3 ms·

If I'm going to be downvoted... some kind of counterpoint or explanation would help progress the discussion, and avoid my making similar errors in the future.

by new299 9y ago

nkrisc 9y ago
I wasn't one who downvoted you but it might be because it sounds as if you're suggesting that there's something wrong with taking an easy and less impactful action when there are more impactful, but much harder actions. One does not preclude the other. Yes, targeting plastic shopping bags is easy, and yes the packaging the items come in is probably worse, but why not take the easy action anyway? What's your point?
- new299 9y ago
  Ah, if that's the case I guess I didn't make my point clearly. Absolutely, it's fine and I personally feel, a great idea to use reusable bags (and water bottles). The difficulty comes if people apply social pressure and say "why are you still using non-reusable bags that you are lazy and apathetic, and it's a sign of societies mental decline" (those are rephrased statements used elsewhere in this discussion). Because there can be good reasons for using a non-reusable bags (or water bottles) in certain situations, and there are likely value judgments you make that have equal (or greater) environmental impact which have similar utility.
jstewartmobile 9y ago
I didn't downvote you. I just thought you were being pedantic. It's not like you need a peer-reviewed study to establish that we're wasting gas and plastic on something people did just fine without a couple generations ago.
- new299 9y ago
  I'd need a peer reviewed study yes. To understand it in the context of all the other things we waste gas and plastic on. A single plane flight uses more energy than all the bottles of water I'm likely to consume in a lifetime (many times more). So.. it seems odd to me to single out bottled water and say those people are the sign of "mental decline" and "lazy and apathetic" (as other commenters have suggested). And what's surprising is that it feels like people are saying: "those are they bad guys... the guys buying bottled water... buying multiple other items with equal or more packaging on a daily basis and buying smartphones, and PCs, and taking international flights, that's fine that's "justifiable"". In my mind, if bottled water is "lazy and apathetic" and a sign of "mental decline". It's not clear that all those other things aren't too.
  - jstewartmobile 9y ago
    We're really arguing value systems here, so I don't see what a study is going to bring to the table. That, and it's not just a matter of energy. What about the litter? What about BPS/BPA leaching? What about the neglect of public systems because everyone with a little extra cash just says "not my problem" and buys a case of Nestle every week?
    - new299 9y ago
      > We're really arguing value systems here, so I don't see what a study is going to bring to the table. As far as I can tell, mostly we're arguing at cross purposes. I'm arguing that saying people who buy a single bottle of water maybe 5 times a year are "lazy and apathetic" and a "sign of mental decline" is an unreasonable and inconsistent view. This is given the other choices that most people make on a daily basis (including say, buying a phone, using electricity etc. etc.). You're arguing... something to do with people who buy large quantities of bottled water? This is a point I'm not even disputing... > That, and it's not just a matter of energy. What about the litter? What about BPS/BPA leaching? What about the neglect of public systems because everyone with a little extra cash just says "not my problem" and buys a case of Nestle every week? People who buy a case of Nestle every week are a separate issue, and not what I was discussing at all (please see the thread I'm responding to). It may be possible to make a reasonable case for dissuading people from purchasing bottled water in large quantities (you might try and do that through social pressure/marketing, or taxation or some other method).

If I'm going to be downvoted... some kind of counterpoint or explanation would help progress the discussion, and avoid my making similar errors in the future.

by new299 9y ago

If I'm going to be downvoted... some kind of counterpoint or explanation would help progress the discussion, and avoid my making similar errors in the future.

nkrisc 9y ago

I wasn't one who downvoted you but it might be because it sounds as if you're suggesting that there's something wrong with taking an easy and less impactful action when there are more impactful, but much harder actions. One does not preclude the other. Yes, targeting plastic shopping bags is easy, and yes the packaging the items come in is probably worse, but why not take the easy action anyway? What's your point?

new299 9y ago
Ah, if that's the case I guess I didn't make my point clearly. Absolutely, it's fine and I personally feel, a great idea to use reusable bags (and water bottles). The difficulty comes if people apply social pressure and say "why are you still using non-reusable bags that you are lazy and apathetic, and it's a sign of societies mental decline" (those are rephrased statements used elsewhere in this discussion). Because there can be good reasons for using a non-reusable bags (or water bottles) in certain situations, and there are likely value judgments you make that have equal (or greater) environmental impact which have similar utility.

jstewartmobile 9y ago

I didn't downvote you. I just thought you were being pedantic. It's not like you need a peer-reviewed study to establish that we're wasting gas and plastic on something people did just fine without a couple generations ago.

new299 9y ago
I'd need a peer reviewed study yes. To understand it in the context of all the other things we waste gas and plastic on. A single plane flight uses more energy than all the bottles of water I'm likely to consume in a lifetime (many times more). So.. it seems odd to me to single out bottled water and say those people are the sign of "mental decline" and "lazy and apathetic" (as other commenters have suggested). And what's surprising is that it feels like people are saying: "those are they bad guys... the guys buying bottled water... buying multiple other items with equal or more packaging on a daily basis and buying smartphones, and PCs, and taking international flights, that's fine that's "justifiable"". In my mind, if bottled water is "lazy and apathetic" and a sign of "mental decline". It's not clear that all those other things aren't too.
- jstewartmobile 9y ago
  We're really arguing value systems here, so I don't see what a study is going to bring to the table. That, and it's not just a matter of energy. What about the litter? What about BPS/BPA leaching? What about the neglect of public systems because everyone with a little extra cash just says "not my problem" and buys a case of Nestle every week?
  - new299 9y ago
    > We're really arguing value systems here, so I don't see what a study is going to bring to the table. As far as I can tell, mostly we're arguing at cross purposes. I'm arguing that saying people who buy a single bottle of water maybe 5 times a year are "lazy and apathetic" and a "sign of mental decline" is an unreasonable and inconsistent view. This is given the other choices that most people make on a daily basis (including say, buying a phone, using electricity etc. etc.). You're arguing... something to do with people who buy large quantities of bottled water? This is a point I'm not even disputing... > That, and it's not just a matter of energy. What about the litter? What about BPS/BPA leaching? What about the neglect of public systems because everyone with a little extra cash just says "not my problem" and buys a case of Nestle every week? People who buy a case of Nestle every week are a separate issue, and not what I was discussing at all (please see the thread I'm responding to). It may be possible to make a reasonable case for dissuading people from purchasing bottled water in large quantities (you might try and do that through social pressure/marketing, or taxation or some other method).