Talk:Reuse and Recycling through 2005

The following table makes no sense - the "years" heading has no years below it, and the "total" heading...Why would we want "totals" of both intaken stuff and outgoing stuff? That would mean things get counted twice...I don't understand... Pete

I think Pete's referring to in part the Overall Rates of Reuse and Recycling section, where the total doesn't make sense. A total of Gizmos

Reused and Gizmos Recycled would make sense, but including Received in that does not. Of course the numbers are a bit suspicious:

               Reused  Recycled   Total  Received
 Systems        7,029    25,582  32,611    17,069
 Monitors       6,998    19,625  26,623     8,408
 Printers       3,342    11,471  14,813     8,045

Here the total is of the first two columns. It looks like we're disposing of 2-3 times as much stuff as we actually get. Something's wrong there.

RfS 12:14, 27 October 2006 (PDT)

actual numbers from FGdb

Pulling actual number from FGdb for systems created in the DB before the beginning of this year, this is what is recorded:

 Reused  Recycled   Neither  Total
  7,284    25,949   16,553  49,786
  14.6%     52.1%     33.2%   100%

That is about 15% (a bit less) are recorded as reused (Sold, Adopted, etc). A bit more than half are recorded as recycled, and a whopping third (nearly 50,000 systems) are either here or unaccounted for. The last nose count of the computers I did showed maybe 1,000 on hand in the building. This means that over 30% of our data is untracked when it comes to systems. Either stuff that never showed up (but somehow got into the database) or never got properly marked as reused or recycled.

I'd estimate about 80% recycle, 20% reuse. But it's a wild ass guess.

RfS 12:56, 27 October 2006 (PDT)