xepherys

Higher cost is a result of a lot of political bullshit as well, though. Realistically, the cost isn't THAT much higher. People should be more worried about eating healthy food than going to the new TOm Cruise movie. Remember, until only a hundred years ago or so, all food was "organic".


No, it won't solve the "population puzzle". I didn't realize it was a problem and needed a solution per se. Also, again, higher costs are imposed by us. Centralized recycling where materials are recycled by a central authority and sold to manufacturers could be as cheap or cheaper than new manufacture.

Sure, energy needs to be cheap. However, solar, water and wind COULD take care of the bulk of our power, especially in third world and developing nations. Better use of materials in buildings and homes, batteries to store energy throughout the night and cloudy days coupled with more energy efficient devices make for a cheaper, cleaner power economy.

I disagree. In fact, I'd say fertilize run off is a much smaller problem, and also generally affect rural areas more. There is more land mass in rural areas, and fewer people. I'd say detergents, cleansers and, of course, other chemical compounds are a larger problem, especially in urban areas.

Aditionally, developments such as this could prove useful if the government took them seriously enough to invest tax dollars into them. This is what tax dollars should go for, IMHO.