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

Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 136 posts

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#81

Post by catalogia »

lopmotr wrote: post #71
Negitivefrags wrote: post #57

This movement is really dumb. Plastic pollution in the ocean is a problem, but it’s not the western countries causing it. There are 10 rivers that cause 90% of plastic pollution, and they are in Africa and Asia. Plastic in a landfill harms nobody. The worst part is that people somehow have this linked in thier mind with climate change, as in fixing plastic pollution is going to help with that. Well if anything, it’s…

Yes, it's a spell of idiotic faith that's somehow been cast over people. I've tried asking proponents of recycling about about this and the only answers I've managed to squeeze out of them are: 1) Landfills leach toxic chemicals into the water table. 2) Landfills are on scarce land which will run out oneday, making waste disposal more expensive. 3) It can be inconvenient to build over a landfill because you might hit…

> 2) Landfills are on scarce land which will run out oneday, making waste disposal more expensive.

Case 2 is an interesting case, it's a startlingly widespread fear yet seems ridiculous when you think about it for more than a few seconds. Slate Star Codex concluded it's alarmism sparked in the 80s by the media's coverage of the Mobro 4000 trash barge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobro_4000

Point 5 ("5. More And More Trash Piling Up Until The Whole World Is Just A Giant Mountain Of Trash"): https://web.archive.org/web/20190102054648/https://slatestar...

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#82

Post by userbinator »

BelleOfTheBall wrote: post #12

There was a similar thread for Germany here recently, and I remember someone saying that most companies will just start using multi-use plastics instead of single-use ones... without reusing them. Is that really likely or am I not foolish to hope that companies will eventually just research and use more biodegradable materials?

Plastic bags used to be sturdy enough to be multi-use, and I still have a collection of them that I reuse. I'm old enough that I remember when they were introduced, and how much better than paper they were, and definitely didn't think of them as disposable back then --- unlike paper ones.

I think the problem is ultimately the "disposable attitude" of most people, which drove the manufacturers to make them thinner and weaker until they're barely enough for a single use (and also for more profit, of course.) I see biodegradable in the same way as planned obolescence --- the manufacturers can both guarantee that people will keep consuming, while also exclaiming how environmentally friendly they are.

Perhaps most people just don't like reusing things?

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#83

Post by chrisseaton »

gruez wrote: post #63
aritraghosh007 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paper/jute bags and multi-use plastics have been in circulation for quite some time now.

>Paper/jute bags not sure about "jute bags" (whatever that is), but paper bags have worse climate impact than plastic bags. >and multi-use plastics have been in circulation for quite some time now. Those don't really work if they're used for packaging, because the rely on the end-user to reuse it. If they don't they probably have worse environmental impact.

It's what ropes are usually made of.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jute

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#85

Post by lopmotr »

catalogia wrote: post #81
lopmotr wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's a spell of idiotic faith that's somehow been cast over people. I've tried asking proponents of recycling about about this and the only answers I've managed to squeeze out of them are: 1) Landfills leach toxic chemicals into the water table. 2) Landfills are on scarce land which will run out oneday, making waste disposal more expensive. 3) It can be inconvenient to build over a landfill because you might hit…

> 2) Landfills are on scarce land which will run out oneday, making waste disposal more expensive. Case 2 is an interesting case, it's a startlingly widespread fear yet seems ridiculous when you think about it for more than a few seconds. Slate Star Codex concluded it's alarmism sparked in the 80s by the media's coverage of the Mobro 4000 trash barge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobro_4000 Point 5 ("5. More And Mor…

Which part of your point 5 link should I be looking at? Doesn't seem to be related.

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#86

Post by octorian »

I still find it hilarious how we were going all in on "Ban All The Single Use Plastics!" over the past year, then the pandemic hit, and everyone pretty much threw the whole idea out the window. Now reusable anything is seen as a disease vector, and banished.

Makes me wonder what'll happen when the pandemic situation finally winds down.

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#87

Post by wolco »

nikeee wrote: post #53
wolco wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ban single use paper and cotton? If you collected each you might have a penny a piece if you could recycle into something people want like homemade face masks.

Cigarette filters are the largest source of trash floating in the ocean and are usually not bio-degradable [1, 2]. They end up as micro plastics. Banning them instead of plastic straws can be seen as vastly more effetive [3]. Edit: It seems pretty useless as they essentially have no function (edit: to health), since the near-universal adoption of filters on cigarettes has not reduced harms to smokers and lung cancer…

"they have no function". They limit and control the amount of smoke. Provides a more consistant experience. I read your #4 source as proof. It talks about how cigarette companies tried coming up with a filter to reduce death but stopped because the filters were reducing the taste/experience. That doesn't tell us filters have no use. Include that link it tells us that in the 50s cigarette companies offered filterless and filtered versions. Customers preferred the filtered versions. You made the mistake of thinking the only purpose of filters is less death. Filters prevent tabacco from fall out, better taste, more consistant smoke, nevermind you need somewhere to hold the cigarette as it burns and without a filter you throwaway more tabacco.

#5 Most cigarettes butts are not brown at least in my megacity. White is more popular.

Cigarette butts can take upto 10 years to breakdown at the most.

https://uhs.berkeley.edu/tobaccofacts

Single use plastics take 1,000 years.

One will breakdown in your pets lifetime the other will take a millennia.

We need to ban single plastic use. And perhaps dig a little deeper before making assuming associations (if cigarettes are bad the filters must be destorying the earth / meanwhile the coffee lids you get every morning is really the problem)

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#88

Post by vimy »

mynegation wrote: post #62
Negitivefrags wrote: post #57

This movement is really dumb. Plastic pollution in the ocean is a problem, but it’s not the western countries causing it. There are 10 rivers that cause 90% of plastic pollution, and they are in Africa and Asia. Plastic in a landfill harms nobody. The worst part is that people somehow have this linked in thier mind with climate change, as in fixing plastic pollution is going to help with that. Well if anything, it’s…

It is not dumb. It is about setting an example. We cannot fix everything everywhere, but we can move the needle. Maybe a youth living near one of those 10 rivers, reading about Canada doing it, will become a member of parliament or a minister and will do something about it. Or not. Maybe here in Canada out of necessity we come up with smart solutions to replaces single use plastics that can be copied all over the wor…

Instead of setting an example we could just pay for waste management programs in Asia and Africa and be done with it. Would be cheaper, faster and more convenient than the current ban all plastics movement.

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#89

Post by multiplegeorges »

Negitivefrags wrote: post #57

This movement is really dumb. Plastic pollution in the ocean is a problem, but it’s not the western countries causing it. There are 10 rivers that cause 90% of plastic pollution, and they are in Africa and Asia. Plastic in a landfill harms nobody. The worst part is that people somehow have this linked in thier mind with climate change, as in fixing plastic pollution is going to help with that. Well if anything, it’s…

The first country/company to develop properly biodegradable plastics with similar properties to existing ones will be very rich.

But the market won't create that solution unless regulations create the problem to be solved: no more single-use non-biodegradable plastics.

Re: Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021

#90

Post by gruez »

mynegation wrote: post #62
Negitivefrags wrote: post #57

This movement is really dumb. Plastic pollution in the ocean is a problem, but it’s not the western countries causing it. There are 10 rivers that cause 90% of plastic pollution, and they are in Africa and Asia. Plastic in a landfill harms nobody. The worst part is that people somehow have this linked in thier mind with climate change, as in fixing plastic pollution is going to help with that. Well if anything, it’s…

It is not dumb. It is about setting an example. We cannot fix everything everywhere, but we can move the needle. Maybe a youth living near one of those 10 rivers, reading about Canada doing it, will become a member of parliament or a minister and will do something about it. Or not. Maybe here in Canada out of necessity we come up with smart solutions to replaces single use plastics that can be copied all over the wor…

>We cannot fix everything everywhere, but we can move the needle. Maybe a youth living near one of those 10 rivers, reading about Canada doing it, will become a member of parliament or a minister and will do something about it.

This kind of attitude only makes sense if it doesn't cost anything. Doubling our CO2 usage (assuming we switched to paper bags)[1], just so we can virtue signal to kids in third world countries is asinine.

[1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Post reply on HN