3 ms·

I think the core problem is that there's a whole raft of things that get bucketed under "environmentally friendly" - for example: - CO2 - Lifespan of materials

I think the core problem is that there's a whole raft of things that get bucketed under "environmentally friendly" - for example: - CO2 - Lifespan of materials - Ecological impact of material extraction/creation - Ecological impact of the materials themselves - Energy cost of transport/etc. In this case, plastic is concerning because of the lifespan of the materials and the ecological impact of the materials - it may be energetically cheaper to produce & transport a plastic bag as opposed to a paper bag, but presumably the paper bag degrades faster and with fewer side effects.

Ma8ee 5y ago
Plastic that is recycled or even incinerated to produce energy is often better than the alternatives. There are many environmental problems much bigger than plastic that ends up in landfills. I always thought that the problems with straws in particular was that a disproportionate amount ended up in the oceans. But even then I still suspect that it just was a way to distract people who care from the real problem of climate change so that the oil companies can make more money a bit longer. Edit: no, I didn't read the article before I commented. I did now. I live in Sweden and put all our plastics in the recycle bin (one specifically for plastics). They are building better and bigger sorting and recycling facilities for plastic, but I think about 80% still is incinerated. Which of course releases greenhouse gases. But the plastic we throw away in a week corresponds to less CO2 than one trip back and fourth to work for my wife in our Prius.