4 ms·

If this chart is accurate, it seems like there are bigger problems than plastic. It's bad, but I'm guessing a lot of people don't even see some of their bigges

If this chart is accurate, it seems like there are bigger problems than plastic. It's bad, but I'm guessing a lot of people don't even see some of their biggest resource intensive purchases as an issue, while feeling guilty or criticizing stuff that isn't as bad as they think. Disposable stuff in general is a big issue, but lots of natural fiber clothes get landfilled too without much thought. https://www.eupedia.com/ecology/carbon_footprint_consumer_products.shtml https://www.eupedia.com/ecology/carbon_footprint_consumer_pr...

bryanlarsen 4y ago
Plastic is a great carbon sink, and could be quite carbon negative if it is used as feedstock for carbon capture (either bio-capture or artificial). Micropollution is why plastic gets such a bad rap.
- netsharc 4y ago
  Genuine Question: how is it a carbon sink, if we left the crude oil in the ground instead of turning it into plastic, wouldn't that be better for our carbon budget?
  - speleding 4y ago
    It would only be better for our carbon budget if the thing you were previously making out of plastic has a substitute with a better carbon footprint. (And you can make plastic out of other things than crude oil)
- _Algernon_ 4y ago
  Plastic is made from oil, so at best it could be carbon neutral (assuming all energy used to process and recycle it is carbon neutral).
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    Plastic can be made from bio-oil or from synthesized hydro carbons.
    - _Algernon_ 4y ago
      Not in this economy
      - bryanlarsen 4y ago
        In an optimal economy it would be. Climate change will cause many tens of trillions of dollars in damages and/or mitigations. Halting climate change would cost < $10T. A world that was spending $10T to stop climate change would be incentivizing carbon capture, among many other things. It would also disincentivize oil production. If you were paid substantial money to store atmospheric carbon and oil was really expensive, then turning atmospheric carbon into stable plastic could be highly profitable.
- immibis 4y ago
  You mean, if captured carbon is used to make plastic? That's the only way I can make this make sense.

bryanlarsen 4y ago

Plastic is a great carbon sink, and could be quite carbon negative if it is used as feedstock for carbon capture (either bio-capture or artificial). Micropollution is why plastic gets such a bad rap.

netsharc 4y ago
Genuine Question: how is it a carbon sink, if we left the crude oil in the ground instead of turning it into plastic, wouldn't that be better for our carbon budget?
- speleding 4y ago
  It would only be better for our carbon budget if the thing you were previously making out of plastic has a substitute with a better carbon footprint. (And you can make plastic out of other things than crude oil)
_Algernon_ 4y ago
Plastic is made from oil, so at best it could be carbon neutral (assuming all energy used to process and recycle it is carbon neutral).
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  Plastic can be made from bio-oil or from synthesized hydro carbons.
  - _Algernon_ 4y ago
    Not in this economy
    - bryanlarsen 4y ago
      In an optimal economy it would be. Climate change will cause many tens of trillions of dollars in damages and/or mitigations. Halting climate change would cost < $10T. A world that was spending $10T to stop climate change would be incentivizing carbon capture, among many other things. It would also disincentivize oil production. If you were paid substantial money to store atmospheric carbon and oil was really expensive, then turning atmospheric carbon into stable plastic could be highly profitable.
immibis 4y ago
You mean, if captured carbon is used to make plastic? That's the only way I can make this make sense.