Bob Blick wrote:
> I guess it's pointless to talk to you about the environment, since so
> far you have objected or resisted all attempts to enlighten you, but
> I'll try one more time.

I do not agree with Russell on many things, but in this case I believe he's 
absolutely right. With most choices, one needs to consider the trade-offs, 
but the "3600 hrs of kerosene vs 3 NiCad cells" choice is a no-brainer.

Let me address your comment from another post:

> I was watching a
> video of electronics recycling in India. One scene
> showed a kid recycling batteries. He had a basket of
> sub-C cells, a wooden block, and a machete. He'd chop
> the batteries like you would a carrot, and scoop the
> remains into a bucket. He's sitting cross-legged on
> the dirt. Not even a mask or gloves. No problems
> there, eh?

What other alternatives does this kid have? When I put myself in his shoes, 
recycling batteries seems like a much more attractive option, than 
prostituting myself, or starving to death. Trade-offs.

By the way, there was an article in a recent issue of The Economist, about 
such recycling operations in Delhi:

http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=10311257

Attempts by the Indian government to "clean up" the slums and "protect" the 
scavengers result in many people losing their only source of income.

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist