3 ms·

I moved into a building that has composting. I've come to believe that recycling was a terrible place to begin environmental efforts, that we should have start

by dade_ 7y ago

I moved into a building that has composting. I've come to believe that recycling was a terrible place to begin environmental efforts, that we should have started with composting programs in the 1st place. Instead of trying to recycle plastic bags and containers, just make bags and containers compostable when practical. Focus on glass and plastic containers should be on reuse and aluminum doesn't seem to be a problem. Reduce, Reuse, compost, then recycle.

KingMachiavelli 7y ago
That is the correct order of the R's but there is no incentive to do that in the US and sometimes there even a perverse/reverse incentive in increase consumption and waste. Manufacturers make money buy selling products with pretty looking packaging. Waste management companies make money by picking up garbage and even more by picking up recycling. Recycling plants make money either through subsidies or by operating in regions were they can get the few profitable materials to resell such as aluminum. No one in the chain currently makes money through reduce and reuse.
barry-cotter 7y ago
The energy cost and usable life of plastic bags versus long life ones like jute or cotton are decisively in favour of plastic on an environmental basis. Long life plastic bags are better than single use are better than cotton/jute/hemp/linen. The problem with single use bags is litter which just disappears with nominal taxes. They’re ugly as hell but paper and cotton use much more energy and water to produce a usable bag. Glass and plastic containers reuse is a solved problem. Put a big deposit on containers and they’ll be reused.
- fyfy18 7y ago
  I was rather shocked reading this, so decided to look this up. It turns out paper bags are just as bad too: - Compared to a plastic bags their production releases 70% more air pollution, and 50x more water pollution. - To recycle paper bags takes 10x more energy than plastic bags. http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/publications/2011/environment/3611.pdf http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/pu... (Note that this is from 2011, so maybe the numbers have changed since then)
- dahart 7y ago
  > The energy cost ... This is a specious argument right from the start. Recycling isn’t about energy cost at all. Energy isn’t about to run out, we have solar, hydro and wind in the future. You can make backward facing arguments about coal use, if you want, but a strong argument would consider what’s already happening and what today’s trends imply for the future. > paper and cotton use much more energy and water Why worry about the two things we can renew, while ignoring plastic’s use of limited non-renewable petroleum, or the fact that plastic production produces carcinogenic pollution and poisonous byproducts? > Glass and plastic containers reuse is a solved problem. Put a big deposit on containers and they’ll be reused. So you mean it could be a solved problem, right? I’m in favor of requiring deposits! If only we actually did that everywhere instead of passing out free single use plastics...
  - barry-cotter 7y ago
    >> The energy cost ... > This is a specious argument right from the start. Recycling isn’t about energy cost at all. Energy isn’t about to run out, we have solar, hydro and wind in the future. You can make backward facing arguments about coal use, if you want, but a strong argument would consider what’s already happening and what today’s trends imply for the future. If we use plastic bags instead of paper or cotton ones we’ll use tens to hundreds of times more energy. Whether you think it’s backwards facing or not, in the present huge amounts of that energy comes from burning fossil fuels and the energy that doesn’t come from fossil fuels needs resources to be produced, it doesn’t appear ex nihilo. Solar requires minerals to be mined and hydro requires land be flooded and dams built. Everything requires resources, which costs are real, not fictitious, whether denominated in dollars or kilojoules. >> paper and cotton use much more energy and water >Why worry about the two things we can renew, while ignoring plastic’s use of limited non-renewable petroleum, or the fact that plastic production produces carcinogenic pollution and poisonous byproducts? Because energy isn’t free any more than the land for growing cotton or trees is, or water pumped from aquifers is. Paper and cotton production is also not without its own chemical waste and uses far, far more water than making plastic bags does. >> Glass and plastic containers reuse is a solved problem. Put a big deposit on containers and they’ll be reused. >So you mean it could be a solved problem, right? I’m in favor of requiring deposits! If only we actually did that everywhere instead of passing out free single use plastics... Yeah, if there was political will to do so it could be done in months not years. When things don’t happen because voters don’t want them that’s democracy.

by dade_ 7y ago

KingMachiavelli 7y ago

That is the correct order of the R's but there is no incentive to do that in the US and sometimes there even a perverse/reverse incentive in increase consumption and waste. Manufacturers make money buy selling products with pretty looking packaging. Waste management companies make money by picking up garbage and even more by picking up recycling. Recycling plants make money either through subsidies or by operating in regions were they can get the few profitable materials to resell such as aluminum. No one in the chain currently makes money through reduce and reuse.

barry-cotter 7y ago

The energy cost and usable life of plastic bags versus long life ones like jute or cotton are decisively in favour of plastic on an environmental basis. Long life plastic bags are better than single use are better than cotton/jute/hemp/linen. The problem with single use bags is litter which just disappears with nominal taxes. They’re ugly as hell but paper and cotton use much more energy and water to produce a usable bag. Glass and plastic containers reuse is a solved problem. Put a big deposit on containers and they’ll be reused.

fyfy18 7y ago
I was rather shocked reading this, so decided to look this up. It turns out paper bags are just as bad too: - Compared to a plastic bags their production releases 70% more air pollution, and 50x more water pollution. - To recycle paper bags takes 10x more energy than plastic bags. http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/publications/2011/environment/3611.pdf http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/pu... (Note that this is from 2011, so maybe the numbers have changed since then)
dahart 7y ago
> The energy cost ... This is a specious argument right from the start. Recycling isn’t about energy cost at all. Energy isn’t about to run out, we have solar, hydro and wind in the future. You can make backward facing arguments about coal use, if you want, but a strong argument would consider what’s already happening and what today’s trends imply for the future. > paper and cotton use much more energy and water Why worry about the two things we can renew, while ignoring plastic’s use of limited non-renewable petroleum, or the fact that plastic production produces carcinogenic pollution and poisonous byproducts? > Glass and plastic containers reuse is a solved problem. Put a big deposit on containers and they’ll be reused. So you mean it could be a solved problem, right? I’m in favor of requiring deposits! If only we actually did that everywhere instead of passing out free single use plastics...
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  >> The energy cost ... > This is a specious argument right from the start. Recycling isn’t about energy cost at all. Energy isn’t about to run out, we have solar, hydro and wind in the future. You can make backward facing arguments about coal use, if you want, but a strong argument would consider what’s already happening and what today’s trends imply for the future. If we use plastic bags instead of paper or cotton ones we’ll use tens to hundreds of times more energy. Whether you think it’s backwards facing or not, in the present huge amounts of that energy comes from burning fossil fuels and the energy that doesn’t come from fossil fuels needs resources to be produced, it doesn’t appear ex nihilo. Solar requires minerals to be mined and hydro requires land be flooded and dams built. Everything requires resources, which costs are real, not fictitious, whether denominated in dollars or kilojoules. >> paper and cotton use much more energy and water >Why worry about the two things we can renew, while ignoring plastic’s use of limited non-renewable petroleum, or the fact that plastic production produces carcinogenic pollution and poisonous byproducts? Because energy isn’t free any more than the land for growing cotton or trees is, or water pumped from aquifers is. Paper and cotton production is also not without its own chemical waste and uses far, far more water than making plastic bags does. >> Glass and plastic containers reuse is a solved problem. Put a big deposit on containers and they’ll be reused. >So you mean it could be a solved problem, right? I’m in favor of requiring deposits! If only we actually did that everywhere instead of passing out free single use plastics... Yeah, if there was political will to do so it could be done in months not years. When things don’t happen because voters don’t want them that’s democracy.