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

321–330 of 401 posts

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

#321

Post by Scoundreller »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #310
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…

I always found it fascinating that in the 70's and 80's everybody moved away from glass and paper to plastic. I mean literally anything that could be converted to plastic from paper or glass was. Do you think we'll ever revert back to just paper and glass again? We are making some good strides with paper straws and the like, and mandating people bring reusable bags to the grocery stores - but I still see many of the…

Probably not as natural gas remains dirt cheap in parts of the world. Turning it into polyethylene is a way to export those low prices.

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

#322

Post by Scoundreller »

refurb wrote: post #305
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.

Moving to plastic significantly reduced the cost of transportation and the resulting CO2 emissions (but increased CO2 through production of plastic - net?). Better to haul a trailer full of coke that 98% product and 2% plastic than one that’s 90% product and 10% glass.

You can fit more plastic-packaged product too. Still waiting for them to sell it in cubes though.

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

#323

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #317

The uncomfortable truth: 50% of food is thrown away due to our current habits. This % would be even higher if we didn’t use multilayer materials to protect food from spoiling. The only way to solve this is by changing our eating habits (e.g. some things would have to go away, because they are not economical to centrally produce and ship everywhere around the world). That, or you get distributed manufacturing that mak…

Food waste isn’t a problem per se. If the farming is done sustainably, and distribution improved so people aren’t starving, I don’t see why we have to eliminate foods instead of just increasing their price and/or reducing availability to e.g. tier 1 cities.

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

#324

Post by bagels »

Y_Y wrote: post #313
bagels wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of millions are we talking? It's probably 3,000,000, which is 6 or 7 figures.

European years typically have on the order of 1e2 days.

Per day vs. per year, got it. I thought the comment was arguing about how many "figures" that number represented.

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

#325

Post by fredophile »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #205
chongli wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t buy one per week. Maybe a few cans per year. I use them for storing sleeves of soda crackers (they fit perfectly even though the crackers are squares). They’re also good for storing snacks of various kinds, dry spaghetti noodles (or any pasta, really). Pretty much any dry goods that you don’t want crushed are a great fit!

Cool! I'll have to go out and buy some Pringles, I need those things done. Normally I don't buy Pringles at all, not in decades. Because, honestly, they're the consistency of pasteboard and taste of mostly salt. The bottom rung on the snack ladder. I snack on nothing instead of Pringles if that's the only option. But the can! That seems worthwhile now that you call out its many uses.

Wouldn't it be better to find someone that likes Pringles and take their can when they're done? Buying something you don't enjoy so you can reuse the packaging, that most people throw away, seems like a poor solution.

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

#326

Post by DFHippie »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #317

The uncomfortable truth: 50% of food is thrown away due to our current habits. This % would be even higher if we didn’t use multilayer materials to protect food from spoiling. The only way to solve this is by changing our eating habits (e.g. some things would have to go away, because they are not economical to centrally produce and ship everywhere around the world). That, or you get distributed manufacturing that mak…

A large percentage of this food waste is perishable or unwanted stuff in the store. Produce gets ugly and, though it's still usable, nobody picks it over the fresher stuff. Milk gets close to its sell-by date and people pick fresher stuff. Someone overstocks something and a manager pitches it. Something doesn't sell. Some of this can go to food pantries, but a lot just turns into methane in landfills.

As for produce, much perishes en route as well, or is abandoned in the field as unsellable, or reaches the market where produce managers are shopping for their stores and it doesn't sell.

Changing our consumer habits is only going to get us so far. Not that it isn't worth doing, but that 50% figure isn't due to families buying two bags of potato chips and pitching one.

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

#327

Post by chongli »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #205
chongli wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t buy one per week. Maybe a few cans per year. I use them for storing sleeves of soda crackers (they fit perfectly even though the crackers are squares). They’re also good for storing snacks of various kinds, dry spaghetti noodles (or any pasta, really). Pretty much any dry goods that you don’t want crushed are a great fit!

Cool! I'll have to go out and buy some Pringles, I need those things done. Normally I don't buy Pringles at all, not in decades. Because, honestly, they're the consistency of pasteboard and taste of mostly salt. The bottom rung on the snack ladder. I snack on nothing instead of Pringles if that's the only option. But the can! That seems worthwhile now that you call out its many uses.

The great thing about the cans is that they're reasonably air-tight. I find if I open a sleeve of soda crackers and then try to close them up and store them in the original box they're pretty much guaranteed to be stale by about half-way through the sleeve.

Not so if I store them in a Pringles can. They stay fresh for way longer due to the confined space and decent-sealing lid.

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

#329

Post by Groxx »

pessimizer wrote: post #113
jdmichal wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their marketing is based around that sound... So it probably is seen as a big deal to them. Probably some pop-psych idea around having that sound be associated to them through the commercials and usage.

I've never heard a pop during a lifetime of probably eating my bodyweight in Pringles. Either it's always been purely a marketing thing and they're finally actually engineering it into their packaging, or people are attacking Pringles lids in a way I do not understand.

Same - I've literally never heard that "pop". I grew up thinking it was just their slogan, referring to the act of opening the tube (as "pop the top/hood/etc" is used for many other things), not onomatopoeia.

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

#330

Post by xeromal »

tomlor wrote: post #291
staplers wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Oregon it is amazing how effective this program is. You never see cans or bottles as litter. Another effect is it lowers your garbage/recycling bill as homeless will often rummage through your bins for cans/bottles freeing up bin space so you never really have an overflow problem of glass or cans.

The pickers in my neighborhood are a nuisance. If my recyling bin is full, then they move good recyclables from my recycling bin to my trash bin in order to try to find cans and bottles. Often, then don't move them back when they're done rummaging.

lol same here. Homeless in DTLA kick the cans over when possible and leave the other refuse on the ground.
Post reply on HN