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

391–400 of 401 posts

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

#391

Post by masklinn »

userbinator wrote: post #372
masklinn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s where the first R comes in. Only buy as many Pringles cans as you can reuse. People don’t want to do that either, though, because Pringles are addictive. That may be the root problem. The first R is already not an option, people who buy pringles want pringles, otherwise they wouldn’t be buying that. Short of making pringles illegal you’re not going to change this. > There’s no way they’ll sell Pringles in ba…

Chips remain sold in bags to this day. Chips which are much thicker than Pringles.

No.

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

#392

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

masklinn wrote: post #15
chongli wrote: post #6

I love Pringles tubes. We reuse them all over the place around the house. Never really thought of recycling them. Seems like a terrible waste to destroy a perfectly good container just to get a ~penny’s worth of materials out of it. This is one of the big problems I have with recycling. When I was a kid in school (throughout the 90’s), we learned the 3 R’s: reduce, reuse, recycle. Notice that recycle is last on the l…

> I love Pringles tubes. We reuse them all over the place around the house. Never really thought of recycling them. Seems like a terrible waste to destroy a perfectly good container just to get a ~penny’s worth of materials out of it. Recyclers are downstream from consumers. They can’t stop consumers from throwing away their pringles cans, and until Kellogg’s starts bulk-selling Pringles in bags… people will throw ca…

Kellogs owns Pringles now? That is news to me. How does that work for the brand image of healthy nutrition?

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

#393

Post by Schwan »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #77
Schwan wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a normal german household on the 'countryside'. I alwasy recycled. Never thought about it much and my family is not 'alternative or whatever'. 3 Years ago i see a documentation telling me, that dark plastic can't be recycled and gets burned. Thin plastic can't be recycled and will be burned. We have a system called 'green point' which basically means that the producer has to pay a little bit of money for…

Burning is better for the environment than landfill. It's getting less good comparitavely as grids become carbon free via renewables, but especially for district heating its probably going to be a good thing for a while. Half recycled and half used to avoid burning coal seems a pretty good deal, especially if its paid for by the producers. So why the big overreaction?

We are not landfilling that stuff we are burning it.

And it doesn't matter thats not the issue. The issue is, that plastic is used every single day and its not reused/recycled it gets burned. This not sustainable at all.

the 'big overreaction' comes from the fact, that the weather is changing due to co2 emissions and we are far far away from any sustainable setup while already seeing the impact it has.

Its the 3th year of a draught in germany. Where i never encountered a drought. It is a green country and the trees around me have damages from the drought. When they are dying of, a tree which was growing for 30-40 years will be gone.

The co2 reduction of corona was around 8% and we would need to have 7% every year to combat climate change. 8% was doable with a lot of inconvienience. It doesn't give me a lot of hope when we are not able to recycle fucking plastic.

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

#394

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #361
akiselev wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another narrative is that recycling rate shows that it is itself functioning as part of the solution to the social safety net. In my experience, no one in good faith argues that bottle deposits are a part of the social safety net, let alone a functional part. Edit: to clarify, mine is a US centric experience. I think the argument for recycling collection as a tool of economic mobility is perfectly sound as long as…

Doubling the bottle deposit to help the homeless was a suggestion made by the German satirical party „die PARTEI“.

Äh, 'Tschullijung? Sie ham de Pfandring verjesse!

https://duckduckgo.com/q=Pfandring

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

#395

Post by Schwan »

bserge wrote: post #197
Schwan wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a normal german household on the 'countryside'. I alwasy recycled. Never thought about it much and my family is not 'alternative or whatever'. 3 Years ago i see a documentation telling me, that dark plastic can't be recycled and gets burned. Thin plastic can't be recycled and will be burned. We have a system called 'green point' which basically means that the producer has to pay a little bit of money for…

To be fair, 40% is better than 0%

True; So how does that make it any better?

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

#396

Post by Schwan »

google234123 wrote: post #154
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Burning is better for the environment than landfill. It's getting less good comparitavely as grids become carbon free via renewables, but especially for district heating its probably going to be a good thing for a while. Half recycled and half used to avoid burning coal seems a pretty good deal, especially if its paid for by the producers. So why the big overreaction?

There's no chance that buring is better than a landfill. There's so much empty (useless) surface area on earth. Burning puts poison into the air and requires a ton of energy.

At least here we do have high requirements for burning stuff so you do have proper filters etc.

At the end of the day you probably have concentrated toxins after the burning but handling this shit is probably easier and cheaper than undoing a landfill in 30 years.

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

#397

Post by jacknews »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #343
jacknews wrote: post #55

The plastic-in-the-environment problem is mainly about collection. Collect it, bury it, and it will eventually turn back into oil. But IMHO manufacturers should be on the hook for the lifecycle of their products. Either through taxes, or some kind of market-driven bidding mechanism, they should have financial penalties (or even rewards), based on product environmental impact. The whole recycling movement seems to me…

> The plastic-in-the-environment problem is mainly about collection. Collect it, bury it, and it will eventually turn back into oil. This is incredibly uninformed and misleading. Burying it will not solve any problems, a PET bootle takes something like 450 years to fully breakdown, on top of that the particles released as it breaks down will be washed away into the subsoil and end up in ground water, then rivers, wat…

It will solve the PET problem for 450 years.

But my point is less to do with how to treat waste, than the fact that the most important first step is to actually collect it. In much of the world, collection is not happening properly, which is why we see so much plastic waste washed into rivers and oceans.

Of course if we create less waste to start with, that also helps, but that will only happen if manufacturers are pressured where it matters, the bottom line.

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

#398

Post by mschuster91 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #272
mschuster91 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

"Recycling" is just eye candy when it comes to plastics. For paper, glass and metal it works, but for plastics? It's way cheaper to just make new plastics. And there's no research that promises effective plastics recycling.

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

#399

Post by Chris2048 »

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…

Silly question: what plastics cannot be recycled?

Can they not just be broken down into simpler hydrocarbons and reformulated? Cannot most plastics be melted into simpler products ala preciousplastic.com ?

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

#400

Post by bena »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #112
bena wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes colored glass more able to be recycled than clear glass? I'm curious, my intuition says it would be the opposite as I assume colored glass has other stuff in the glass to make it colored.

As I understand it, it's hard to keep coloured glass and other impurities out of the clear glass recycling stream, so the clear glass isn't clear any more. Coloured glass is just mixed together, which is why it's brown. I would love to hear from someone who knows more.

I can see that. It's a good enough reason for me.

In my head, I imagined it like boiling impurities out of liquid. Get the glass hot and melty, the impurities and glass separate due to different melting points, blah blah, blah.

But if that doesn't happen and it doesn't affect the integrity of the glass too much, I can see the "Screw it" attitude of just letting it be.

Post reply on HN