Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve • Hacker News Board

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#421

Post by chiefalchemist » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 12:33 PM UTC

st26 wrote: post #336

chiefalchemist wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"...the bill always comes due..." Yes. But it's __always__ the consumer that pays that bill. Increase in the cost of anything simply gets added to the price. Yes. You might get manufactures to change. But the consumer is still the one who pays.

That's fine, but if the consumer pays the real cost up front, people will behave appropriately for whatever that cost is. By hiding the real cost, we distort the market and people make different choices.

Agree. I was simply pointing out that in the end it's the consumer who pays, not the Inc.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#422

Post by DisruptiveDave » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 12:37 PM UTC

Rovanion wrote: post #79

DisruptiveDave wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't our generation the most overworked, least-amount-of-free-time one? How does this extra job fit into that major issue?

By exercising other parts of your brain you let those used for work recover.

I'm hoping this is sarcasm. If not, I don't need the government assigning me work to "exercise other parts of my brain" thanks.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#423

Post by lmm » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 12:56 PM UTC

TheGRS wrote: post #343

dougmwne wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it is? We can dig some pretty deep holes. It may not be pretty but seems to work.

I guess I've never really thought about it from an unbiased perspective before. How bad are landfills if they are done in some sort of long-term strategy? You can cover over the landfill and make new land with it (many parks are basically this). But I worry about things like battery acid and other chemicals seeping into the water table or causing who knows what damage to the soil. At least on its face if you're putti…

The Earth has 5-10 billion years left at most, whatever we do to it (unless we reach the point of being able to change its orbit). Less if we're unlucky and get hit by an asteroid etc.. So there's no such thing as truly sustainable, only "good enough".

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#424

Post by lmm » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 12:59 PM UTC

mijamo wrote: post #158

xapata wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easiest solution would be a tax on petroleum as it comes out of the ground. That discourages both plastic and greenhouse gas.

Now how high would that tax need to be to so that everyday goods would dump plastic? And what would that mean for other uses of petroleum? Let's say you want a plastic bottle to cost 0.1$ more, so that alternative options are considered, and you tax it on the original petroleum and gas processed, what does that represent for the fuel used in a plane? The problem is that not every use is equal, some are more necessary…

> Now how high would that tax need to be to so that everyday goods would dump plastic? And what would that mean for other uses of petroleum?

Charge what it costs to clean up, and spend the tax on cleaning it up.

> The problem is that not every use is equal, some are more necessary than others

That's exactly why the price mechanism works - the necessary uses will continue to happen even at a higher price, while the frivolous ones will stop.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#425

Post by lmm » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 1:02 PM UTC

quantum_magpie wrote: post #371

steve19 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or it may just create perverse incentives fir people to throw everything in landfill. Not 100% sure where to put that $1 drink bottle, throw in the trash and don't risk a $200. Not sure how that could be prevented.

Throwing recyclable goods in to the landfill bag nets you a fine. That's the whole point - you sort correctly, or you pay up. If you are unable to sort your trash - you don't buy stuff. The landfill bags are for non-recyclable items.

That makes no sense as policy. 1 cubic metre of landfill space costs the same whether you fill it with "recyclable" or "non-recyclable" items.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#426

Post by lmm » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 1:05 PM UTC

aeternus wrote: post #22

idbehold wrote: post #8

Perhaps we should start doing something like what Taiwan did with their trash: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/separation-anxiety/ > The trucks only accept trash bags officially sanctioned by the government of Taiwan which come in a distinctive blue color, complete with an official seal. The bags range in price and size, from 3 liters to 120 liters. The most popular bag is 25 liters (similar to a tiny bathroom…

Is careful sorting of trash/recycling really a good use of time? Seems better to put that effort towards development of techniques to sort en-masse. Likely controversial, but I think there is also an argument for simply throwing hard-to-recycle items in a landfill. If consumption continues to increase, it will likely become economically viable to eventually mine those landfills for raw materials.

> Is careful sorting of trash/recycling really a good use of time?

Price mechanisms let you answer that question yourself. Say you have 5 bags' worth of rubbish of which 3 bags' worth is recyclable. You can either spend the time to sort the one from the other, or you can pay for 2 extra bags.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#427

Post by lmm » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 1:09 PM UTC

pkulak wrote: post #291

djsumdog wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that famous Indian crying from litter on the highway campaign? It was funded by the packaging industry. It was part of a propaganda campaign (a.k.a public relations) by packaging company to place the blame on litter and non-reusable packaging on the consumer instead of the industry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koqNm_TgOZk

Looks exactly like the "Jaywalking" playbook: https://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/the-invention-of-jaywalking-... EDIT: As an aside, the argument that buying a new car is waste always annoyed me. Maybe if I crushed my old car, but how does changing owners shorten the useable life of a car?

> EDIT: As an aside, the argument that buying a new car is waste always annoyed me. Maybe if I crushed my old car, but how does changing owners shorten the useable life of a car?

What's the person who buys your car doing with their old car? Presumably either crushing it or selling it on to someone with an even older car. If we assume a constant number of drivers (for simplicity) then every new car bought ultimately corresponds to one car getting disposed of.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#428

Post by magduf » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 1:37 PM UTC

leoedin wrote: post #194

magduf wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If we forced all producers of trash to account for its safe reuse, recycling or disposal as part of the cost of doing business, this problem would disappear quickly. Because here's the thing, the bill always comes due. If we let them skip out on it, then we will be the ones who pay. There's no easy way to do that, as long as we don't have a single planetary government, and as long as we have trade. The producers are…

The EU legislates product safety by making the person who made it available within the EU legally responsible. This is always an EU based entity. If you want to sell something which falls under a range of product classifications within the EU, you have to take responsibility for that product's safety. Yes, manufacturing may happen overseas, but generally the product is still sold to the consumer by a locally based en…

>Yes, manufacturing may happen overseas, but generally the product is still sold to the consumer by a locally based entity.

What about online sales that are shipped from overseas? Legislating against sellers isn't going to work well when the seller is on AliExpress and shipping in a small package from China.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#429

Post by mrhappyunhappy » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 1:42 PM UTC

Is there a place where the world can provide ideas on how to solve complex global issues? Something that that curated the best ideas, forms pros and cons to approaches proposed and automatic weighs the risks? I guess what I imagine is some sort of machine learning solution that takes in account the knowledge of the internet and allows for weighing of various factors based on assigned trust scores. It seems weird that we live in this information rich society, a ton of ideas float around the web but they are never acted upon or formulated in ways that harness public support. Am I just envisioning a utopian idea or is this possible to build? There Must be a way to pull most prominent ideas into one place for public scrutiny without creating additional noise.

Re: Plastic recycling is a problem consumers can't solve

#430

Post by Firadeoclus » Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 1:45 PM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #221

corey_moncure wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>i.e. the consumer choosing the cheapest option This is what he means by "externality". The disposable plastic garbage isn't really the cheapest option. It's just that the real cost of all the garbage isn't priced in at market.

It can still be the cheapest option even after pricing in the externality. A lot of people forget this, because they advocate such Pigovian taxes with the intent of stamping out the good, irrespective of the (edit: net) value it provides. I very rarely see anyone come in with the attitude of: "Hey, burn all the gas you want once we have the appropriate carbon taxes!"

One problem with environmental degradation is that effects are often non-linear whereas taxes are typically linear. So "do all the X you want" is not the appropriate response if the tax is simply used as a lever to move behaviour in one direction.

On the other hand, if the government is selling emission rights then this can model non-linear effects. Then it makes sense to say, "go on, use your rights to the full extent."