How come those in charge don’t have all trash and garbage thrown into a volcano to burn up?

There would be no more need for landfills

9 Answers

Relevance
  • ALBERT
    Lv 5
    4 weeks ago

    That is so strange . I was thinking the exact thing some time ago. But then I though : can all trash be disposed off in the right way with the heat of the volcano and then , in that case how much trash could a volcano deal with before being overwhelmed with the sheer amount of trash out there. I saw a rather recent movie called "Sahara" where they have some kind of station in a hot region of the earth were the have machines that concentrate the rays and heat of the sun to produce intense heat that they hope can destroy safely all kind of trash safely and efficiently. That seems like a great idea yet I am not too clear how well that works. Sometimes I wonder a society like the Amish community in the state of Pennsylvania can live quite comfortably and have a solution to the trash problem. Their glass and metal and paper can be recycled, and so can their food stuff to make compost. Maybe that lifestyle would take care of this trash problem! 

  • 4 weeks ago

    Did you even consider if the volcanoes even want people to throw waste in its mouth? They already have upset stomachs, and now you want to give it questionable chemicals. Savages

    Source(s): A heart to heart with an inactive volcano.
  • 4 weeks ago

     And all that burning trash smoke mixed with volcanic gasses would be beneficiary to what?

  • 1 month ago

    You can volunteer to be a thrower.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 month ago

    There are quite a number of good reasons. I can think of one very simple one to give your for now. It is an economic reason.

    I live in the UK. There are no volcanoes in the UK. Therefore, even if there were no other issues, the costs of transporting our waste to the nearest volcano that would accept it is prohibitive.

    I say the nearest volcano that would accept because the country in which the physically nearest volcano is located may not want to receive our waste. I think Italy would be the nearest country with a volcano. I am quite sure that Italy would not want to accept the UK's waste.

    It is an incredibly silly idea.

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    They tried, but they ran out of throwers.

    (CarolOkla; sulfur dioxide. I know you know, and it was a spellcheck typo.)

  • 1 month ago

    People say this a lot because they have no clue.  A lot of garbage converts into some pretty nasty chemicals with combustion, so burning is actually the worst thing you can do with the wastes, and besides, what sort of mechanical equipment do you have in mind that can roll right up to the edge of a volcano without damage?  Never mind that the nearest active volcano with a lava pool is many thousands of miles away from most of us.

  • 1 month ago

    There are no active volcanoes in Oklahoma Texas, Kansas, Nebraska, North or South Dakota and a bunch of other states is?a major reason. And colcanoes produce green house gases like carbon dioxide, methane and silver dioxide which becones sulfuric acid when it reacts with water vapor. 

  • 1 month ago

    Not everyone has a nearby volcano to use, and I think there would be some logistical problems getting the flammable waste where it needs to be.  And of course, I'm sure the environmentalists would object. 

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.