4 ms·
They lied about the recycling potential to encourage widespread adoption of plastics. I don’t think consumers are blameless, but you can’t get everyone in the w
by jolux 6y ago
They lied about the recycling potential to encourage widespread adoption of plastics. I don’t think consumers are blameless, but you can’t get everyone in the world to change their purchasing behavior without regulation, which is necessary when lower prices are subsidized by huge externalities that have negative consequences for the world at large.
- jariel 6y ago"They lied about the recycling potential to encourage widespread adoption of plastics." ? Plastics are an absolutely incredible technology, to the point of revolutionary. They are used absolutely everywhere, in everything. Nobody needed to be convinced of the utility of plastics, it's one of the most utilitarian things ever created.
- josho 6y agoSo, they lied when they didn't even need to. Doesn't that make the lie that much worse?
- jariel 6y agoThey marketed their industry, just as every industry does.
- jolux 6y agoThey promoted something they understood to be a fiction because they knew it would offset reasonable concerns about their product. If you think that’s the core of marketing then we have very different ideas about what good marketing is.
- knappe 6y agoGive this episode of planet money a listen: https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/912150085/waste-land https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/912150085/waste-land It discusses extensively the knowledge the petro chemical lobby knew about the ability to recycle plastic and how little could really be recycled.
- gruez 6y ago>huge externalities that have negative consequences for the world at large. What are these negative consequences? The only ones I can think of are related to improper disposal (eg. littering), and would be present regardless of whether the material was recyclable or not. ie. if we replaced all the non-recyclable plastic bottles with 100% recyclable aluminum cans, the littering problem would still be there.
- ngokevin 6y agoAn idea is to get the companies to internalize these costs through a carbon tax which can be invested into climate change action (which is another story). At the moment, the consequence is that companies have zero incentive to act for the planet, so they will continue their behaviors. Perhaps they pass some of these costs down to consumers which makes them less likely to purchase (and then litter) non-biodegradables. Or they can provide a cheaper good to avoid a carbon tax which encourages consumer to buy that alternative.
- afarrell 6y agoIf the plastic is sequestered in a landfill, then what is the carbon externality? Does decomposing plastic emit methane?
- cmrdporcupine 6y agoI think it's important to at least partially separate the issues of climate change from plastic pollution. For some reason these two have become entwined together in the public mind. We need to get a handle on plastic pollution, and yes, it's a product of the petrochemical industry so there is that, but it's not the same type or scale of problem as the emergency around tailpipe / smokestack CO2 or methane emissions.
- thescriptkiddie 6y agoForget recyclable aluminum cans, use refillable glass bottles with a meaningful deposit ($0.25 or more).
- 6y ago