Re: scheme: fly ash in concrete

[Sam McClintock <mac@ensanity.com>]

> What's the point?  In order to reduce (not eliminate) the impact on life
> on earth, air pollution controls capture some of the poisons.  Turning
> these poisons into cement, alike mixed waste or sewage sludge
> composting, does not eliminate the problem --only the liability at the
> source, in my opinion.

At some level, I think most sane people would agree with you, with the
exception of liability.  While some people like to focus on issues of
liability, it is only a piece of the puzzle when it comes to dealing with
waste.  For most businesses, it is a factor of cost - nothing more insidious
than that.  Now they have insidious ways of dealing with cost - trust me I
know (see Carolina Solite news releases).

However, we have varying ideas of how to get to that point.  We are a long
way off from controlling all waste, particularly in a large industrial
society.  What do we do in this interim (we hope) period, between the
atrocious practices of the not-too-distant past and where most people want
to be-  minimal waste, relatively safe disposal, smart packaging, smart
recycling, etc.?  What are the solutions that serve us best, which ones can
be implemented without large sacrifice (because in our current society,
large sacrifices are not accepted).  Personally, I don't see a lot of
difference between a relatively small increase in trace contaminants of
cement, which is going to be made anyway, and granted that the material will
eventually, over time, push this material pack into the environment, than
placing it in a landfill, which eventually will be have to dealt with also.
Liability - over the scale of time we are talking about, 95% of those
corporations contributing in either direction will not be found on paper.
For those doubting that, see the relatively short-term problems of 75% of
all superfund sites.

Regards, Sam