85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics • Hacker News Board

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#221

Post by Carrok » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 9:34 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #220

Carrok wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don't them smell? If you wash them by hand you end up using more resources than if you had disposable. No. There is absolutely no way that rinsing out a container uses more resources than creating and transporting new disposable containers. > Are you dumping things in the street? I personally am not. I see plenty of people who are. I see plenty of trash in my local rivers and streams, so I'm not sure what you're ba…

> There is absolutely no way that rinsing out a container uses more resources than creating and transporting new disposable containers. that's what i thought, too, until i did the math, and it turns out that i was wrong. rinsing out a bottle with hot water uses several times more energy than manufacturing a brand new plastic bottle from petroleum and transporting it (they're generally transported as preforms until th…

I use cold water to rinse lol. Right, there are other issues so let’s do nothing about this issue. Got it.

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#222

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 9:35 PM UTC

textninja wrote: post #208

Carrok wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, taking 5 seconds to rinse the bag out in the sink is _such_ an inconvenience. Life is rough. I stopped buying meat for environmental / water usage reasons a while back, so no, this isn't an issue for me anymore. Guess I'm just a stupid hippie.

> Yea, taking 5 seconds to rinse the bag out in the sink is _such_ an inconvenience. The old "you're just not doing it right" chestnut, where have I heard that one before! Hey, by any chance have you noticed how many of those silly face masks made it (or didn't make it) to landfills? > I stopped buying meat . . . Guess I'm just a stupid hippie. You said it not me!

[deleted]

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#223

Post by kragen » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 9:37 PM UTC

Carrok wrote: post #221

kragen wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is absolutely no way that rinsing out a container uses more resources than creating and transporting new disposable containers. that's what i thought, too, until i did the math, and it turns out that i was wrong. rinsing out a bottle with hot water uses several times more energy than manufacturing a brand new plastic bottle from petroleum and transporting it (they're generally transported as preforms until th…

I use cold water to rinse lol. Right, there are other issues so let’s do nothing about this issue. Got it.

in your case rinsing does use less resources than manufacturing and transporting a new container, then!

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#224

Post by Gigachad » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 9:56 PM UTC

blackle wrote: post #42

AlexandrB wrote: post #14

I'll admit I was a little skeptical of plastic bag bans here in Canada, but it's had a noticeable effect on how much random garbage ends up stuck in hedges and fences where I live. Adapting to it wasn't too bad and good reusable bags are a lot more ergonomic and don't tear as easily when carrying heavy loads.

I fully agree, however if you're the kind of person who orders groceries, then what ends up happening is that you start collecting reusable bags that you have no way of reusing. I hope that someone starts some kind of "reusable bag recycling" system so I can give the scores of bags I have to a good home

I had that problem, but then the supermarkets in Australia all switched to paper bags. Now I just chuck them in recycling. Even if they do end up in landfill or a creek, they are paper, in a month they will have disintegrated.

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#225

Post by Gigachad » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 9:58 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #219

lokar wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s wrong with paper?

making paper is much more environmentally damaging than making plastic i'm not joking, look it up

It uses more energy, but doesn’t create plastics which last thousands of years.

Energy usage of shopping bags isn’t that big of a deal. The trash created after use is.

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#226

Post by kragen » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 10:00 PM UTC

Gigachad wrote: post #225

kragen wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

making paper is much more environmentally damaging than making plastic i'm not joking, look it up

It uses more energy, but doesn’t create plastics which last thousands of years. Energy usage of shopping bags isn’t that big of a deal. The trash created after use is.

the trash created after use of shopping bags is not a big deal either; a typical non-reusable shopping bag weighs 200 milligrams, so if you use three per day for 72 years, you produce a grand total of 16 kilograms of shopping bags. that's less than even your own bones, which will also last thousands of years

the issue with paper mills is not their energy consumption, which generally is fueled by the same biomass they process (and is thus carbon-neutral), but the toxic waste they produce

do the math instead of just posting stuff without thinking

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#227

Post by Slyfox33 » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 10:02 PM UTC

GeoAtreides wrote: post #212

dumbo-octopus wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The response rate is so low as to be entirely meaningless. If you're content with sampling only 0.000001% of the population, you can get any results you want by simply selecting for the people who care the most by taking a bunch of time to lecture the individual if they seem like they'd vote the other way (oh no, you have to leave? but we didn't even have time to submit your vote yet... :( ), and wording the question…

> The response rate is so low as to be entirely meaningless. This calculator says you need a 385 sample size for a billion (or infinite) population: https://www.calculator.net/sample-size-calculator.html?type=... Please check the theory presented below the calculator, it explains why such a low number is enough for a confidence level of 95% that the real value is within ±5% of the measured/surveyed value.

That's extremely dependent on who the 385 people are.

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#228

Post by snapplebobapple » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 10:23 PM UTC

lowkey_ wrote: post #41

I was skeptical of whether it was representative of 85% of the global population, or just the first-world. I've often thought (and heard that) environmental concerns are secondary to economic, and that people in less prosperous countries don't care as much about environmental concerns as people in first-world countries who are secure in most areas of their lives. Surprisingly, this data says the opposite! Sample size…

The key word is "unnecessary". Everyone thinks we should get rid of unecessary plastic. Everyone also disagrees on what is unecessary. ask them if they would pay some percent more for a good to not have some specific plastic and it will be a resounding near unanimous no.

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#229

Post by orhmeh09 » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 10:40 PM UTC

Slyfox33 wrote: post #227

GeoAtreides wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The response rate is so low as to be entirely meaningless. This calculator says you need a 385 sample size for a billion (or infinite) population: https://www.calculator.net/sample-size-calculator.html?type=... Please check the theory presented below the calculator, it explains why such a low number is enough for a confidence level of 95% that the real value is within ±5% of the measured/surveyed value.

That's extremely dependent on who the 385 people are.

TFA goes into this a little

> The samples in Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, the Republic of Korea, Spain, Sweden, and the United States can be taken as representative of these countries' general adult population under the age of 75.

> Due to the fact that the vast majority of the data was collected via Ipsos' online panels (India being the only exception, in which 1,800 were interviewed face-to-face and 400 were interviewed online), participation tends to consist of those who have access to the necessary technology. The samples in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Indonesia, Ireland, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Peru, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey and Uganda are more urban, more educated and/or more affluent than the general population. While not nationally representative, the survey results for these countries provide a useful and unique indication of the direction of public opinion.

>

> Weighting has been employed to balance demographics and ensure that the sample's composition reflects that of the adult population according to the most recent census data.

>

> The precision of Ipsos online polls are calculated using a credibility interval with a poll of 1,000 accurate to +/- 3•5 percentage points and of 500 accurate to +/- 5.0 percentage points. For more information on the Ipsos use of credibility intervals, please visit the Ipsos website.

Ipsos is fairly reputable in the field, FWIW.

Re: 85% of People Want Global Ban on Single-Use Plastics

#230

Post by akasakahakada » Wed, Jun 05, 2024, 10:46 PM UTC

Carrok wrote: post #106

ars wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you just take the containers back to a drop point. If someone drives to drop off the container they have uses way more resources than they would just using a disposable. I suspect this idea is just greenwashing. > thicker paperboard Which again uses more resources, and emits more CO2, than plastic.

You're assuming I'm driving it back to the drop point as a dedicated trip. A: I typically keep the containers until I order next time, you have a month to drop them off. So just drop them off when you're picking up your food. B: The drop off point is a short walk away, so you could just, you know, walk. I'm not worried about resources or emissions here, I'm more concerned about trash in the rivers/oceans, and micropl…

Of course transport 10 tons of paper product has zero energy consumption according to Law of Newtonian Physics. More weight, less energy. We successfully keep the ocean clean, but all turtles are dead by stopping ocean current with global warming.