51–60 of 291 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also have to think in terms of actual harm. Considering the US has an absurd amount of junk land it can use for landfills, a single use plastic object that has 1/1000 the carbon emissions of the reusable alternative may be the best environmental choice.
Where is the "junk land"? Almost everywhere has animals that likely don't enjoy plastic.
As long as we can keep plastic waste out of the environment, does it really matter?
But the giant pacific garbage patch, and any island beach not maintained regularly will clearly tell you plastics end up in the ocean regardless. I think the only solution is global legislation forcing consumers and businesses to use alternatives.
Q: Do we know where the plastics in the pacific garbage patch actually come from?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In practice we don't really have replacements for a lot of things "single use plastic" is used for. Sterilized medical equipment, storage and distribution of prepared food products for people with disabilities, and probably a myriad of other minor uses that don't get a lot of attention just don't have practical alternatives without making life untenable for a lot of people. So I don't think there's a world in which w…
That argument feels a little disingenuous. Like when people drive a big truck every day because once per summer they haul a boat. We can eliminate or at least improve a lot of single use plastics outside medicine and people with special needs. At my local farmer’s market, for example, all prepared food from food trucks and stands comes in unlined cardboard containers. When you’re done, you throw it in compost because…
Eh, they also choose big trucks so they'll win in a crash. Remember, safety ratings/requirements for cars are based on collisions with similar cars. If you're in a Fit or Golf or Mini and the other guy's in an F-150 or Tahoe, you're in big trouble.
The solution's probably some form of graduated weight-based tax. Makes sense both on a safety-externalities basis and on a damage-to-the-road basis (which doesn't scale linearly with weight, so the first ton is way less damaging than the second ton, and so on).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also have to think in terms of actual harm. Considering the US has an absurd amount of junk land it can use for landfills, a single use plastic object that has 1/1000 the carbon emissions of the reusable alternative may be the best environmental choice.
Does the US still operate landfills? Some or all EU countries have completely abandoned the practice. So that's just not a harm that matters, unlike some other ones. In any case, it'd be compounding the problem here, and rather bad economics at the same time. Plastics aren't that hard to collect/separate, especially if it's ok to be mixed with paper. They burn readily and, given high temperatures, cleanly, allowing t…
“In 2018, 24% of all municipal waste generated in the EU was landfilled.” That said, incineration is a similar option that drastically lowers volume of waste, but still produced ash that ends up buried and vast amounts of CO2.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the giant pacific garbage patch, and any island beach not maintained regularly will clearly tell you plastics end up in the ocean regardless. I think the only solution is global legislation forcing consumers and businesses to use alternatives.
> the giant pacific garbage patch Q: Do we know where the plastics in the pacific garbage patch actually come from?
[EDIT] which is not to say that the plastic was not used and discarded in an OECD state, then shipped elsewhere for "disposal" (LOL).
I believe it. But that doesn't mean we're innocent in the rest of the western world. One really cool improvement here in Sweden recently, besides "banning" plastic bags at supermarkets, was one store called ICA started selling their burger pattys in cardboard packaging. So the only plastic is a top foil that you peel off to open the package, the rest is cardboard. Pretty cool! That's one area where we're all guilty,…
There are quite a few schemes for reusable packaging for food delivery currently getting started. It's a concept that needs a certain amount of market penetration and concentration to work, but has the potential to make a significant contribution for private sector/household trash and energy use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That argument feels a little disingenuous. Like when people drive a big truck every day because once per summer they haul a boat. We can eliminate or at least improve a lot of single use plastics outside medicine and people with special needs. At my local farmer’s market, for example, all prepared food from food trucks and stands comes in unlined cardboard containers. When you’re done, you throw it in compost because…
> That argument feels a little disingenuous. Like when people drive a big truck every day because once per summer they haul a boat. Eh, they also choose big trucks so they'll win in a crash. Remember, safety ratings/requirements for cars are based on collisions with similar cars . If you're in a Fit or Golf or Mini and the other guy's in an F-150 or Tahoe, you're in big trouble. The solution's probably some form of g…
Eh this is where it gets really complicated. I used to be a car crash enthusiast as a kid (crash science, not crashing myself). The main thing I learned is that big cars are ridiculously unsafe. Especially american big cars.
Long stopping distance, lots of inertia, bad on the moose test, ridiculous amounts of energy to dissipate/absorb in a crash. Terrible.
Give me a Fiat 500 any day.
Anyway, the best thing you can do for crash survivability is to ensure you’re never driving a car that’s more than 5 years old. The engineering advances fast and a modern small car colliding with a 10 year old big car will absolutely destroy the big car. Use it as a crumple zone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also have to think in terms of actual harm. Considering the US has an absurd amount of junk land it can use for landfills, a single use plastic object that has 1/1000 the carbon emissions of the reusable alternative may be the best environmental choice.
Where is the "junk land"? Almost everywhere has animals that likely don't enjoy plastic.
The average American produces 3.5 pounds of trash per day at an average one third of a gram per cubic centimeter. Assuming that holds steady, and we use a normal landfill depth of 400 feet, and the US population doubles over the next century, we need a landfill area of 250 square miles to cover us for the next hundred years.
Compared to available land that's tiny.