4 ms·

I've long maintained that plastics recycling is worse than useless -- washing all of that plastic takes loads of water, and there just aren't many uses for recy

I've long maintained that plastics recycling is worse than useless -- washing all of that plastic takes loads of water, and there just aren't many uses for recycled plastic. Consider the plastics around you. How many objects are virgin plastic? How many are recycled? There's not some secret destination for recycled plastics. Clearly it's being dumped or burned, and it has been for a long time. Now we're doing it in the U.S. again, it's much harder to pretend that's not its fate.

CydeWeys 8y ago
If the plastic is burned in a really high quality incinerator, with a great scrubber stack, it at least isn't putting out lots of pollutants, and can generate power to boot. This might be a better fate than having them end up in a landfill, though of course they are releasing CO2 when you burn them (though I don't know if that's significant at all compared to global CO2 released in manufacturing and transport).
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  About the same CO2 impact as manufacturing them. The problem is burning it clean. To do that you have to run a very hot furnace, near gasification temperatures. Otherwise, you will be releasing cracked chlorine, sulphate, partial urethane chains and other hydrocarbons into air. They're invisible but noxious and sometimes stinky. Electroscrubbers have limitations and high energy cost too.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wang_li 8y ago
  >This might be a better fate than having them end up in a landfill... If you're not recycling them, why is burning them better than putting them into a landfill? Is it the fact that plastics don't biodegrade and will last in the ground for thousands of years? Isn't that good? Aren't we trying to find carbon sequestration techniques?
sixstringtheory 8y ago
We need more public education on the Reduce and Reuse portions of the 3 Rs that only have Recycle as a last resort. We’re getting further away from those in the name of convenience, with things like meal delivery like Blue Apron. Start small: dont use those bags for produce, bring reusable containers to eat out for bringing home leftovers, use a reusable water bottle, buy as much in bulk as you can (with reusable containers).
- throwawaytoday5 8y ago
  Why should the onus be on the consumer when the reality is that there are massive corporations that aren't paying the external costs they are inflicting on our environment? Even if I never consumed another piece of plastic in my life, a single cargo truck destined to Walmart will contain more plastics effectively ruining what I can do. It would be smarter to actually have politicians who want to regulate and fine companies these corporations that are destroying out planet than trying to blame people who aren't the real problems.
  - sixstringtheory 8y ago
    Agree wholeheartedly that regulation must come into play. But ultimately people have to ask for the regulation and vote accordingly. Bit of a chicken and egg problem. I grapple with the fact that my efforts aren’t even a drop in the bucket, but raising awareness does help to get others doing the same.
  - wang_li 8y ago
    >Why should the onus be on the consumer when the reality is that there are massive corporations that aren't paying the external costs they are inflicting on our environment? There are zero companies that create and distribute products for the simple enjoyment of doing so. If consumers didn't buy these products in their packaging, the manufacturers would not produce them. >people who aren't the real problems. People are the real problem. What's more is that it's poor, stupid people who are disproportionately the problem. But it's out of fashion to criticize poor people as they are, supposedly, victims of circumstances and not to be thought as functioning humans who are capable of making choices.

CydeWeys 8y ago

If the plastic is burned in a really high quality incinerator, with a great scrubber stack, it at least isn't putting out lots of pollutants, and can generate power to boot. This might be a better fate than having them end up in a landfill, though of course they are releasing CO2 when you burn them (though I don't know if that's significant at all compared to global CO2 released in manufacturing and transport).

AstralStorm 8y ago
About the same CO2 impact as manufacturing them. The problem is burning it clean. To do that you have to run a very hot furnace, near gasification temperatures. Otherwise, you will be releasing cracked chlorine, sulphate, partial urethane chains and other hydrocarbons into air. They're invisible but noxious and sometimes stinky. Electroscrubbers have limitations and high energy cost too.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wang_li 8y ago
>This might be a better fate than having them end up in a landfill... If you're not recycling them, why is burning them better than putting them into a landfill? Is it the fact that plastics don't biodegrade and will last in the ground for thousands of years? Isn't that good? Aren't we trying to find carbon sequestration techniques?

sixstringtheory 8y ago

We need more public education on the Reduce and Reuse portions of the 3 Rs that only have Recycle as a last resort. We’re getting further away from those in the name of convenience, with things like meal delivery like Blue Apron. Start small: dont use those bags for produce, bring reusable containers to eat out for bringing home leftovers, use a reusable water bottle, buy as much in bulk as you can (with reusable containers).

throwawaytoday5 8y ago
Why should the onus be on the consumer when the reality is that there are massive corporations that aren't paying the external costs they are inflicting on our environment? Even if I never consumed another piece of plastic in my life, a single cargo truck destined to Walmart will contain more plastics effectively ruining what I can do. It would be smarter to actually have politicians who want to regulate and fine companies these corporations that are destroying out planet than trying to blame people who aren't the real problems.
- sixstringtheory 8y ago
  Agree wholeheartedly that regulation must come into play. But ultimately people have to ask for the regulation and vote accordingly. Bit of a chicken and egg problem. I grapple with the fact that my efforts aren’t even a drop in the bucket, but raising awareness does help to get others doing the same.
- wang_li 8y ago
  >Why should the onus be on the consumer when the reality is that there are massive corporations that aren't paying the external costs they are inflicting on our environment? There are zero companies that create and distribute products for the simple enjoyment of doing so. If consumers didn't buy these products in their packaging, the manufacturers would not produce them. >people who aren't the real problems. People are the real problem. What's more is that it's poor, stupid people who are disproportionately the problem. But it's out of fashion to criticize poor people as they are, supposedly, victims of circumstances and not to be thought as functioning humans who are capable of making choices.