3 ms·

ahm, so, how exactly was ex-USSR ecologically worse than western countries, that were already producing en masse all sorts of single time use plastic unnecessar

by skff 4y ago

ahm, so, how exactly was ex-USSR ecologically worse than western countries, that were already producing en masse all sorts of single time use plastic unnecessary products, solely for the purpose of economic growth? Single time coca-cola bottles, plastic wrapping etc were not found in USSR. Yes, certain energy sectors were inefficient, and burning a lot of energy in vain, but still it seems to me that it was way less environmentally impactful than consumer society in the west. But that's just my personal armature opinion.

mantas 4y ago
It was not „inefficiency“. It was environmental disasters left & right without nobody responsible. Single-use plastics is peanuts compared to just dumping chemicals and bio waste left and right. For example, there is a lake in my hometown. Next to it, there was a carpets factory. Do you know how you could know what color they'd use that day? Just go swim in the lake in the evening :) The factory didn't care. Upper tier of the party doesn't care if some workers' town lake is messed up. There's neither resources nor incentive to take care of it. If you'd go to local party office or KGB, they'd laugh you off and go party with the factory management :) Oh, and you probably work in the same factory. Or local school/shop/water, which is run by the same single party as the factory. As a citizen, do you want to vote with your wallet and not buy carpet made in such way? Tough luck, that's the only carpet factory you get it from :) State farm in the outskirts of town was run in same way. Just drop fertilizer in a water ditch and call it a day. Who cares how much you produce and that local ecological system is messed up? Meanwhile tractor driver can steal diesel planned for fertilising the fields and sell it in black market :) It's not a random town with tough luck. This was modus operandi throughout USSR. If you want bigger scale stories, look up lake Karachay and Majak nuclear accident(s) :) Same line if thinking, just worse consequences.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  Fertilizer in water is a problem to this day in capitalist USA. And every attempt to limit it is attacked, ironically, as communism. https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-agriculture https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-... The EPA itself was started by a right-wing president because rivers were catching fire due to pollutants. In China, a nominally communist party is working to shift from coal because air pollution was a threat to their continued rule. Politics is definately important to climate change, but not the team sports level politics that many indulge in.
  - mantas 4y ago
    Not fertilizer in water. But literalyl piles of fertilizer in water ditches. No farmer in market economy would do that, because fertilizer is damn expensive. China is turning away from coal mostly because they don't want to be dependent on Australia and other sources of coal.
    - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
      > No farmer in market economy would do that, because fertilizer is damn expensive. Farmers in market economies literally do this, when the costs are externalities to them, it's the same thing being done for the same reason. With the right incentives, they'll do something else.
      - mantas 4y ago
        How would you structure incentives in market economy to incentivise discarding fertiliser in ditches? In worst case, you'd be better off selling it in black market.
AlgorithmicTime 4y ago

by skff 4y ago

mantas 4y ago

It was not „inefficiency“. It was environmental disasters left & right without nobody responsible. Single-use plastics is peanuts compared to just dumping chemicals and bio waste left and right. For example, there is a lake in my hometown. Next to it, there was a carpets factory. Do you know how you could know what color they'd use that day? Just go swim in the lake in the evening :) The factory didn't care. Upper tier of the party doesn't care if some workers' town lake is messed up. There's neither resources nor incentive to take care of it. If you'd go to local party office or KGB, they'd laugh you off and go party with the factory management :) Oh, and you probably work in the same factory. Or local school/shop/water, which is run by the same single party as the factory. As a citizen, do you want to vote with your wallet and not buy carpet made in such way? Tough luck, that's the only carpet factory you get it from :) State farm in the outskirts of town was run in same way. Just drop fertilizer in a water ditch and call it a day. Who cares how much you produce and that local ecological system is messed up? Meanwhile tractor driver can steal diesel planned for fertilising the fields and sell it in black market :) It's not a random town with tough luck. This was modus operandi throughout USSR. If you want bigger scale stories, look up lake Karachay and Majak nuclear accident(s) :) Same line if thinking, just worse consequences.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Fertilizer in water is a problem to this day in capitalist USA. And every attempt to limit it is attacked, ironically, as communism. https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-agriculture https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-... The EPA itself was started by a right-wing president because rivers were catching fire due to pollutants. In China, a nominally communist party is working to shift from coal because air pollution was a threat to their continued rule. Politics is definately important to climate change, but not the team sports level politics that many indulge in.
- mantas 4y ago
  Not fertilizer in water. But literalyl piles of fertilizer in water ditches. No farmer in market economy would do that, because fertilizer is damn expensive. China is turning away from coal mostly because they don't want to be dependent on Australia and other sources of coal.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    > No farmer in market economy would do that, because fertilizer is damn expensive. Farmers in market economies literally do this, when the costs are externalities to them, it's the same thing being done for the same reason. With the right incentives, they'll do something else.
    - mantas 4y ago
      How would you structure incentives in market economy to incentivise discarding fertiliser in ditches? In worst case, you'd be better off selling it in black market.

AlgorithmicTime 4y ago