or a collection station in the inner yard of a housing complex for example. I think this is done differently in different municipalities. Currently I just walk down the stairs into the backside of the apartment building and there is a station right there (our housing association pays for collection).
Electricity is ALWAYS inefficient way to heat the home. I wish schools taught people about thermodynamics. It would eliminate a lot of "green" illusions.
@@MartinHangaardHansen No we don't. Only food waste and non-reyclable trash is collected by the garage trucks. Everything else it is up to the individual house- or flat resident to transport to the recycling-bins or to the dump. But that one woman seems to be an extreme case. No one in their right mind leaves waste at the recyclingbins bin every day. Once a week is more normal.
22:53 Here is the most important point.
Sweden is extremely cold in the winter so they need lots of heating at the same time they heavily rely on hydro-electric energy, which have very low production in the winter of natural reasons. This means Sweden has to import cheap coal electricity during the 3-4 coldest months of the year.
Burning trash to heat in the winter instead of importing cheap coal based electricity from Germany is less pollutant.
Biased interviewer , Waste to energy is the way to go.
Until the late 1960's in Philadelphia, trash was INCINERATED (with NO POLLUTION CONTROLS), the "ash" was taken out to the ocean and dumped. I remember seeing pictures in the 1960's New York City used to load garbage on to barges and hauled out to the ocean and dumped. Modern incineration is the BEST ALTERNATIVE TODAY WITH THE TECHNOLOGY WE HAVE AVAILABLE NOW.
interesting mini documentary.
My best friend is handling one of those incenerators in Högdalen.
I work as a plumber, i install these pipes and heat exchangers in the houses and buildings.
I know the requirements we both work under, they are EXTREME! These fumes that comes out of the chimneys, it is mostly waterwapor! The consentrate that is left from the washing process is processed in alge factories i guess. There is one big such in Uppsala. It does it job very effectively!
I think this is a good solution to this waste problem. If you do landfills you risk contaminating the ground and groundwater. And recycling plastics... requires energy, energy requires a electric powerplant burning coal or a nuclear powerplant with other kinds of hazardous waste. (if you dont sit on top a nice big dam! :D)
So all these processes are monitored closely and quality secured by strict laws! From picking up the trash containers to delivering the heat thru license welded pipes! And we heat our warm water with the same heat exchanger that heats our homes! :)
You are spot on on all parts but one. It's not nearly as clean as a Nuclear power plant! Regulations there are so strict it actually beats every other means of power production in terms of pollutants. Including Nuclear waste.
Tack för det jobb du gör, Micke. Heder till dig. Hoppas du får redigt betalt.
Nor you or the guy in the film mention the ash. Around 25 % of the trash becomes toxic ash, where the fly ash (flue dust?) is being transported to Langöya in Norway as landfill. In Switzerland it is forbidden to transport fly ash before it's been recycled (there are many metals in it). Now Norway wants to extract metals from the fly ash. We will se what will happen. Both fly ash and bottom ash is toxic, however, in particular the fly ash. In the film the person in Västerås tells that they have Sweden's strictest rules when it comes to cleaning the smoke, which raises another question: What about the other more than 30 plants in Sweden and other countries? For instance are incinerators spreading dioxines and other toxic substances. I strongly doubt that all filters are so efficient that they stop all toxics from entering the air outside the plant.
fukashima and Chernobyl show why we cant rely on nuclear
Fukushima and Chernobyl were 2 freak accidents! Ofc its bad that so much radiation got spilled inte the pacific! And that the close surroundings of Chernobyl are radioactive. But it is still the most effective and clean energy source we have! We will see soon enough how the ITER project develops! Very interesting!
At Least It's Not Like Paris where EVERYBODY pisses on the Sidewalks.!! 😑
really ??? I thought it was the dogs. When I last visited Paris the Cafe's were ringed with Dog Sh*t as no one picks up after their dogs there.
Paris want to be multicultural nation 🤣🤣🤣
@@sanketkumar8040 you know Sweden is too right?
Swedes just piss in the Metro elevators.
As an Australian, our people are very skilled at criticising ideas for solving problems, and very incompetent at actually solving them.
"-That's not how I look at it." Well, that's not a problem really, as people tend to look at things differently, especially from different countries. Turning waste into energy that you otherwise would have to import from coal plants f.ex., is to me a better solution. Imagine all that plastic being collected being left in the nature instead, and then have to import energy from coal and other "dirty" power plants...
Landfill? I thought Australia was more ... developed
I'm not sure he speaks for all of Australia! He seems to be just one man.
We in Australia, do recycle, ie put it our recycle bins. Only for the incompetent fools to put in landfill. Why? because electricity is too expensive.
Easier for Australia to bury trash than many other countries because they have huge areas of useless land (desert, semi-desert that's unsuitable for farming).
If you are an Australian that believes recycling is decent here, you are delusional.
You are so right. I waste my time taking sorting the waste out. I think I will give up.
Are you burning coal for electricity? Yes.
Could you burn trash instead? Yes.
Would that be an improvement? Doesn't take a genius to answer that.
Did the correspondent bother to notice that the trash incinerating plants in Sweden are sometimes right in the middle of towns and cities? No smoke, no smell, just steam emmanating from the stacks.
Also, plastic is collected during recycling precisely for burning! Kilo for kilo, plastic contains more energy than gasoline. High heat energy demands such as cement making uses plastic incineration.
So speaks a man who haven't invested a single cent in coal mining or coal fired power stations.
@@grevberg vad menar du?
Aleksander suur, did you actually watch it? Running cost vs how much electricity it makes annually makes this unfeasable for australia.
@@joshbramich388 Yes reason why Australia want just to bury trash is because it is cheapest solution, not because it is good for environment.
16:38 if someone doesn't consent to being filmed you STOP FILMING THEM. you absolutely don't try to lie to the person about whether you're recording
It's actually criminal to keep filming a private citizen in Sweden after they have asked you to stop.
He motioned for the camera man to stop, but they didn't need to include the footage
@bopp9 depends where you live
It is interesting to see this Aussie man struggle against his preconcieved notions and fail to recognize a fantastic solution when it is right in front of him
I hate landfills: expensive, polluting, very little time and they fill up, crack(if they were well made in the first place, or remade because the old ones had no infrastructure, no recycling what so ever.
I never studied their solution, but is what I envisaged for our waste problems. The only thing is to limit the chemicals who are released from burning waste.
Also, it seems as a last resort since classical recycling is not discouraged.
Planting trees is one solution, as well as bamboo
Remaking plastic in to something useful is another solution.
3. We need to look at "garbage" as an income stream not as trash.
discarded plastic can be used to make hobbits for people and animals
You can make stepping stones, bricks. People just have to get super creative . Creativity and the view that nothing is waste can make us super rich, productive and cleaner. .
Not to mention, India needs compost toilets for public use
Hobbits..😂😂😂
Or you could consume less.
No mention anywhere on reducing amounts of plastic in packaging and producing containers that biodegrade. But knocking the burning of plastic when the alternative is inverted piles (landfill) of waste is stupid.
Burning of plastic waste is also stupid, it produces harmful chemicals and releases toxic gases which if inhaled would kill far more people.
@@pietrojenkins6901
No it isn't stupid. As the plant employee said a lot of that toxin is destroyed in the burning, at 900° C. There isn't a better way then burning the waste. Everything that's recyclable is removed from the raw waist. And what's left is burnt. He said they burn 60 tonnes a day. Failing to burn it, it would go in the ground. 60 tonnes buried every day, where every toxin associated with the waste, will release into the air, slowly, and if it was just the 60 tonnes, then not really a problem, however, its 60 tonnes a day, = 22,000 t a yr, the accumulative affect would be a disaster of biblical preportions, as they say., not to mention the methane waist produces as it breaks down. So this is why I believe burning is the best solution.
Actually, this kind of waste solution (option) is way better than landfilling, aside from the latter has the more ecological impact than incineration, leachate if not properly managed (as so far experienced by a developing country due to lack of budget) is a potential harm to public's health. Leachate contains heavy metals which are highly toxic.
Likewise, landfilling is a form of mining and have a various type depending on the available area or location, there is this one type wherein landfill cover is taken from another place such as hills (which is environmentally destructive). The landfill also emits methane which is a second most significant GHG next to CO2 and has a GWP of 25 (global warming potential). Meaning it is 25 times higher than of the CO2. Although there are numerous landfill site that has a system that collects this gas and utilized it as fuel for energy production the process is still expensive, bear in mind the cost for the leachate collection and treatment system and the post-management of the site are still not included. Other things need to be considered in the landfilling are area requirement, effects to nearby water bodies, communities, flora, and fauna, among others.
Thing is that actually Swedish companies ARE investing into development of bags made out of sugarcanes and that sort of thing, even though in my opinion there is still far to much plastic packaging in the grocery stores.
@@nateman10 yea it is best to do like you guys have done a long time, to dump everything to sea, there environment takes care of it.
Don't complain on sweden for this :) It's the best way we have now and it's good
No, it is not the best way, however compare to most country just dump into the developing country or dig a hole and bury it...hmmm I say Sweden is way better.
@@NekoLilium2012 Yes it is for our country. Remember that we can get cold waves down to under - 30 celcius. And as it works now we get the heat to the houses from trashes and industries for paper, instead of oil, coal and natural gases as the other countries that lives where it's this cold.
nothing ventured, nothing gained.It's not perfect. Just curious, what has Australia done of interest lately?
The recycling process for plastics also requires heat or burning thus it also has emmissions, with that huge amount to be recycled it is still better to incinerate where fumes are being treated at highger terget temperature. Therefore incineration is still better.
I think it's an interesting idea. I live in Ohio and we bury our garbage. It's gotten so big we call it Mount Rumpke lol. They've ran into issues trying to expand the landfill. We need a better alternative than to just keep creating new garbage mountains
I live in St.Martin and we have a huge landfill problem.
A big problem with landfills as well is the methane emissions caused by micro organisms feeding on the plastic. It damages the atmosphere more than actually burning it because the particles released by the organisms stay in the air for 100's of years as compared to the burned particles which stays for 30-70 years. Also plastic takes thousands of years to decompose.
(Edit): Obviously burning it is bad but
KELLI2L2 I actually lived in a house built on the old city landfill. Miami University sits on part of it. But it wasn't huge to begin with. The landfill here is like the second highest elevation in our county and it's not the mountains here but we have some decent hills. The air around it does have a distinct smell. That's been one of the biggest complaints from residents around it
@Oke Fixico "send it to the moon"? Are you insane? Just imagine every country on this planet to just that... I can't imagine anyone would I'm just I can't believe somebody would suggest that... First of all I don't even agree people going to the moon digging it now on top of that take garbage to the moon? It is hard to breathe as it's now garbage to be on top of us? I guess u call progress!!!!!!
I live in Ohio too, and I find it hilarious that we literally dig a massive hole in the ground, fill it with trash, put some dirt over it, and act like the problem has been solved. We pretend as if, in a hundred years, when we dig there it will magically be dirt and not a massive pile of trash. Of course, we do this simply because it's the cheapest solution we have, not the best solution we have.
The dictionary defines 'recycling' like this: convert (waste) into reusable material.
So, no burning it for energy is not 'recycling'.
But it's probably better than dumping it in landfills.
If energy is not material, what is it?
donmab: the point is that even energy is a material or a modification to a material in some cases like heat. Electricity is energy and since it is made up of a pile of electrons in one place and a pile of protons in another place, and since both electrons and protons are things which can me moved around and used, why are they not "reusable material"?
donmab, what do you think electrical current is?
Balboa Baggins Plastics is made from oil, oil has a lot of energy so why not re-use it or recycle it in to energy?
@@donmab oh you are wrong electric currents are movement of electron in a conductor, energy is matter times the speed of light squared
Sweds are great and clever.. i got in love with the first burning central... they produce 35 millions a year in heating the city and 10 million in Electricity.. so they are totally eficient and producing a profit... and have a clean surroundings.. Great and practical well done Sweds...
Sweden is recycling most of its recyclables. The plastic which is being incinerated in Sweden is only the residual plastic left over which waste transfer stations all over Europe missed when sorting the recyclables from their waste streams before exporting it to Sweden. Swedes do make an effort to recycle most if not all their domestic plastics before they dump any left over rubbish in the furnaces. For example, there might be a grade of plastic which French or Portugese MRFs might miss separating before sending the waste to Swedish incinerators and by that point the Swedes could not be buggered with retrieving it..
There is one thing this guy avoided is this program, that is the supply and demand issue. The government can mandate and pass laws all they want, but unless there is a market for any given material, it won't matter. All of that plastic stacked up at that company probably didn't have anywhere to go because there wasn't a buyer. They didn't want to talk because they were being made out as the bad guys. Private companies have to be able to make a profit, like it or not.
The swedes dont really need the garbage , they were mainly build to burn paperwaste and wood products/waste then homegrown waste, outlandish garbage is just the spice to get a bigger profit.
there's always the option of state run schemes, but apart from that, new legislation often creates new markets, it's not that cut and dried.
What's the hidden truth here?
It just seems to be an uneducated interviewer asking stupid questions & he doesn't understand the recycling process.
a reporter with an agenda imo the guys obvious bias says the bbc don't want folks to do this eh.
Yeah this dudes, as he would say I think, a 'twat'
The hidden truth might be that people think all the collected plastic is recycled to new products instead of destroying resources by burning them... Maybe recycling is a word that has a lot of meanings and we feel better if we choose that one that fits us best...
Yeah he can't even say Copenhagen the right way 😉😂😂 seriously 😱
There is some truth in what you say. But if the plastic is collected, and the good plastic is sorted out to be reused, the leftovers are a good source of fuel of known quality.
Manufacturers will need to become better at making packaging that's easy to recycle by avoiding stuff like mixing different kinds of plastic in the same package.
18:43 but like the guy at the beginning of the video said, is it really that bad that 84% is burned Unless there's some really toxic smoke being emitted, I don't see the issue.
Yes, do u think burning plastics will create problem?
@@plantman7119 I don't understand why you're asking me that.
We actually have several waste to energy plants in the U.S as well as many other countries besides Sweden with the exact same set up. The company I work for is the world leader in WTE plants and other means of recycling when possible so it's weird watching this video and not hearing it mentioned because I know we have one in Dublin, Ireland. It is a better solution than landfills and this video seems to gloss over the fact that there are strict emission controls in place with heavy heavy fines(hundreds of thousands) if pollutants do end up making their way into the environment.
This video seems biased from the beginning.
Love it how carefully he dances around terms like 'plasma arc gasification'...
Wonder who sponsors this shill.
I'd say it's interesting, thorough, well-made, and high quality. (Added unintentional Australian amusements such as "cintral hating" [central heating] certainly doesn't hurt either.)
How is it biased though, Todd?
"How is it biased though, Todd?"
===
Biased in the sense that it erodes his worldview about how perfect Sweden is. I live here and it's far from perfect. As you saw in the video, officials don't like being questioned. You are simply told an official narrative and expect to unquestioningly believe what you are told.
Fascinating
As a family in the UK we have always sorting out our household rubbish. Once a week the council pick up our rubbish as well as the plastic bottles, the paper and the glass.
We take all the metal separately to the scrap metal yard where for ordinary magnetic metals we get about £10 for about 120 kilo's of the scrap but more for copper and tin etc.
The Swedish idea where the manufacturers must pay for the disposal of their plastic wrapping and containers etc.
We pay so much tax for products especially cars, why shouldn't they pay you for disposing all their packaging. I noticed that our neighbour did not re-cycle anything, he has a similar sized house and garden yet we recycle and he doesn't, why don't we get rewarded for doing it, also he pays the same council tax but his home is worth double what mine is.
When ordinary garbage is being picked up it should be weighed and the heavier it is the more tax you pay.
I also use lime putty mortars and plasters in my work which is better for the environment because it absorbs carbon dioxide yet buying lime is more expensive than cement.
We have a totally fekked up system that is geared up to support unsustainable stuff with electricity production having better subsidies that the sustainable power production.
We should also be using Maglev trains and trams throughout our country yet they want to build the very expensive and slower HS2.
If we must have nuclear power stations we should be using THORIUM in a molten salt nuclear reactor this is because it uses lower energy, can be recycled AND IS WALK AWAY SAFE unlike
the present high pressure water systems that use uranium and are more expensive to run.
That would be nice Mr True Manc but will countries like the US be able to opt out, I hope not. This is probably the time I wish that there was a new world order but not one run by the corporations who only looks after their share holders and doesn't care what their toxic output does to the world, I want one that only looks after the planet, like a short term pain for long term gain I guess.
The trouble is that the acidification of our oceans is almost irreversible now as the slow death of the worlds corals, the rain forest destruction and climate change is showing.
Live long and prosper.
Much as I can appreciate what you are saying with the radiation and all that jazz, the acidification of the oceans will kill off quite a bit, and although nuclear is bad just look at the area around Chernobyl after the blast in 1986, it's all quite good there and people have actually moved back in. The wildlife is thriving and it's not too bad.
I once played a game called 'Stalker' which is modeled on area's like Chernobyl and Pripyat (the city they abandoned) I have a friend who is quite obsessed with chem-trails and nuclear fall-out and all the other morbid stuff that so many go on about. Of course the uber-rich and the royal family, all those in gated communities think that they will be much safer than the rest of us ordinary mortals but they are only fooling themselves, it'll be like living in a golden cage. If everything all kicks off would you really want to live in the way that they do? It will all come to an end eventually so it's probably much better to turn to dust when the 1st blast waves hit us than to sit in your underground bunker waiting for everything to get better, it won't, fall-out takes many thousands of years to be safe.
As soon as the shite hits the fan I'm going to start one big drink fueled party and go out in style with a smile on my face.
Unfortunately like most people the presenter seems to be under the false impression that most recyclable plastics that go to recycling plants are actually recycled, when the truth is that only about 2% of them are actually recycled as most plastics are not actually recyclable and many 'recycling' plants are unable to deal with contaminated (dirty) plastic and the rest still ends up in landfill. Therefore, burning it is undoubtedly better for the environment, despite the emissions which are far better for the atmosphere than the methane created by landfill.
District heating is a brilliant idea! I am surprised we do not do that here in Canada.
In Australia I think you ought to look into district cooling. They have this in Hawaii. It is just a loop of ocean water that is pumped up and circulates throughout the city. the pipe goes a mile out or so to get a deeper and cooler source of water. You could burn your garbage to make electricity to run the pumps for the district cooling system. You can also use your waste heat to run your next-door recycling companies processes too!
We do the burning in Hawaii a lot as well since we don’t have the space for land fills
It is recycling, just because "Thats not how i see it" Doesnt mean it isnt. Also your look of mistrust when he said that the fumes are washed shows just how little understanding you have, it is an extremely effective process, Also we have rules with high fees in most areas for not sorting out plastics and putting it in seperate containers. A lot of the unsorted plastics you saw are from the imported stuff but ofcourse a lot of shit sneaks into the trash anyway and that is not about weather the stuff that reaches the plant is burned or not. that is about information to the public, Also the "all the stuff is in plastic" when bought. No, you can buy it all without packaging, especially the higher quality stuff and ecological/Organic.
We are also (and already were when you made this) Banning plastic more and more and forcing renewable options or reusable options. With things like straws being paper or metallic and same with cups and a lot of other stuff.
Perhaps you should take a look at what you compare it to th-cam.com/video/lqrlEsPoyJk/w-d-xo.html
Mathias Westerlund - understood and support the effort. Washing the fumes was not a negative statement or it was not meant to be.
washing the fumes is impossible. what happens is they catch the fly-ash and filter it from the less harmfull fumes. the ash is then used as building material in asphalt and such. problem is its riddled with heavy metals and cancerous materials. so basically we are just pushing the problem to the future. this is the simple explanation, theres allot more to it. the stuff is so light and blows away in an instant when removed from the containers. usually its pumped via a closed system in to tank trailers, sadly sometimes the machines break and people have to open it up and empty it out in to big bags for transport... dont wanna be near that when its going on!!
source: mechanic, had to fix the broken hoppers that fill the tanker and i like to ask questions. and after that i did a little digging in to what i was working with, cause the 'dont worry about it' wasnt satisfying enough.
@@civiere Washing the exhaust is not impossible and there are more advanced ways of washing the exhaust which are currently employed in WTE plants in Sweden other than simple ash filters. Currently the fly ash from WTE plants is not used in building materials because it tends to contain the majority of the heavy metals and other toxic compounds from the waste and combustion products that are released when you burn waste. Instead fly ash from waste is buried in special deposits. However there are some new technologies that are being developed which will make the fly ash more usable in building materials.
I mean sure it's not the same as burying garbage all over the country and hoping that the same toxic substances don't leak out into the ground water reservoirs or into the ocean but you know it kinda works.
Source: Powerplant operator who currently works on a WTE plant.
I totally get your point about lets prioritize our actions based on a hierarchy of integrate municipal solid waste management, which basically states that first we ought to avoid, reduce, reuse, recycle/re-valorize, and as a last resort treat and dispose of. The reality is that in Sweeden, and also in Norway where I live they are 'skipping' the actions and going directly to treat/dispose of. One super important fact that maybe you were not aware of is regarding the by products of incineration (namely bottom ash and fly ash), and the fact that they do generate a significant ammount of solid waste that commonly is sent to a landfill. The difference here is that these residues are no regular solid waste, are actually hazardous waste loaded with toxic heavy metals, dioxins and other pollutants, which if not properly treated can further contaminate for instance groundwater because of the ease at which they can leachate off.
Good report. The real questions are 1. How much recycling plastic is really feasible? Which kinds of plastic, and at what scale? 2. Where in the world is recycling done well? Where is trash that can't be recycled being handled well? 3. When garbage is burned what is the pollution/energy produced/CO2 compared to burning natural gas, oil and coal? 4. Is it okay for a place like Japan, surrounded by water, to burn it's trash with most of the plume going over the uninhabited north Pacific Ocean? (Japan has more clean public toilets than any place on the planet, but almost no public trashcans outside of train stations. Everything has to be separated correctly.) 5. What are the recycling/trash collection/disposal methods that are the worst (but could easily be improved?) and what are the forms of corruption that are common with waste disposal? 6. What is considered the best way to handle these materials? (Of course the easiest step is to not produce it in the first place. Bananas in a plastic bag?) Having just visited the UK and Ireland, unlike the States they're still separating glass by color, but there seem to be Zero plastic recycling cans. I have the sinking suspicion that a lot of recycling is mostly localized ritual. In America we have billboard showing what can be made from recycled plastic, while in the UK, it's just trash; but they're sorting glass....
This reporter is clueless about winter here in scandinavia, I'ts better to burn and heat than built more nuclear 🏭 Of course this is not best option for you. Here we have at least learned how to recycle and I'm sure future generations will figure out how to use this material more and more .. Reporter in this doc. Is almost saying that we should end this good work and start dumping it. We appreciate our grounds waters more than Aussies 💦
Molten salt reactors are fail-safe, have been invented over 50 years ago. The only reason why Fukushima happened is because the world turned their back on this non-water cooling based technology in the shadow of Chernobyl catastrophe.
Burning plastic, which is a non energy-dense form of oil, is not thinking about the environment, and not useful for heating in the long term if we are to live in a world that has resolved the global warming issue. Nuclear in combination with renewables, including recycling, is the way to go!
Get your facts straight and stop spreading misinformation, Heidi!
the fact is that the waste we burn makes upp a very small part of our energy like 40 procent comes from water and 10 procent comes from wind then another 40 from nukulear. so realy waste is like what 2- 5 procent.
@@whatsupbudbud It seems to me that you imply that Tsjernobyl's reactors were molten salt reactors whereas it were overly complicated and outdated graphite-moderated light water reactors (RMBKs). Just wanted to point that out :)
@@marthafakker Thanks, but Chernobyl which was a disaster.
Look into "Molten salt reactor experiment". They deliberately forced it into critical mode and it run fine without human intervention. But then Chernobyl happened and nuclear became taboo.
Yea you're right, it's a sad story...
I'm currently working on a topic to separate americium and curium from spent uranium fuels to re-use in fast breeder reactors. Hope it can change the mind of some people someday because it has so many benefits :/
I love the word play, 'we recycle it into energy' LOL
Prayerfully we will all embrace this level of caring and eventually 100% on all our waste, amen and amen.
And now it's more and more common with special bins at home, that are made of different smaller compartments for each material. Så, no more ride to the green containers - just sort at home.
23:58 The best part of the documentary!!! :D
The reporter failed to ask the most important question. Where does the ash from this go? The ash has got to be similar to coal ash or worse.
Typically you have reduced the trash volume by 95% and weight by about 70%-80%. The ash that's left can be used in asphalt and concrete aggregate products, as the intense heat from incineration greatly reduces any leach-ability of the ash, or it can be sent to regular landfills.
you can just bury the ash, its like putting coal back into the ground.
It ends up in a norwegian island outside Oslo called Langøya....
Have they checked the pollution levels of that ash?
I'm not sure if the ash from plastic and trash would be ok to use in asphalt as different types of ash have different properties and they all react differently with cement. I don't know the exact science but I know that there is a science behind it.
Another option would be to send them to Asia, since only a minimum amount of waste can be recycled, where they are dumped into rivers, almost all of the plastic waste of the ocean comes from just nine big Asian and African rivers. Incineration is a very good option and due to filters is not even producing pollution.
Fab or buy an atmospheric sampler, attach it to your drone.
Go up to those exhaust stacks- take & test a sniff.
An amazing system
And then you realize, earth will be just fine. We are the ones who are screwed.
Very true. We will be extinct eventually and life on Earth will continue. Unless we keep using nuclear power
In my province of British Columbia, they are implementing a new programme to recycle plastic packaging. The catch is that you have to go to London Drugs or select bottle recyclers to recycle flexible plastic packaging such as potato chip bags and vegetable nets. Still, I always see a full bin when I go to London drugs, although my city is over 150,000 in population and there are not many London Drugs, so not everyone is going to go there. I think that much of the flexible plastic packaging is going to end up as fuel for now, but they mentioned that they are working to find ways to recycle more of it.
My country performs waste incineration too to (at least) partially disinfect it (IIRC) and reduce the amount of landfill (since its land-scarce). However the government does recognise the importance of recycling too; a challenge though is stopping people from throwing non-recyclables into recycling bins & making all the recyclables inside unrecyclable.
Fishing for a bad story, reality is quite different but I guess it would be much of a story if you showed what's really going on.
You picked the one plant that had not even fulfilled their contract terms to paint a bad picture, there are several recycling centers that recycle properly and make shit tons of money out of it.
You forgot to mention metals, paper and other stuff we recycle instead of dumping it into the ground to pollute the ground water etc.
For plastic in particular it's benefical to burn it and capture the toxic waste from the exhaust instead of letting it be ground into the ground water as micro plastics.
Also getting rid of waste by making energy is infinitely better than wasting energy on burying it while burning coal/oil for heat and electricity.
Too bad the video doesn't talk a word about reducing the waste. which has more priority than recycling.
you said it man
We need to increase plastic waste so there is more volume which will make recycling more profitable
@@highstreetkillers4377 1/3 of all the plastics in the world cant be recycled. And those plastics that are recycled and turned in to ex. carpets then cant be recycled anymore. Everything has a certain amount of time its usable before its just trash and have to be either burned or burried.
Also our technology for recycling plastic is way behind atm hence so much gets burned or burried.
Landfill is the worst option in my opinion. Plastic recycling is very difficult, and the resultant recycled product needs a market, which is also very difficult, but the recycling industry needs a backstop, to ensure it can accept mixed waste. Backstop should be waste to energy, but it needs to maximise recycling. It is a very difficult balance, the waste keeps arriving at your recycling facility, then one day one of your big outlets for the recycled product says no more thank you, you need incinerators with energy recovery. 900 degC is not enough for PVC plastic waste.
Disclosure, I avoid buying over packaged products, I was refusing plastic bags 30 years ago and my local shops looked at me as though I was weird. I was involved in a waste to energy project in the UK, and organised shipments of waste to Sweden for use as alternative fuels,20 years ago.
Thanks for the video.
Craig, Matt here, Environmental Consultant from New Zealand. We, like yourselves export or bury a significant amount of our refuse and 'recyclable' material. Glass is one of the only recyclable materials that has a saleable market in NZ. Paper and cardboard is occasionally re-pulped. Plastic, cans, aluminium and other hard metals which aren't scrapped are shipped offshore or buried. Burying materials contaminates the land - classifying the land as a hazardous site (within NZ - I believe legislation is similar for Australia), with the quantity of contaminated soil, leachate and dry dust emissions from (exposed-to-be-buried) and buried material being significant. Buried plastics leach at a relatively stable pace over a long period of time meaning a high quantity of contamination is generated from relatively small quantities of material. I can't understand why you have gone to Sweden to criticise the fact that they are doing *something* rather than burying and forgetting in poorly engineered landfills, like us. Your critique is so short sighted, simply our practices within Australasia have less beneficial outputs than Sweden. Were you after a free trip to Sweden or just an argument for arguments sake?
For everyone critiquing the reporter allow an Australian like myself to put it into context.
His name is Craig Reucassel, a comedian apart of a group called the Chaser. Their highlight was their television series The Chaser's War on Everything, which made fun of effectively everyone (especially politicians and journalists). However, their skits sometimes were beyond controversial - their most infamous example was attempting to meet George W Bush (during his visit to Australia in 2007) with one member dressed up to look like Osama Bin Laden. The last episode of that series was in 2009.
Since then however, their latest works have lacked those skits and as such have seen their popularity decline. Now shows like this, titled the War on Waste, are the only means of staying relevant.
I didn't watch season 2 (only 3 episodes), but I watched season 1 (only 4 episodes) and saw it as regurgitating facts that Australians should be aware of already - like compost, recycling, how cheap and disposable products damage the environment, etc
How can you think that burying garbages is better ??? You still don't recycle in Australia ? We've been recycling in 2 and now 3 different bins for 20 years in Canada in many places .
Only 3 different bins? We have to choose the right bin for 7 different categories of trash for as long as I can remember. Greetings from Austria xD
Real Salica
Glad I came to the comments section before sitting though this video. Had a feeling it was bull shit. Anyone trying to put a negative spin on recycling has to have an agenda.
@@bala5984 In some places it would be organics, single-stream recycling (everything gets sorted at a facility), and landfill. Some places have dual stream recycling instead of single to try and reduce contamination among other reasons (fibres and containers)
This is part of a series of videos were this reporter does an in depth analysis of what happens to waste and how so called recycling is not really what it is cracked up to be. The point that he is trying to make is the solution to waste is to produce less of it. I personally think burning waste is a solution but as in everything there is a trade off .
"How can you think that burying garbages is better ???" Well it depends on what sort of burying we are talking about here if we are talking about old technologies were you dig a hole and fill it with trash then no it is not better but if however we are talking about burying it with multiple liners that form a barrier to stop water from getting into the waste and then polluting waterways than burying may be a better solution as the waste is contained and can be treated. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landfill
Harms the community in the end and basically kills real recycling because you gotta keep feeding the monster to justify that half a billion dollar expenditure.
Some people "carefully sort recycling" but in my Stockholm apartment recycling building there is much that gets thrown in the wrong bin or in the burn bin.
I hope they do this in India
Why? With the much lower wages in India, unlike Sweden, recycling is acutally viable? Isn't it a missed opportunity for India's poorest?
Something SomethingSomething actually most of the recycling is done in the informal sectors and poses most serious risks to workers, but waste to energy is actually a viable option but not at the expense of the environment
I recently watched a video about the "recycling" of electronic waste in Pakistan, it was horrifying. Calling that recycling is such a stretch of the imagination, that I can't even start to elaborate. It's flat out poisoning of the land! Someone makes some money on top of it ( and the video implies it's seen as a good thing by the local government ), because that one guy got a bit wealthier ( the others involved got poisoned in the process ).
Something SomethingSomething India has multiple languages and a large population that does not watch television regularly. While recycling is possible and should be strived towards, it is impossible to get the message to everyone enough to change behaviour everywhere, at least for now. Thus the unsorted waste should be burnt for electricity.
keep hoping
Funny, not once in this entire video did anyone mention reducing our dependence on plastics as a whole and developing biodegradable alternatives. Im all about progress but at some point everyone is going to have to wake up to the bigger picture in order to leap over the constraints we have placed upon ourselves. Recycling is being exposed... not only on how its being handled by the facilities but also how uneducated we are as "consumers"
We have created a gigantic problem that can only be solved by gigantic efforts. Maybe its time we start allocating tax dollars to this instead of having it all siphoned out of the economy by corrupt agendas and military spending. Geezus wtf is wrong with our species.
They are braindead. Vaccines maybe, people are not capable of simple logic anymore. The worst part is they will defend the opposite of anyone with free thought tries to point out even when it goes against their own principles or self interest. People say the exact same sheet too.
Great show as always, and it proves what a scourge on modern society that alot of plastics actually are, there are many that have a near zero recyclability option.
Perhaps the answer could be to produce plastics that are more adept to the recycling processes currently available, to better utilise their lifespan?? or look at more reuse of the products that are unable to be recycled...is and wil be an argument for the ages until either technologies improve or we can better utilise what is left over.
Swedish people I commend you for taking the initiative of disposing in a responsible way your waste ( breaking even the money invested or making a small profit ) you will get better at it as technology progress. The planet is grateful.
I recycle my gasoline in my car every day
ALI B
Great and I drive on ethanol made from the Swedish forest 😀
Plasma arc furnace burn at over 10000 degrees F much higher than 900 C.
Nothing disappears, ever. Burning things is a chemical change, it just combines with oxygen and is released into the air. Sweden just dilutes it's waste into the atmosphere
Great video and having just come back from Sweden it was interesting to hear another perspective. Have you considered doing a similar style video looking into the pros/cons of Australia investing in nuclear power? Seems topical ATM and your balanced reporting style would work well.
God bless you sweethearts that care. Better to burn it for energy than to dump it into the ocean, like some are doing on a large scale. Bravo Sweden for your efforts. God bless you and peace be with you.
Australia dumps loads of bulky household waste in the ground much of which could be recycled yet this guy chooses to make a show critical of one of the best waste management systems in the world.
As for plastic in the waste, we have excessive amounts of plastic waste which we haven't really been recycling we have been dumping it in Asia so we don't have to deal with it but we can feel good thinking we have recycled it.
Burning works well in Sweden and Japan and should be adopted worldwide along with packaging and bulk waste reduction.
As long as the world still burns Virgin resources like oil and coal for energy, I can't see the problem in turning rubbish into energy by incineration. But I might be wrong of course.
I have a very odd feeling this video was sponsored by the Australian greens party and obviously produced by the ABC also known as the most influential television company in far left views.
2gud4umenglez same here mate
Cody Doblar I understand what you are saying but the ABC have 'preset' views on pretty much everything the produce and claim to have no set political views or ideologies. In the matter of this video if you pay deep attention to the journalists actions (can't find the right word) you'll see he has a 'preset bias on the use of burning waste other than being open and objective to interviewing such matters.
Sorry if this sounds like a mess, its 2am.
*Its sad to see Australia still in the stone age when it comes to dealing with waste.*
Yeah Australia has a state run broad caster so of course
Considering the ignorance of the bloke doing the talking its more like a rightwing Propaganda - Australia is lightyears behind Sweden on all levels...
I just gave up 3/4 of the way through, what the heck point is he trying to make? Everything in this video looks "pristine" clean! The people, the children, the town, the houses, the cars, the streets, the sky, the skyline, the harbors, the boats...ALL OF IT! I want to move there!!! In fact, I want to move there more than I want to move to Australia.
The thing is, countries who use landfills still create co2 emissions but also cause long-term issues with the garbage underground. The swedish solution reduces co2 emissions overall and should be the model that other countries follow.
Yup he is not to smart he starts with a Danish flag and then over to Hamlet, brilliant. I am pretty sure Hamlet never came here at all. Sweden sucks in many ways as the rest of the planets countrys but how we handle our waste is not anything I am ashamed of. We got recycling stations all over the place and I used to have one just outside my door couple of steps away.
Doesn't Hamlet take place in Denmark? "Something is rotten in Denmark. "
Yes
9:21?.....WTF is that painting? OMG someone has completely lost their mind!!!!
BAHAHAHA, that sneaky joke at 23:16 "Cooling to the Node" was a GREAT jab at the NBN..
thats mainly steam coming out of the chimney tower.. its invisible where it comes out.. it dissapears like steam.. 900 degrees celcius is almost enough to melt steel thats really really hot !
What a delight to hear serious "classical" music as background for a change.
Burning trash is for energy but driving cars is eco unfriendly.
we've been importing trash into the netherlands for decades, we just don't call it recycling. the slag is used for outdoor furniture or roads. same with sewage, it's cleaned by bacteria, and the hard stuff is fermented to produce methane. even the old landfills are used for methane and the tops are covered in solar panels. we do separate out plastics, but since recycling atm is more expensive than using new plastic, most of it gets bought by the incinerators to keep them going, since not enough trash is being produced otherwise. this seems a roundabout way of doing things, and it is, but it gets people used to separating, and when the price of crude oil rises, the system is already in place
Many years ago we had plastic bottles for mineral waters and other drinks that where reusable and the pant refund was 4 SEK instead of 2 SEK. Nowadays the plastic bottles are only used once.