Re: Recycling, Rosennean Style...

[Dan Fiscus <***>]

Judith,

I have interests in this general area, but am too swamped
now to email much. One quick/general idea for now:

Our human problems (bioaccumulation in our selves of
our own toxins, like mercury, PCB's. etc. etc.) stem largely
from not creating the metabolism and repair processes for
new molecules or materials at the same time, and keeping
these complementary processes coupled and integrated
ever and always. That is, we make (metabolize, transform)
many things that we never bother to un-make (repair,
restore to elemental and basic form as you cite for water,
etc.) them to put them back the way they started, as safe
and inert building blocks.

This applies to new materials like nano-tubes, etc. Unless
we build both the builder and the unbuilder and can say
and show that the two processes can work together to
have a net neutral enviro effect, then we can essentially
bank on problems, toxicity, bioaccumulation, pollution as
inevitable. It seems to me...

Dan

Judith Rosen wrote:
> *One of the most pressing problems facing humanity at present is 
> actually a set of consequences of various "metabolic" processes. These 
> metabolic processes include direct physiological metabolic processes 
> (human food production/waste treatment and disposal) as well as human 
> societal metabolic processes (industrial and city-based raw material 
> acquisition/waste treatment and disposal).*
> ** 
> *It occurred to me that perhaps our recycling efforts may best be 
> employed at the molecular level, since molecules are "simple systems" 
> that we can easily take apart and reconfigure. A molecule of H2O is the 
> same-- and just as pure and clean, whether it is derived from some long 
> chain of hydrocarbons in a different molecular configuration or derived 
> from raw sewage. *
> ** 
> *My thinking on this began when it was clear that only certain types of 
> plastics are "recyclable" in our local waste collection scheme. We were 
> told that the types not recyclable are impossible to separate into pure 
> plastic types (or perhaps it's just too expensive)... but I suspect that 
> not enough "thinking outside the box" has been put into solving the 
> problem. Perhaps that kind of thinking has to be more inclusive of all 
> stages of the processes we utilize to provide our various "metabolic" 
> needs. Cradle to grave analysis would be useful, with the difference 
> being that there is no grave. It should be cradle to cradle, even if the 
> cradles are different (meaning that the end material of the first 
> process becomes the beginning material for a different process, etc.).*
> ** 
> *The development of a fuel cell which uses water as the beginning fuel, 
> a solar-battery-rechargeable electrolytic mechanism to separate the 
> hydrogen and oxygen from one another at the molecular level (something 
> we did in high school chemistry class; it's easy), burning the hydrogen 
> and oxygen to power the car, and the end product is water vapor and 
> heat... is a perfect example of a good solution to the toxic side 
> effects caused by our dependence on using fossil fuels for so much of 
> what we do.*
> ** 
> *I would love to develop other applications like this, based on 
> Rosennean Complexity Theory, to ameliorate the myriad "metabolic" 
> processes human beings engage in. Anyone on the list have thoughts or 
> ideas in this vein?*
> ** 
> *Judith*
> ** 
> /BioTheory: An E-Journal of General Science in the Rosennean Complexity 
> Paradigm //http://www.rosen-enterprises.com/RobertRosen/BioTheoryLaunch.htm/
> /Website address: //http://www.rosen-enterprises.com//

--

Dan Fiscus
Ecologist/Researcher/PhD student
University of Maryland
Center for Environmental Science
Appalachian Lab
301 Braddock Rd
Frostburg, MD 21532
301-689-7121 (phone)
http://al.umces.edu/~fiscus/research