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

As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 293 posts

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#241

Post by pfranz »

icebraining wrote: post #176
pfranz wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just my opinion, but compostable doesn't make that great of a product in a lot of places they're being pushed. I've seen a bunch of places switch to compostable silverware and cups. The silverware is a lot less durable than plastic (which is already a low bar) and coffee lids don't fit properly. One place I frequent uses them and I constantly hear others complain and discover this for themselves. I sound like an old…

Arguably, being annoying is a feature, not a bug; we want to discourage single-use packaging and get people to bring their own reusable containers.

I was trying to think of a way to write my first comment without coming across as insensitive to the environment. I much prefer the cheapest reusable containers to most expensive disposable. I believe it's common for people in Japan to carry their own towels to dry their hands. I think it's becoming more common for people in China and Japan to carry their own cutlery. I hope that catches on.

My preference would be to get coffee in a mug, which they offer (afaik they don't offer byo containers), but due to whatever other incentives (poor communication between workers when ordering or not wanting to wash a dish) I often get a compostable disposable cup.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#242

Post by m3at »

grecy wrote: post #239
andrewstuart wrote: post #2

The packaging industry is going to fight tooth and nail so it can continue to spew out single use plastics for every single sales transaction that occurs. There's big money involved. Imagine the costs to the packaging industry if it was no longer allowed to create infinite garbage. I do find it strange that there seems to be zero noticeable social pressure on bottled drink companies to stop using single use plastic b…

> zero noticeable social pressure on bottled drink companies to stop using single use plastic bottles Plastic water bottles - of any size - have been illegal in NSW, a state of Australia for many years. It has been fantastic. Governments need to grow a spine and stop taking so much corporate money as bribes, and actually get to work making our world better.

Is it for water only? If yes, did consumption of other drinks still sold in plastic bottles increase?

Genuinely interested, if no hard numbers exist anecdotes are fine

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#243

Post by dannyw »

grecy wrote: post #239
andrewstuart wrote: post #2

The packaging industry is going to fight tooth and nail so it can continue to spew out single use plastics for every single sales transaction that occurs. There's big money involved. Imagine the costs to the packaging industry if it was no longer allowed to create infinite garbage. I do find it strange that there seems to be zero noticeable social pressure on bottled drink companies to stop using single use plastic b…

> zero noticeable social pressure on bottled drink companies to stop using single use plastic bottles Plastic water bottles - of any size - have been illegal in NSW, a state of Australia for many years. It has been fantastic. Governments need to grow a spine and stop taking so much corporate money as bribes, and actually get to work making our world better.

I'm drinking from a plastic water bottle right now in NSW, so I'm no sure what you're referring to.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#244

Post by jillesvangurp »

The problem is not waste but the fact that is not a problem for consumers or manufacturers. A lot of product packaging only makes sense because you don't have to worry about disposing in a responsible way. Milk used to come in glass bottles, which the milkman would take back for reuse. Not anymore. There's no more milkman and the factory uses cheap to produce one time use packaging. Disposal cost is not their problem.

The solution is twofold.

1) we can do better now at separating waste using AI and robotics. Instead of having 3 or 4 bins at home where we toss things based on our mood, gut feeling, or simply which bin is the least full; a robot could confidently be sorting waste into hundreds of buckets. And unlike humans they'd get it mostly right. Waste becomes a resource when you treat it properly. There are some places where former land fill sites are being mined for precious materials. This stuff is not worthless anymore.

2) Price for disposal needs to be part of the deal when selling a product. E.g. disposal cost for e.g. washing machines is part of the sales price in some countries. They take back the old one when you buy a new one. Already payed for when you bought it. Also, super convenient to not have to do that yourself.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#245

Post by Dylan16807 »

LaGrange wrote: post #220
berbec wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've started to see boxes of water. They look like milk cartons.

Those are not at all better. They're mixed materials. Much harder to "recycle," in practice even if collected, usually just burned.

Not-recycled paper is an improvement over not-recycled plastic. The coating I don't know.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#246

Post by Dylan16807 »

blablablabla991 wrote: post #240
andrewstuart wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> How can the packaging industry force companies to order superfluous packaging? By strongly opposing any initiative to implement returnable, multi use packaging, coming up with a bunch of plausible reasons why it doesn't work - maybe it's unhygienic, maybe things can't be washed etc etc

But if multi use packaging would work just as well other single use packaging, wouldn't the packaging industry make the same profits?

Many types of wasteful packaging work better for them, when they don't have to pay a lot of the costs. That doesn't mean they're the better overall choice.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#247

Post by icebraining »

pfranz wrote: post #241
icebraining wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguably, being annoying is a feature, not a bug; we want to discourage single-use packaging and get people to bring their own reusable containers.

I was trying to think of a way to write my first comment without coming across as insensitive to the environment. I much prefer the cheapest reusable containers to most expensive disposable. I believe it's common for people in Japan to carry their own towels to dry their hands. I think it's becoming more common for people in China and Japan to carry their own cutlery. I hope that catches on. My preference would be to…

FWIW, I didn't think your comment was insensitive; mine was about the population in general, not targeted at you.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#248

Post by Tsubasachan »

dredmorbius wrote: post #216
mirimir wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It hasn't just been China. Pharmaceutical manufacturing in India is an environmental disaster.

Certainly, much of the developing world is in the same boat. What's notable is that China is actively and aggressively transitioning.

Becoming the factory of the world was never China's end goal, just a step on the road to a first world economy. Now that China is becoming more middle class they don't need low skill jobs as much anymore.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#249

Post by JulianMorrison »

ineedasername wrote: post #164
JulianMorrison wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was an illusion. Specifically, it was an illusion that allowed capitalism as normal to largely continue, with a bit of greenwashing here and there. Things you can actually recycle: Aluminium, iron/steel scrap, and to a lesser extent glass. Plastic was never recyclable in the sense of "circular economy indefinitely". Recycling was never an effective way to save resources, compared to its ugly stepsisters "reuse" an…

Paper must be recyclable, or else all of these "made from 100% recycled paper product" things wouldn't be possible, nor the many actual plants the recycle paper.

There's a category of things that can go once or twice around the carousel. Paper, becomes low grade paper, become toilet paper, and gone. Plastic, becomes "bags for life", becomes bin bags, and gone.

I refuse to call them recyclable. The circle isn't closed.

Re: As Costs Skyrocket, More U.S. Cities Stop Recycling

#250

Post by u04011 »

mirimir wrote: post #187
skriticos2 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Person from Germany here where we have 4 different bins per household - paper, recyclables (metal, plastic), compostables and dump (+ glass by color, batteries and electronics at dedicated sites). We get to a recycling rate of about 20-30% (effective at plant) with really wanting to and having it ingrained into our culture. Recycling is hard at the best of times. Unless packaging gets much better at identifying as re…

Damn, I had no clue that it was just 20-30%. That's depressing.

German 66.1 percent recycling rate in 2015. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=...
Post reply on HN