4 ms·

Glass bottles were reused then recycled for many decades. Why exactly are we using plastic? Plastic is not "cheaper" if the total cost of all externalities re

by bcrl 4y ago

Glass bottles were reused then recycled for many decades. Why exactly are we using plastic? Plastic is not "cheaper" if the total cost of all externalities resulting from its use are included. One of our local grocery store finally switched back to paper bags this past week. Paper bags used to be the default back in the 1980s.

im3w1l 4y ago
Glass is heavier and breaks into dangerous shards if you drop it. Paper bags get soggy and tear when it's raining. Plastic is used because it's better.
- bcrl 4y ago
  That's a pretty lame straw man argument as I'm pretty sure that virtually every human on the planet learns how to deal with broken glass at some point in their life. Dropping a full plastic gallon of milk on a childs toe will still break it. Should we ban gallon sized plastic jugs then, too?
ch4s3 4y ago
More CO2 is released moving that glass around than the whole lifecycle of the plastic by an order of magnitude. A glass bottle on average weighs 40x what a PET bottle of similar volume weighs.
- louhike 4y ago
  Yes, but isn't the likehood of a reusable bottle polluting our environment (ocean, etc.) lower?
  - ars 4y ago
    What matters more, CO2 or litter? And in any case there are way better way to solve that: A bottle return credit removes basically all bottle litter.
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    Littering is a totally solvable problem, and by no means existential. Climate change is clearly the bigger issue.
- bcrl 4y ago
  Maybe if you ignore the weight of contents of the liquid in the bottle. The pacific garbage patch isn't filled with glass bottles. It is, however, filled with plastic of all shapes, sizes and forms. Micro particles of plastic are impacting our health. Glass is pretty inert when it comes to health. Glass bottles don't need BPA and other additives. I'm not convinced that plastic bottles are truly better when all externalities are factored in.
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    > Maybe if you ignore the weight of contents of the liquid in the bottle. The liquid has the same weight regardless. The issue is the marginal increase in container mass. This isn't some conspiratorial point, green groups agree. > The pacific garbage patch isn't filled with glass bottles. It is, however, filled with plastic of all shapes, sizes and forms. It mostly isn't filled with drink containers either. The plurality is fishing gear, and the next categories by volume are crates and household containers. Besides, it's trivial to just crush and bury the plastic bottles in a landfill, still coming out ahead of glass on the CO2 front. > Glass bottles don't need BPA and other additives. Maybe not, but you're probably consuming sugar or alcohol out of them anyway, so I'm hardly getting worked up about BPA. > I'm not convinced that plastic bottles are truly better when all externalities are factored in. Shipping glass to be cleaned, then cleaning it, and shipping it again to be refilled spews a ton of CO2. It's obviously worse by miles if you care about climate change. The rest is classic gish gallop.

by bcrl 4y ago

im3w1l 4y ago

Glass is heavier and breaks into dangerous shards if you drop it. Paper bags get soggy and tear when it's raining. Plastic is used because it's better.

bcrl 4y ago
That's a pretty lame straw man argument as I'm pretty sure that virtually every human on the planet learns how to deal with broken glass at some point in their life. Dropping a full plastic gallon of milk on a childs toe will still break it. Should we ban gallon sized plastic jugs then, too?

ch4s3 4y ago

More CO2 is released moving that glass around than the whole lifecycle of the plastic by an order of magnitude. A glass bottle on average weighs 40x what a PET bottle of similar volume weighs.

louhike 4y ago
Yes, but isn't the likehood of a reusable bottle polluting our environment (ocean, etc.) lower?
- ars 4y ago
  What matters more, CO2 or litter? And in any case there are way better way to solve that: A bottle return credit removes basically all bottle litter.
- ch4s3 4y ago
  Littering is a totally solvable problem, and by no means existential. Climate change is clearly the bigger issue.
bcrl 4y ago
Maybe if you ignore the weight of contents of the liquid in the bottle. The pacific garbage patch isn't filled with glass bottles. It is, however, filled with plastic of all shapes, sizes and forms. Micro particles of plastic are impacting our health. Glass is pretty inert when it comes to health. Glass bottles don't need BPA and other additives. I'm not convinced that plastic bottles are truly better when all externalities are factored in.
- ch4s3 4y ago
  > Maybe if you ignore the weight of contents of the liquid in the bottle. The liquid has the same weight regardless. The issue is the marginal increase in container mass. This isn't some conspiratorial point, green groups agree. > The pacific garbage patch isn't filled with glass bottles. It is, however, filled with plastic of all shapes, sizes and forms. It mostly isn't filled with drink containers either. The plurality is fishing gear, and the next categories by volume are crates and household containers. Besides, it's trivial to just crush and bury the plastic bottles in a landfill, still coming out ahead of glass on the CO2 front. > Glass bottles don't need BPA and other additives. Maybe not, but you're probably consuming sugar or alcohol out of them anyway, so I'm hardly getting worked up about BPA. > I'm not convinced that plastic bottles are truly better when all externalities are factored in. Shipping glass to be cleaned, then cleaning it, and shipping it again to be refilled spews a ton of CO2. It's obviously worse by miles if you care about climate change. The rest is classic gish gallop.