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

3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 423 posts

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#251

Post by marssaxman »

runnerup wrote: post #46
DoreenMichele wrote: post #36

3M has been facing a raft of litigation that has prompted the move Generally speaking, toxic substances are only "cheap" due to externalizing many of the costs involved, like increased healthcare costs and lost productivity. If you do a thorough analysis of the costs of using such chemicals, they aren't cheap at all. Maybe someday humans will get that.

I always thought that if our universe is actually a simulation, it's one of countless simulations trying to determine a solution to the Tragedy of the Commons. I suspect it's one of the hardest problems to solve in any universe.

The idea of the "tragedy of the commons" is an ahistorical myth, promulgated quite recently by a racist, eugenicist, nationalist fearmonger:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-t...

History offers many examples of human communities successfully managing their common resources, over generations.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#252

Post by cj »

elevaet wrote: post #222
dmd wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 20 years ago, I made a mistake at work which I later calculated put an extra 8500 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (It had to do with the delay/routing of a cargo ship.) There is literally nothing I could possibly do that could come even close to making up for that...

That's in the range of 10x the CO2 an average human will produce in their lifetime. If you could find a way to get 20 people to cut their emissions in half, or 200 people to reduce it by 5%, or 1000 people by 1%, you could balance out your CO2 ledger :) Or, if you still work in the industry and can find a way to make the shipping routes more efficient, or prevent future mistakes like that, you could make it into the…

(Controversial comment warning) one way to save more than your lifetime’s worth of CO2 is to not have children. By not having children, you’re not just saving the CO2 output of the child itself, but the entire lineage that could have resulted from that single child.

Obviously this advice is not good advice for anyone who wants to have children :)

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#253

Post by Tepix »

4ad wrote: post #57

I'm calling it, if you want GoreTex or similar clothing, get it now, in five years it will start to get banned, and in 10 years you won't find it anywhere.

The more gore-tex is bought, the more PFAS will be released into the environment. No thanks.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#254

Post by bluGill »

jraby3 wrote: post #124
Reason077 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general there is nothing wrong with long-life plastic products. Plastic is a really useful and important material when used appropriately! It's the insane amount waste and environmental pollution that single-use plastic generates that is the problem.

Exactly. What I always tell vendors when I get a strange look after refusing their plastic bag is that we use it for 5 minutes but it stays in the environment for 1000 years.

They make plastics that biodegrade in a few years. Supposedly even in a landfill they degrade (I've seen this debated, I'm not qualified to figure out who is right). However they are more expensive and so rarely used except when someone wants to make a point about being green.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#255

Post by TEP_Kim_Il_Sung »

marssaxman wrote: post #251
runnerup wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always thought that if our universe is actually a simulation, it's one of countless simulations trying to determine a solution to the Tragedy of the Commons. I suspect it's one of the hardest problems to solve in any universe.

The idea of the "tragedy of the commons" is an ahistorical myth, promulgated quite recently by a racist, eugenicist, nationalist fearmonger: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-t... History offers many examples of human communities successfully managing their common resources, over generations.

Those communities are usually around Dunbar's number, 100-300 people, or organized around such. It's easier if you know the people you live with.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#256

Post by dublin »

dmd wrote: post #213
jraby3 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try really hard not to use single use plastic. Especially plastic bags, plastic bottles, etc. This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days but will wait till I get home or to work to drink filtered water out of the tap. I went to Las Vegas about a year ago on a work trip and realized that the hotel I stayed at uses more plastic bottles in an hour than I would use in my lifetime with no though…

About 20 years ago, I made a mistake at work which I later calculated put an extra 8500 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (It had to do with the delay/routing of a cargo ship.) There is literally nothing I could possibly do that could come even close to making up for that...

Fortunately, this planet has abundant land and sea life that will absorb and fix that carbon dioxide for you, liberating highly reactive oxygen in the process. No problem - the amount of carbon used is proportional to the amount of carbon available. All available evidence shows that CO2 lags global temperature rises, rather than leading it. Science IS real, and it says carbon is NOT a pollutant.

You should have no guilt over this (although efficiency is always to be aimed for). And carbon is probably the least objectionable byproduct of burning the bunker oil that fuels ships - you can't make anything that heavy burn cleanly without insane combustion temperatures.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#257

Post by teaearlgraycold »

cj wrote: post #252
elevaet wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's in the range of 10x the CO2 an average human will produce in their lifetime. If you could find a way to get 20 people to cut their emissions in half, or 200 people to reduce it by 5%, or 1000 people by 1%, you could balance out your CO2 ledger :) Or, if you still work in the industry and can find a way to make the shipping routes more efficient, or prevent future mistakes like that, you could make it into the…

(Controversial comment warning) one way to save more than your lifetime’s worth of CO2 is to not have children. By not having children, you’re not just saving the CO2 output of the child itself, but the entire lineage that could have resulted from that single child. Obviously this advice is not good advice for anyone who wants to have children :)

I’ve thought about this. I think it really depends on whether we need more climate-minded voters in the future. If we do then those susceptible to this message are exactly the wrong ones to hear it.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#258

Post by dublin »

pigsty wrote: post #74
jraby3 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try really hard not to use single use plastic. Especially plastic bags, plastic bottles, etc. This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days but will wait till I get home or to work to drink filtered water out of the tap. I went to Las Vegas about a year ago on a work trip and realized that the hotel I stayed at uses more plastic bottles in an hour than I would use in my lifetime with no though…

That example is one reason why legislation is necessary. There will always be detractors saying we should just make people want to make the right choice, but all it takes is one person in a company to make a decision that outweighs the collective efforts of millions.

Aristo! Aristo! A la lanterne!

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#259

Post by is_true »

elevaet wrote: post #222
dmd wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 20 years ago, I made a mistake at work which I later calculated put an extra 8500 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (It had to do with the delay/routing of a cargo ship.) There is literally nothing I could possibly do that could come even close to making up for that...

That's in the range of 10x the CO2 an average human will produce in their lifetime. If you could find a way to get 20 people to cut their emissions in half, or 200 people to reduce it by 5%, or 1000 people by 1%, you could balance out your CO2 ledger :) Or, if you still work in the industry and can find a way to make the shipping routes more efficient, or prevent future mistakes like that, you could make it into the…

One alternative is to add a couple of free condom machines to a couple of local bars. haha

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#260

Post by david422 »

dmd wrote: post #213
jraby3 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try really hard not to use single use plastic. Especially plastic bags, plastic bottles, etc. This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days but will wait till I get home or to work to drink filtered water out of the tap. I went to Las Vegas about a year ago on a work trip and realized that the hotel I stayed at uses more plastic bottles in an hour than I would use in my lifetime with no though…

About 20 years ago, I made a mistake at work which I later calculated put an extra 8500 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (It had to do with the delay/routing of a cargo ship.) There is literally nothing I could possibly do that could come even close to making up for that...

Sure there is. I'm assuming you also routed cargo ships more efficiently in your job which prevented extra CO2 from being released. You can't pull the CO2 back in, but you can still prevent future CO2 from going out.
Post reply on HN