Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 78 posts

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#61

Post by code_duck »

crooked-v wrote: post #54
code_duck wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typically these are added to sushi packaged in disposable plastic trays. This makes the ‘grass’ a tiny percentage of the plastic used in the meal. The article seems to convey that plastic is considered inferior to vegetable matter for this. It is cheaper, which actually suggests less resource consumption. Plenty of plastic and other resources (petroleum itself) would be expended to provide lettuce or bamboo for this…

> It is cheaper, which actually suggests less resource consumption. Cheaper so long as you ignore the externalities of long-term use of disposable plastic. Using a little piece of harmlessly biodegradable waxed paper instead might be "more expensive" in strict manufacturing terms but would the cheaper option if the externalities of plastic were properly taxed.

You’re right that there is a third option which wasn’t mentioned in the article, which is a non-edible biodegradable separator.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#62

Post by code_duck »

darkpuma wrote: post #44
code_duck wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typically these are added to sushi packaged in disposable plastic trays. This makes the ‘grass’ a tiny percentage of the plastic used in the meal. The article seems to convey that plastic is considered inferior to vegetable matter for this. It is cheaper, which actually suggests less resource consumption. Plenty of plastic and other resources (petroleum itself) would be expended to provide lettuce or bamboo for this…

Maybe it's regional, but when I get takeout food it's in compressed cardboard-type material containers. If nothing else, it biodegrades. Some of these containers are segmented. Regardless, I am asserting that the "grass" divider is purely aesthetic and should be left out completely. The supposed practical purpose is transparent BS, those flavors are going to get mixed in my mouth more than they would in the tray mere…

I see food from hit bars and restaurant take-out in cardboard sometimes too, but this is prepackaged supermarket sushi.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#63

Post by brucemoose »

To the people complaining about the format, does it make more sense if you look at it in the context of a social media story? It looks weird as images presented vertically on the New York times website. But this would be right at home in an instagram feed.

I personally appreciate the hand drawn look and artwork, but supplementing that with a text version would be an improvement for many reasons.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#64

Post by tracker1 »

darkpuma wrote: post #59
tracker1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plastic is largely a byproduct from oil/gas processing... as long as we're using as much oil/gas as we do, plastic usage (even disposable) is already additional use out of the system. If it weren't composite plastic, it would be landfill sludge anyway. Now, reducing the consumption of oil/gas could reduce plastic as a byproduct and increase costs in which case the market would self-correct.

If that's the direction you want to approach the situation from, then consider that by allowing the byproducts to be commercialized you are in effect subsidizing the oil and gas, and thereby encouraging their continued use. You should also consider the unique harm plastic waste in particular does to wildlife.

I'm not saying it isn't a problem... the larger issue of littering in general, and wildlife preservation are huge to me. We have very well managed waste disposal sites, and do a lot of subsidizing recycling efforts.

My point was that if you aren't littering, then the net cost to the environment isn't such a huge thing. I'm also not a fan of government subsidies in general. Your point really isn't a subsidy, it's a means of greater use, which is generally considered a good thing. Unless you'd rather have more environmental waste that isn't used for any secondary purpose.

I'd love to see more/better efforts with regards to wildlife conservation, not littering etc. I like to do road trips while on vacation. Seeing the shear amount of litter on roadways, in the mountains and everywhere but a proper trashcan that will get disposed of reasonably is upsetting. Frankly, I think that getting society as a whole to respect their environment and other people's property (littering and vandalism) would go further to improving things than not.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#65

Post by r00fus »

Benjammer wrote: post #30
r00fus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish delivery services like DoorDash would present UI to opt out of cutlery and condiments (preferably as a default). When I order a dinner for delivery to my home, I'm likely going to use my own plates/knives. If I'm ordering via phone or pickup, I can decline the default forks/chopsticks but using the UI it's nto possible without a "comment" and some restaurants don't even read that. Yes there's already wa…

Seamless.com has had an option at check-out for as long as I can remember that says "I'm trying to save the environment, spare me the napkins and utensils." It's always up to the restaurant to "support" that option though.

This is great. I might just have to vote with my wallet.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#66

Post by dpark »

drusepth wrote: post #31
zython wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How's that infantile ? As far as I can see all the people are more or less drawn anatomically correct and IMO it looks good. Have you ever seen something drawn by an infant ?

I would imagine the OP you're responding to was referring to the "drawings" of text, which look straight out of one of those kindergarten "write this letter 100 times to practice it" books. The people/illustrations are pretty good, and wouldn't be out of the ordinary accompanying regular text.

> I would imagine the OP you're responding to was referring to the "drawings" of text, which look straight out of one of those kindergarten "write this letter 100 times to practice it" books.

This would make a lot more sense if this was at all what kindergarten handwriting looks like.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#67

Post by dpark »

Benjammer wrote: post #30
r00fus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish delivery services like DoorDash would present UI to opt out of cutlery and condiments (preferably as a default). When I order a dinner for delivery to my home, I'm likely going to use my own plates/knives. If I'm ordering via phone or pickup, I can decline the default forks/chopsticks but using the UI it's nto possible without a "comment" and some restaurants don't even read that. Yes there's already wa…

Seamless.com has had an option at check-out for as long as I can remember that says "I'm trying to save the environment, spare me the napkins and utensils." It's always up to the restaurant to "support" that option though.

"I'm trying to save the environment, please bring me food in single-use containers and have a person make a trip just for me in a gas-powered vehicle; cooking seems hard"

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#68

Post by jimmaswell »

nicoburns wrote: post #39
jimmaswell wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you rather do dishes than use free plastic cutlery/containers?

Because it's better for the environment. Washing dishes is barely any effort. Do you have no concern for the planet at all?

I don't care enough about the infinitesimal impact of an individual using plastic silverware to want to go wash a fork, no. I don't feel the externalities of the decision come anywhere close to outweighing the convenience. Convenience being the whole point of food delivery.

I keep all the extra cutlery and napkins I get in a drawer and reuse them. Haven't had to buy paper towels in a long time.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#69

Post by civilian »

btashton wrote: post #29
civilian wrote: post #8

"traditional health benefits" means "bullshit health benefits", right?

Normally I would agree, but I think they were referring to "bamboo kun" which is how the bamboo plant fights off fungi and was thought to provide some antimicrobial properties, although at least in textiles seems to be ineffective [0] [0] https://bioresources.cnr.ncsu.edu/BioRes_08/BioRes_08_4_6501...

darkpuma already expressed the general idea but yeah--- if one piece of food has a bacterial/fungal presence, then having anti-microbial properties for the flavor-divider is a not that big of a plus.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#70

Post by code_duck »

Retra wrote: post #47
code_duck wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m skeptical that that is actually the intended audience, though

Obviously not. And it's not a fair criticism either way, but that is the criticism. Nobody is accusing the author of drawing like an infant.

Infantile might be a bit of an exaggeration. Juvenile, perhaps?
Post reply on HN