5 ms·

I'm here for this. The less plastic garbage we pump out, the better. Why packaging is considered single use is beyond me. Edit: Even better if it can be optimi

I'm here for this. The less plastic garbage we pump out, the better. Why packaging is considered single use is beyond me. Edit: Even better if it can be optimized for shipping, but I know not everything packages into a cube shape easily.

thaumasiotes 7y ago
> Why packaging is considered single use is beyond me. Disease.
- uxp100 7y ago
  There was an interesting article (I think?), I read somewhere (maybe linked to from here?) about all the disease spread by ice cream sandwiches in the 1910s. Individually wrapped single use packaging really was a response to diseases killing many children.
  - bobbiechen 7y ago
    I did find this interesting article [1] that might fit your description. It gives some history around ice cream poisonings, Victor Vaughan, and the advancement of bacteriology: For instance, prior to the development of the ice cream cone, street vendors often served their ice cream in reusable glass dishes. Often made of thick glass to create the appearance that they contained more ice cream than they actually did, these “penny licks” were simply wiped out and reused rather than being washed.26 Later in the century the more hygienic “hokey-pokey”—an individual serving of ice cream wrapped in paper—became popular.27 Besides avoiding the unsanitary “penny lick,” the hokey-pokey also discouraged the notorious practice of refreezing unsold melted ice cream and serving it to unsuspecting customers. As melted ice cream provided an ideal environment for the reproduction of bacteria, this noxious product surely caused many food poisoning cases. [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/26305867 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26305867
- Pfhreak 7y ago
  In the modern era?
  - thaumasiotes 7y ago
    Yes, the diseases are still there. They always will be. We don't have such a big problem with them as we used to, because of responses like single-use packaging. Moving back to reusable food containers is the same basic impulse that tells people they should stop getting vaccines because, after all, nobody catches measles in the modern day.
    - jbay808 7y ago
      But now we have autoclaves =)
    - GuiA 7y ago
      I agree with your premise, but your conclusion overlooks the fact that we are much better at sterilizing things and understanding how diseases work now than we were a century ago.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - thaumasiotes 7y ago
        If that were true, there would probably be less of "why packaging is considered single use is beyond me" going around. Anyone who understands how diseases work will understand why you wouldn't want all your food to come in contact with the same single physical object. California tried to outlaw grocery bags provided by the store, instead encouraging you to bring your own bags from home. The morality having been established, it's now very important to my mother to live up to the environmental ideal and bring her own bags. She's been doing it for years. Those bags have never been washed. Also, she's a doctor.
        germinalphrase 7y ago
- romwell 7y ago
  >Disease. Well, surely it doesn't matter as much for non-perishable items? To say nothing of the non-food items.
newsoul2019 7y ago
We can absolutely get ride of single use packaging. This will come at a cost, which may include things like: Expending energy to wash dishes, expending energy to transport containers around to and from being washed, and disease/death when it all goes wrong.
chrisseaton 7y ago
> Why packaging is considered single use is beyond me. People used to get ice cream in reusable containers. It spread tuberculosis and cholera. People died. https://www.atlasobscura.com/foods/penny-lick-ice-cream https://www.atlasobscura.com/foods/penny-lick-ice-cream
- inflatableDodo 7y ago
  That was an emotional journey for such a short comment, thank you. One thought from the example of the penny lick. You could decide not to have reusable packaging because of that, or you could decide to have reusable packaging that is designed to be cleaned.
  - thaumasiotes 7y ago
    > You could decide not to have reusable packaging because of that, or you could decide to have reusable packaging that is designed to be cleaned. One of those alternatives is vastly inferior to the other. The ice cream dish has to be cleaned by someone you don't know, producing a result you can't observe. Glass bowls are designed to be cleaned. That was the original system.
    - inflatableDodo 7y ago
      According to the article posted, these were not. >After finishing their ice cream, customers handed back their well-licked penny lick, and the next customer ate from the same cup. Because of the conical openings, Jacks couldn’t keep the narrow point clean if they tried. Penny licks became the perfect vessel for transmitting disease. I suspect we might be able to improve on this, perhaps with some kind of new fangled sanitising machinery, more suited to this bright new modern age of steam. No, wait, I'm getting it wrong. Remind me, which century are we in again?
      - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
        We could invent some new fangled name like washing for this advanced new process you have in mind. I think this thread is in the 18th, but can't be sure. :)
Jill_the_Pill 7y ago
Don't the emissions from the home delivery and pickup offset any good done by re-using the containers?
- spronkey 7y ago
  If you think about it, the emissions already occur when trucks drive goods to the shops, then people drive to the shop then drive home.
  - Jill_the_Pill 7y ago
    I have thought about that, but when people shop, they pick up dozens of things at once. Having them delivered singly from different vendors seems like a lot more trips, plus the return-packaging trip.
- abyssin 7y ago
  This is the crucial part. If the transport depends essentially on petrol, why care about the plastic? Plastic comes from petrol and is first used as a container, then to produce heat when burning it. If single-use container helps improve the logistics, then I don't think it is the main issue. I remember reading about an explanation about the sub-packaging of biscuits. Consumers would complain that a pack of biscuits contained multiple packs of biscuits itself. But it all made sense when accounting for the fact that biscuits go stale, and producing them takes more energy than storing them in smaller packages inside the main package. This all assumes a correct treatment of plastic containers. But my point is that the main issue lies with logistics, that produces lots of CO2, rather than with containers.

thaumasiotes 7y ago

> Why packaging is considered single use is beyond me. Disease.

uxp100 7y ago
There was an interesting article (I think?), I read somewhere (maybe linked to from here?) about all the disease spread by ice cream sandwiches in the 1910s. Individually wrapped single use packaging really was a response to diseases killing many children.
- bobbiechen 7y ago
  I did find this interesting article [1] that might fit your description. It gives some history around ice cream poisonings, Victor Vaughan, and the advancement of bacteriology: For instance, prior to the development of the ice cream cone, street vendors often served their ice cream in reusable glass dishes. Often made of thick glass to create the appearance that they contained more ice cream than they actually did, these “penny licks” were simply wiped out and reused rather than being washed.26 Later in the century the more hygienic “hokey-pokey”—an individual serving of ice cream wrapped in paper—became popular.27 Besides avoiding the unsanitary “penny lick,” the hokey-pokey also discouraged the notorious practice of refreezing unsold melted ice cream and serving it to unsuspecting customers. As melted ice cream provided an ideal environment for the reproduction of bacteria, this noxious product surely caused many food poisoning cases. [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/26305867 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26305867
Pfhreak 7y ago
In the modern era?
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  Yes, the diseases are still there. They always will be. We don't have such a big problem with them as we used to, because of responses like single-use packaging. Moving back to reusable food containers is the same basic impulse that tells people they should stop getting vaccines because, after all, nobody catches measles in the modern day.
  - jbay808 7y ago
    But now we have autoclaves =)
  - GuiA 7y ago
    I agree with your premise, but your conclusion overlooks the fact that we are much better at sterilizing things and understanding how diseases work now than we were a century ago.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - thaumasiotes 7y ago
      If that were true, there would probably be less of "why packaging is considered single use is beyond me" going around. Anyone who understands how diseases work will understand why you wouldn't want all your food to come in contact with the same single physical object. California tried to outlaw grocery bags provided by the store, instead encouraging you to bring your own bags from home. The morality having been established, it's now very important to my mother to live up to the environmental ideal and bring her own bags. She's been doing it for years. Those bags have never been washed. Also, she's a doctor.
      - germinalphrase 7y ago
romwell 7y ago
>Disease. Well, surely it doesn't matter as much for non-perishable items? To say nothing of the non-food items.

newsoul2019 7y ago

We can absolutely get ride of single use packaging. This will come at a cost, which may include things like: Expending energy to wash dishes, expending energy to transport containers around to and from being washed, and disease/death when it all goes wrong.

chrisseaton 7y ago

> Why packaging is considered single use is beyond me. People used to get ice cream in reusable containers. It spread tuberculosis and cholera. People died. https://www.atlasobscura.com/foods/penny-lick-ice-cream https://www.atlasobscura.com/foods/penny-lick-ice-cream

inflatableDodo 7y ago
That was an emotional journey for such a short comment, thank you. One thought from the example of the penny lick. You could decide not to have reusable packaging because of that, or you could decide to have reusable packaging that is designed to be cleaned.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  > You could decide not to have reusable packaging because of that, or you could decide to have reusable packaging that is designed to be cleaned. One of those alternatives is vastly inferior to the other. The ice cream dish has to be cleaned by someone you don't know, producing a result you can't observe. Glass bowls are designed to be cleaned. That was the original system.
  - inflatableDodo 7y ago
    According to the article posted, these were not. >After finishing their ice cream, customers handed back their well-licked penny lick, and the next customer ate from the same cup. Because of the conical openings, Jacks couldn’t keep the narrow point clean if they tried. Penny licks became the perfect vessel for transmitting disease. I suspect we might be able to improve on this, perhaps with some kind of new fangled sanitising machinery, more suited to this bright new modern age of steam. No, wait, I'm getting it wrong. Remind me, which century are we in again?
    - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
      We could invent some new fangled name like washing for this advanced new process you have in mind. I think this thread is in the 18th, but can't be sure. :)

Jill_the_Pill 7y ago

Don't the emissions from the home delivery and pickup offset any good done by re-using the containers?

spronkey 7y ago
If you think about it, the emissions already occur when trucks drive goods to the shops, then people drive to the shop then drive home.
- Jill_the_Pill 7y ago
  I have thought about that, but when people shop, they pick up dozens of things at once. Having them delivered singly from different vendors seems like a lot more trips, plus the return-packaging trip.
abyssin 7y ago
This is the crucial part. If the transport depends essentially on petrol, why care about the plastic? Plastic comes from petrol and is first used as a container, then to produce heat when burning it. If single-use container helps improve the logistics, then I don't think it is the main issue. I remember reading about an explanation about the sub-packaging of biscuits. Consumers would complain that a pack of biscuits contained multiple packs of biscuits itself. But it all made sense when accounting for the fact that biscuits go stale, and producing them takes more energy than storing them in smaller packages inside the main package. This all assumes a correct treatment of plastic containers. But my point is that the main issue lies with logistics, that produces lots of CO2, rather than with containers.