Talk:Renewable resource

???? Is this for blocks, items, or both?--PurpleKiwi 08:01, 16 November 2010 (CST)

Actual resources
There may not be quite a fine enough line (for me anyway) between actual resources and stuff that can be created from them. For example, Stone (Block) is not actual renewable, but it can be created from Cobblestone, which is a renewable resource (can be created). As are fishing rods. As is bread, which is crafted from wheat, which is the renewable resource (grows in the fields).

Perhaps a gauge of "is this thing crafted or smelted from a renewable source" can be used to determine when something is one step too removed from being the actual renewable resource? Just throwing some thoughts out there. --meioziz 21:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Just thought of replying to this since I've read this :P This article is about the raw materials only. Any compounds after that are not considered "resources". --Scykei 07:16, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I've added a second column to the (now) table, listing commonly interesting products such as logs from trees and bread from crops. I hope it resolves this issue by giving a clearly separated place for the interesting-but-at-one-remove-from-renewable resources. —KPReid 07:20, 12 December 2010 (CST)


 * Perhaps renaming it to "renewable products", and removing those entries which can't be produced indefinitely? For example, you can make unlimited amounts of stone using the renewable resources of cobble and wood, whereas TNT requires the limited resource of sand to create.


 * Arrows are an interesting case, as they can be harvested indefinitely via skeletons, but they require the limited granite resource to craft them yourself. You might also like to add paintings, which are crafted using cloth and sticks. - Bomb Bloke 13:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't like that idea as the list might get pretty long soon. Listing some would usually result in listing all. I think it would be better if it was just the raw materials which people can then figure out what to do with them by themselves. And arrows should be added to the table as it is renewable. No special cases. :P --Scykei 14:05, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * let me have a go at fixing this.--Kizzycocoa 08:06, 12 December 2010 (CST)

Milk renewable?
I don't think milk is renewable, as it requires a bucket to be milked from cows, a bucket requires 3 iron ingots and Iron isn't renewable. So is it really renewable? Tials 14:22, 10 December 2010 (CST)


 * The only thing you can currently do with milk is pour it out on the ground (which destroys it). This does not, however, destroy the bucket. Once milk gets a "real" use (eg crafting), the bucket may indeed be consumed, but that's not the case at present. - Bomb Bloke 14:59, 10 December 2010 (CST)
 * you can argue that, technically, by your logic, trees are not renewable. just destroy every tree in the world, and throw ALL the drops into lava. no more trees.--Kizzycocoa 21:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * untrue. just hop on a boat, go sailing, and you'll find more trees. Pokepal101 18:45, 20 December 2010 (CST)
 * Huh? If it were the case that using milk resulted in the consumption of a limited resource (iron), then the milk itself should also be deemed a limited resource. Yes, renewable resources can potentially be eliminated from maps, but that doesn't mean they don't fit the definition of the word, and that has nothing to do with resources that cannot be "created" (such as the aforementioned iron resource). You mine long enough, you'll eventually run out of iron, full stop - and you'll have to explore further and further away to get more as the resource dwindles. You at least have the option of planting more trees if you want them, where you want them. - Bomb Bloke 06:39, 11 December 2010 (CST)
 * you completely missed the target. In fact, you fired the arrow in another direction, killing three babies. Well done.
 * the point is, EVERYTHING is seen as a limited resource, to some degree. the only true unlimited resource is cloth. and even then, it needs grass or a higher than peaceful difficulty setting. in fact, without a crafting table, a empty level will have no unlimited resources. A lot of what we put there is "renewable IF".


 * The only truly renewable substance is air. despite how many wood blocks you make to fill in the air, you can still remove any block, aside from adminium which you cannot place.
 * So, air is the ONLY truly renewable resource. If we go by such logic.--Kizzycocoa 01:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm a baby killer because I disagree on a definition...? I'm starting to wonder if you're just trolling me here, but I'll take another stab at explaining things to you anyway. :/


 * Currently you can generate unlimited quantities of milk (even if there's a cap on how much can exist in the world at any given time, which is related to the amount of iron ore in the world). If consuming the resource lowered that cap (by actually using it, as opposed to throwing it away as you suggested), and continuous consumption resulted in the iron supply being exhausted, then milk would not be renewable. Consuming wood, for example, does not lower your potential to create more unless you go out of your way to destroy all saplings - you can create new saplings, you can't create more iron.


 * My point is that milk should be listed on the page at present, as stated in my first post on the matter. If it becomes consumable in such a way that using it eats iron, then it should be removed for the exact same reason gold ingots aren't included - sure, you can craft ingots into gold blocks and back (allowing you to "create" the ingots as many times as you like), but if you craft eg armor out of them then your overall ingot-producing potential goes down as a result. Unlike wood, that potential can't ever be increased again. - Bomb Bloke 03:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Right. My understanding of "renewable" is simply anything that can be recreated or reproduced more than 1:1 ratio. Placing blocks on the ground and picking them up and storing ingots as blocks and turning them back is therefore not renewable because it does not produce any more than it already has. This means that anything that can spawn more of a particular item will be renewable, i.e. saplings and the entire tree, not just logs, as stated in the current table. No matter what is done with the saplings that cause them to be unable to grow, like destroying them, they are still renewable because they can be renewed.


 * Through a non-technical perspective, a bucket is merely something that is used to carry the milk. We cannot put a "bucket of milk" in the table; it's just "milk". And even if the bucket is consumed in whatever the process it is used for, milk will continue to be renewable, as the bucket can be emptied and filled over and over again. --Scykei 07:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Which is all well and good, except that from the perspective of the game, it's not "just milk" - it is "milk in a bucket". There's no way to have milk just on its own, hence the amount you can have at any given time is directly tied to the amount of buckets you can produce (... on a 1:1 ratio). Same as the amount of gold blocks you can have is directly tied to the amount of gold ore in the world - sure, you can toggle the block back into ingots as many times as you like, just as you can toggle a bucket between the "full" and "not full" states as often as you like - but once they're actually consumed, they're gone for good. The only difference is that milk buckets aren't consumable, and so the milk within them currently falls on the side of "renewable". Whether or not we'll be able to use that milk on its own as an actual resource, or whether we'll be consuming the whole bucket, remains to be seen. - Bomb Bloke 07:11, 12 December 2010 (CST)

Data
Actually feathers and sulphur(gunpowder) have a use in crafting. Arrows are made from feathers and TNT from the gunpowder. Someone please upload the small pictures that are in all the other rows.
 * but, flint is not renewable. and nor is sand.--Kizzycocoa 15:24, 22 December 2010 (CST)
 * So on this page you add just items/blocks that are only renewable as a whole? Shouldn't we then create a page on which you have partially renewable resources, and non-renewable resources? --Danny Ufonek 21:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Why not have the second column be "used for" or "turns into" and just note in the method what parts of the items (like arrows) are non-renewable? --JonTheMon 00:29, 27 December 2010 (CST)
 * To tell you the truth, I don't see the reason for having the "Typical Renewable Products" in the table. I do not see how it would be useful to anyone. I mean, how does making these stuff completely out of renewable resources help? Most people would only want to find the raw items to combine with something else, not necessarily with another renewable material. --Scykei 09:10, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * People don't want to combine stuff for the sake of it. It's one thing to know what can be easily collected, it's another thing to know why that's worth doing. - Bomb Bloke (Talk/Contribs) 03:12, 27 December 2010 (CST)
 * Oooh, wrong point there. Majority of the stuff in the list aren't as easily collected as those non-renewable stuff. Just swing your pick and you get an ore. How hard is that? Besides, you can't replace those stuff with these. We don't have any alternatives. :P And if you want to tell them why it's worth doing, you should not just include those stuff in the table. We need to list all of them, and that's not practical at all. --Scykei 10:36, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Getting ore is a little harder then swinging a pick - you need to FIND the stuff first. That's fairly easy in a new world, but it becomes more and more tedious as the game goes on; eventually, renewable resources are more practical. Now, granted, there are times when you NEED to use the more limited materials to achieve certain ends, but new users would be better served knowing what's worth hoarding and what can be harvested/crafted without worry as to when supplies will falter. Otherwise, why would they be reading this page in the first place? Why not read a page listing all materials instead?


 * Oh, wait, that page got deleted... Doesn't mean I'm convinced it's not "practical".- Bomb Bloke (Talk/Contribs) 12:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)