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

How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 324 posts

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#301

Post by lorenzorhoades »

GhostVII wrote: post #268
randcraw wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not convinced... because you understand the component costs and you believe they add up favorably? Or you don't know and don't care? The answers to your suggestion start with knowing the volume of plastic, time to degrade, degradation byproduct toxicity, and alternative 'recycling' methods and their costs. There's also clear evidence that the 'current' model and practice for plastic disposal (that you endorse)…

I'm not convinced because as the article says, it's not realistic to recycle many kinds of plastic, and because I don't see the harm in safely burying garbage. In my city there is an old landfill which has now been covered in dirt and turned into a park, with a sledding hill and a bike park. If you didn't know better, you wouldn't even be able to tell it was a landfill before, and if properly managed none of that gar…

Are you talking about Tacoma/ Ruston Area?

I agree with you. Recycling is stupid; weirdly enough it's a major contributor(? Totally not the right word) to homelessness.

Secondly, it's allowed to be 'disposed of' internationally. Who knows what the Chinese and Indians are doing with it.

Instead of CRV at the consumer level, we should have susidies or direct payments to suppliers for reusing plastic. All the plastic that isn't 'intrinsically valuable', ends up safely in a landfill.

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#302

Post by lorenzorhoades »

refurb wrote: post #147
Dylan16807 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can microplastics escape landfills, or is that an issue for trash that didn't get into a landfill? > We can't just keep adding and adding to it, we can't cover the planet in landfills of plastic, we aren't putting the "oils" back to where they came from. Why does it matter if it's the same spot? More importantly there's only so much oil and putting it all in landfills would not cover the planet.

Microplastics mostly come from fabric like nylon. Small fibers that can be easily broken off. Your crushed 4L milk jug in a landfill isn't much of a source of microplastics, nor is it much of a threat to the water table (I mean, we use that same plastic for food).

i've heard this before. It was in regards to people washing their clothes.

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#304

Post by peterlk »

lorenzorhoades wrote: post #303

Controversial uninformed opinion: Recycling is a major cause to the Homeless epidemic. Roads, brakes, weight are major causes to pollution. Heavy cars (IE. Super dense lithium, nickel, cobalt) will cause more pollution.

Was this comment generated with GPT-3?

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#305

Post by EForEndeavour »

thu2111 wrote: post #248
tedk-42 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They produce a lot of toxic gases as the plastics often contain a variety of elements which when burned formed nasty compounds

The local incinerator here in Switzerland isn't merely burning the waste. IIRC it gets vapourised using a high energy plasma or something like that, broken down to constituent atoms. At any rate it belches smoke into the atmosphere in the middle of a city, has done for a while and nobody seems to suffer any ill effects, so I believe them that the "burning" is highly effective.

That sounds like plasma gasification (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_gasification). Out of curiosity, which city are you in?

> it belches smoke into the atmosphere in the middle of a city, has done for a while and nobody seems to suffer any ill effects

How long is a while, and how does that compare to the time it would take to detect meaningful increases in cancer or other illnesses in the vicinity of the incinerator?

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#306

Post by brunoff »

spodek wrote: post #110
nkingsy wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe make some videos or something. My tiny California trash can is full to the brim every week, not for lack of trying. I’m fairly sure I’m in the top 10% of giving a f in my country. Culture has huge impact so I don’t want to discourage individual action, but this won’t change until conservation becomes the default.

I posted a video on my blog here: https://joshuaspodek.com/year-emptied-garbage This post explains more: https://joshuaspodek.com/emptying-my-household-garbage-for-t...

There's someone with a nickname similar to yours (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NYCJosh) that after reading the article, updated wikipedia's plastic recycling article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_recycling#Deception_of.... I would like to thank him.

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#307

Post by curyous »

gerbler wrote: post #278
sudasana wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if a site compiled by the Canadian Plastics Industry Association is a great source here. Even though it cites sources, there's probbaly some strong selection bias going on here.

I missed it was from a plastics association. But my point about the life-cycle analysis work is still valid - I studied this a little in grad-school and the paper v plastic bag trade-off was frequently discussed because of the surprising results. (Life-cycle analysis does have huge assumptions involving usage, so it's not an exact science)

I'm not sure life-cycle analysis is that useful in this case.

If a paper bag requires more energy to produce, it could still be better for the environment as it doesn't stay around polluting the world forever.

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#308

Post by bjoli »

inglor_cz wrote: post #208
rvense wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know paper right now doesn't have a great environmental footprint, but paper does seem like a pretty good way to trick capitalism into planting lots of trees.

Traditional forestry in Europe was keen on preserving total forest area for future harvest. And after the general shift from burning wood to burning coal, forests actually expanded. In my country (Czechia) the contemporary forest cover is about twice as much as in the 18th century and several per cent bigger than in 1950. The problem is species composition. Those forests are mostly monocultural and prone to devastati…

I don't know about forest cover, but we have the same issues in Sweden. The biological diversity in areas used for forestry is poor compared to untouched forests. The recent dry weather has been very good for a kind of beetle that has destroyed vast amounts of trees. Forests that were untouched, or just mixed kind, did a lot better.

Regulation is slowly catching up though, and some of the larger companies have actually started doing more than is required by law.

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#309

Post by tonyedgecombe »

carstenhag wrote: post #211
11235813213455 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the actions should go on both producers and consumers. Taxes, and also mentality changes, in my case, I produce almost no garbage, because I eat fruit foraged outside, and other local organic food. My only garbage in a year is: 10 rice plastic bag (5kg bags), a toothpaste tube and a toothbrush, a few soap bars plastic wrappings. That's all. That yearly volume you see, that's what most people produce in one da…

It's maybe doable, but just about every fresh food/ingredient ist wrapped in plastic. I can get lentils, rice, bread, maybe milk etc without packaging (Unverpackt-Läden in Germany) but not butter, eggs, cheese, spices and so on.

Before the thing came along we were starting to see shops popup in the UK selling loose items. You could take your containers and fill them with milk, rice, washing up liquid, etc. Some of the supermarkets have started experimenting with it.

Re: How Big Oil Misled the Public into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

#310

Post by thu2111 »

jjeaff wrote: post #262
thu2111 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be flipped around a third time. Eco-campaigners that create hate campaigns against corporations doing useful work, without even the faintest idea of a proposal for what they want those corps to do differently, will inevitably produce nonsensical virtue signalling PR responses. What else are they going to do? As the article discusses, plastic recycling is hard.

What do you mean no solution offered? Tax non-recyclables at the source and tax them enough to dispose of those materials effectively and safely. And the markets will respond by switching to truly recyclable alternatives or else pass the cost on to consumers willing to pay more for a non-recyclables option.

That won't solve any environmental problems, as in most cases there are no plausible recyclable substitutes. Or are you proposing we make iPhones out of wood?

All that'd do is act as a general consumption tax, and we already have those.

In fact there are no viable solutions, assuming rolling civilisation back to the stone age isn't considered viable. That's why eco-extremists never get specific about what they want corporations or governments to do, and in the rare case where someone is actually serious enough to consider that problem they end up leaving the environment movement: see the long history of ex-Greenpeace or now ex-Extinction Rebellion leaders leaving the movements and coming out in favour of nuclear power.

Post reply on HN