3 ms·

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, in that order is what you should aim for. It still takes a lot of energy to recycle something and much less to reuse it as is or not use

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, in that order is what you should aim for. It still takes a lot of energy to recycle something and much less to reuse it as is or not use it in the first place

xienze 9y ago
Again, this assumes that shipping an empty container however many miles uses less energy. BA has three, count 'em, three distribution centers for the entire country. If I live in Florida, what do you think has a lower carbon footprint? Recycling my BA waste, or shipping it to New Jersey?
rtkwe 9y ago
That aphorism is true in general but reuse might still fall short here and it's most true when you're dealing with the recipient reusing the item themselves not shipping it back to be reused. To get the it back to Amazon or whatever meal service sent the boxes will require a second trip by your house to pick up the used items, the entire trip back to the warehouse where the food boxes are packed (which is probably not local unless Amazon gets into this in a big way, and smaller companies can't afford the huge build out of local packing and distribution when there's so little customer lock in), then finally the energy to fully wash and sanitize them before shipping out again.
- pera 9y ago
  In one single trip you can take an old container and deliver a new one with food. Also, Amazon owns Whole Foods, so I don't see why the warehouse couldn't be local. Finally, recycling plastic and glass usually requires washing the material.
  - rtkwe 9y ago
    Washing for recycling doesn't have to be nearly as thorough or sanitary as washing for reuse though. And yeah that might work for Amazon but no one else has the infrastructure to do local delivery like that. Even with whole foods local they'll still probably need to expand staff or food prep areas to make it work.

3 ms·

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, in that order is what you should aim for. It still takes a lot of energy to recycle something and much less to reuse it as is or not use

by oakesm9 9y ago

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, in that order is what you should aim for. It still takes a lot of energy to recycle something and much less to reuse it as is or not use it in the first place

xienze 9y ago
Again, this assumes that shipping an empty container however many miles uses less energy. BA has three, count 'em, three distribution centers for the entire country. If I live in Florida, what do you think has a lower carbon footprint? Recycling my BA waste, or shipping it to New Jersey?
rtkwe 9y ago
That aphorism is true in general but reuse might still fall short here and it's most true when you're dealing with the recipient reusing the item themselves not shipping it back to be reused. To get the it back to Amazon or whatever meal service sent the boxes will require a second trip by your house to pick up the used items, the entire trip back to the warehouse where the food boxes are packed (which is probably not local unless Amazon gets into this in a big way, and smaller companies can't afford the huge build out of local packing and distribution when there's so little customer lock in), then finally the energy to fully wash and sanitize them before shipping out again.
- pera 9y ago
  In one single trip you can take an old container and deliver a new one with food. Also, Amazon owns Whole Foods, so I don't see why the warehouse couldn't be local. Finally, recycling plastic and glass usually requires washing the material.
  - rtkwe 9y ago
    Washing for recycling doesn't have to be nearly as thorough or sanitary as washing for reuse though. And yeah that might work for Amazon but no one else has the infrastructure to do local delivery like that. Even with whole foods local they'll still probably need to expand staff or food prep areas to make it work.