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

Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 401 posts

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#271

Post by notatoad »

pkphilip wrote: post #70
Ensorceled wrote: post #16

We need to focus on the second R, reuse. I have mason jars that my grandmother and then my mother used for pickling. The only waste is the rubber ring which needs to be replaced occasionally and THAT could be recycled. Many of these bottles have been used for 80+ years now. I have a few Ball jars which my GREAT grandmother used 100+ years ago. Beer bottles in Canada are reused dozens of times and are recyclable (brow…

One of the key issues with using bottles is the cost, weight and the fact that there is a lot of breakage. The weight alone increases the cost of the supply chain by several times. One key invention which could really help here is flexible glass packaging. Interestingly, one of the lost technologies from the Roman era is flexible glass: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_glass Corning does have flexible glass, bu…

one of the reasons the cost and weight of glass is such a problem is because the supply chains have consolidated around huge centralized bottling plants that require the transport of individually-packaged goods clear across the country.

bottling isn't a specialized task, it can be done anywhere. If companies were forced to pay the true cost of their plastic packaging, we might see a return to a system where bottling plants were set up locally, provided local jobs in smaller communities, and customers could return their used glass bottles directly to the local bottling plant for sterilization and re-use.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#272

Post by marcosdumay »

mschuster91 wrote: post #110
marcosdumay wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hum... I do not disagree exactly, but, there is simply no rush to fix landfill. There's a rush to fix climate change, species extinctions and habitat losses, environment pollution and a huge number of problems. Landfill can easily wait for a century or two. So why take focus from the hanging problems and place into it?

> There's a rush to fix climate change, species extinctions and habitat losses, environment pollution and a huge number of problems. > Landfill can easily wait for a century or two. So why take focus from the hanging problems and place into it? Because the universal solution to almost all the problems you mentioned is to drastically cut consumption. It's amazing how many resources get wasted on stuff no one needs (i.…

> Because the universal solution to almost all the problems you mentioned is to drastically cut consumption.

Yet the thread is about recycling.

Efficiency (in consumption too) is a real valuable goal to work towards. And way more relevant than recycling. So, go on, you have a good problem to solve.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#273

Post by brewdad »

strogonoff wrote: post #264
emerongi wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the advice. I use the same plastic bottle for months when going to the gym. Should I stop doing this?

Here's the case that makes me cringe: I know some families that don't think their tap water is clean enough to drink, and they reuse disposable plastic bottles for months to store spring water that the whole household drinks. That can't be good long term. In your situation it's probably not worth stressing too much if your plastic bottle is built to be reusable or if it's not your primary source of water. It's diffic…

Glass bottles are great, until you use them for the bottle flipping game.

That's actually the main reason I use a metal bottle. I am clumsy and inattentive enough of the time to make using glass on the go a dangerous proposition. Glass remains the container of choice when sitting at my desk or table though.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#274

Post by asiachick »

remote_phone wrote: post #121
pkphilip wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the key issues with using bottles is the cost, weight and the fact that there is a lot of breakage. The weight alone increases the cost of the supply chain by several times. One key invention which could really help here is flexible glass packaging. Interestingly, one of the lost technologies from the Roman era is flexible glass: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_glass Corning does have flexible glass, bu…

Let the costs increase then. All food containers must be recyclable or compostable. This should be a rule across the globe. We should also ban single-use plastic. If costs need to go up, then let them go up. Consumers need to understand the costs of their consumption and we can’t destroy our planet so that corporations can be more profitable.

It's not so corporations can be more profitable. It's so poor people can eat. Raise the price of food 20% for heavy but recyclable containers and suddenly 1 of 5 poor kids doesn't get enough to eat.

This is why finding sustainable solutions that lower costs, not raise them is the dream solution.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#275

Post by Footkerchief »

qwertygnu wrote: post #249
treis wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... No. Which part do you disagree with?

I'm finding a huge disparity with your ideas. Saying that we need not worry about using too much glass, paper, or plastic because we have plenty of sand, trees, and land to bury waste, then saying we need to reduce our carbon footprint doesn't make sense. Do you not think creating waste and dumping it in landfills, in oceans, in nature, is part of our carbon footprint? Do you not think the processes to make and trans…

Carbon footprint refers to atmospheric carbon, typically combustion products. Burying carbon, assuming it stays buried, does not contribute to carbon footprint. It is in fact how fossil fuels were formed in the first place.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#276

Post by makomk »

matthewheath wrote: post #239
mattmanser wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We" didn't stop, it was cheaper for Coca-Cola to use plastic. Coca-Cola did it. Stop blaming consumers for corporate choices to slightly increase profits. Like in the UK, Tesco have just inexplicably switched from using cardboard egg containers to plastic ones. Is that my fault?

> Tesco have just inexplicably switched from using cardboard egg containers to plastic ones. They've only switched because they've run out of the pulp used to make the cardboard egg containers. It's a temporary switch, although not ideal.

I'm sure the disruption to UK recycling collections due to Covid can't have helped much with that.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#277

Post by akiselev »

conradev wrote: post #261
Ensorceled wrote: post #16

We need to focus on the second R, reuse. I have mason jars that my grandmother and then my mother used for pickling. The only waste is the rubber ring which needs to be replaced occasionally and THAT could be recycled. Many of these bottles have been used for 80+ years now. I have a few Ball jars which my GREAT grandmother used 100+ years ago. Beer bottles in Canada are reused dozens of times and are recyclable (brow…

I found this article incredibly illuminating: https://theintercept.com/2019/10/18/coca-cola-recycling-plas... The United States is seemingly uniquely bad at this, thanks to - you guessed it - corporate greed. Container deposit laws work: > The United States' overall beverage container recycling rate is approximately 33%, while states with container deposit laws have a 70% average rate of beverage container recycling.…

A significant fraction of that 70% is collected by homeless individuals and others living below the poverty line, for whom recycling is a zero cost, zero training income source that can pay out the same day. If our (California) social safety nets were effective, I suspect the collection rate would be more in line with the national average.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#278

Post by dflock »

emerongi wrote: post #213
strogonoff wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On board with mandating recycling and encouraging use of infinitely recyclable materials in container manufacturing. A couple nits to pick, though. – You have to be specific when advocating for reuse. Some like to keep using—for long periods of time—bottles made from cheap thin disposable plastic. That plastic, when repeatedly emptied, may quickly accumulate tiny cracks and leech chemicals, which in case of P(V)C may…

Thanks for the advice. I use the same plastic bottle for months when going to the gym. Should I stop doing this?

Yes. Get a stainless steel one and use it forever.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#279

Post by munificent »

akiselev wrote: post #277
conradev wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found this article incredibly illuminating: https://theintercept.com/2019/10/18/coca-cola-recycling-plas... The United States is seemingly uniquely bad at this, thanks to - you guessed it - corporate greed. Container deposit laws work: > The United States' overall beverage container recycling rate is approximately 33%, while states with container deposit laws have a 70% average rate of beverage container recycling.…

A significant fraction of that 70% is collected by homeless individuals and others living below the poverty line, for whom recycling is a zero cost, zero training income source that can pay out the same day. If our (California) social safety nets were effective, I suspect the collection rate would be more in line with the national average.

I love this comment because it's a great example of how the exact same data can be used to support opposing narratives. The raw data here is that California sees a certain quantity of bottle recycling and has a certain level of social safety net.

* One narrative is that the high bottle recycling rate shows a problem with the social safety net.

* Another narrative is that recycling rate shows that it is itself functioning as part of the solution to the social safety net.

Sort of like how a high rate of airbag use could make a statement about how safe or unsafe driving is.

I don't know which of these narratives is closer to the truth, but I think it's good example to use to help train ourselves to realize that many narratives are possible and part of critical thinking is not jumping too quickly from raw data to any one particular interpretation.

Re: Pringles tube tries to wake from 'recycling nightmare'

#280

Post by bostik »

mattmanser wrote: post #174
stx wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is we (the US) did do this at one point in time. When I was a kid you could buy a coke in a glass bottle and return it when done to be re-used by the manufacturer. For some reason we stopped. We should bring that back. When I was in Mexico around the early 2000 they still did this. When you buy a drink you could return it for a few cents back from the vender.

"We" didn't stop, it was cheaper for Coca-Cola to use plastic. Coca-Cola did it. Stop blaming consumers for corporate choices to slightly increase profits. Like in the UK, Tesco have just inexplicably switched from using cardboard egg containers to plastic ones. Is that my fault?

> Like in the UK, Tesco have just inexplicably switched from using cardboard egg containers to plastic ones. Is that my fault?

If you keep buying them, yes. Tesco's beancounters (who are legion) are certainly going to keep track of the overall cost and revenue structure. Assuming the plastic containers cost less and are sold in equal amounts, they will push forward to roll out plastic over cardboard where they can.

If they want price signals, give them price signals. Vote with your wallet.

We buy our eggs from a nearby farm. Tray of 30 is good for a week, and sometimes two. Better quality than what Tesco or Sainsbury's offers, too.

EDIT: we also return our cardboard trays to the farm shop when we buy a new batch. Reuse >> recycle.

Post reply on HN