3 ms·

I don't really get this trash argument even though I hear it over and over. I throw away a higher volume of stuff in one or two average days than all the wall w

I don't really get this trash argument even though I hear it over and over. I throw away a higher volume of stuff in one or two average days than all the wall warts and phone cables I've ever owned probably add up to. I've been on smart phones since Blackberry, and I don't think all of the chargers and cables I've used over the two decades combined add up to a single trash can full. Interoperability sure.

Someone 4y ago
> I throw away a higher volume of stuff in one or two average days than all the wall warts and phone cables I've ever owned probably add up to. I would think ‘mass’ is a better metric to use than ‘volume’. Also, it’s not only the waste, but also the work needed to make it, and I would guess that’s a lot harder for electric chargers than for, say, the plastic bags that take up the bulk of the volume of trash. Also, “Others are worse” isn’t a strong argument. Some of the large contributors to trash may not be completely unavoidable (example: plastic packaging). Because of that, it’s not possible to significantly reduce the amount of waste by making a few cuts on the largest contributors of trash. You have to do it by making lots of small cuts. This is one of them, and also a relatively easy gain.
- mattmaroon 4y ago
  I would think volume is a better metric because landfills don't really much care about mass. If you wanted to save trash you'd probably go after packaging. Ban disposable water bottles (or something less drastic like taxing them extra) and there's 50 lifetimes of wall warts per person per annum. This just isn't really an enviromental problem. Or if it is, it's so far down the scale as to be pointless to prioritize over almost anything. It's really about competition.
  - majewsky 4y ago
    > I would think volume is a better metric because landfills don't really much care about mass. Most EU countries have actually outlawed landfills in favor of waste-to-energy systems. [1] Of course waste-to-energy only works for stuff like plastics, not for electronics which you'd rather want to disassemble carefully to recover the precious metals. > If you wanted to save trash you'd probably go after packaging. Which the EU does too. There is legislation underway (or possibly already passed) to outlaw many types of single-use plastic items. Everyone switching from plastic straws to paper straws may actually be another case of Brussels effect. > it's so far down the scale as to be pointless to prioritize over almost anything The thing is, from experience we know that these legislations take so long to enact and enforce that you cannot just start with the biggest items, wait for it to be done, and then move to the next biggest item. You need to tackle many possible avenues for waste reduction at once. [1] https://www.cewep.eu/landfill-taxes-and-restrictions/ https://www.cewep.eu/landfill-taxes-and-restrictions/

Someone 4y ago

> I throw away a higher volume of stuff in one or two average days than all the wall warts and phone cables I've ever owned probably add up to. I would think ‘mass’ is a better metric to use than ‘volume’. Also, it’s not only the waste, but also the work needed to make it, and I would guess that’s a lot harder for electric chargers than for, say, the plastic bags that take up the bulk of the volume of trash. Also, “Others are worse” isn’t a strong argument. Some of the large contributors to trash may not be completely unavoidable (example: plastic packaging). Because of that, it’s not possible to significantly reduce the amount of waste by making a few cuts on the largest contributors of trash. You have to do it by making lots of small cuts. This is one of them, and also a relatively easy gain.

mattmaroon 4y ago
I would think volume is a better metric because landfills don't really much care about mass. If you wanted to save trash you'd probably go after packaging. Ban disposable water bottles (or something less drastic like taxing them extra) and there's 50 lifetimes of wall warts per person per annum. This just isn't really an enviromental problem. Or if it is, it's so far down the scale as to be pointless to prioritize over almost anything. It's really about competition.
- majewsky 4y ago
  > I would think volume is a better metric because landfills don't really much care about mass. Most EU countries have actually outlawed landfills in favor of waste-to-energy systems. [1] Of course waste-to-energy only works for stuff like plastics, not for electronics which you'd rather want to disassemble carefully to recover the precious metals. > If you wanted to save trash you'd probably go after packaging. Which the EU does too. There is legislation underway (or possibly already passed) to outlaw many types of single-use plastic items. Everyone switching from plastic straws to paper straws may actually be another case of Brussels effect. > it's so far down the scale as to be pointless to prioritize over almost anything The thing is, from experience we know that these legislations take so long to enact and enforce that you cannot just start with the biggest items, wait for it to be done, and then move to the next biggest item. You need to tackle many possible avenues for waste reduction at once. [1] https://www.cewep.eu/landfill-taxes-and-restrictions/ https://www.cewep.eu/landfill-taxes-and-restrictions/