3 ms·

Fishing nets are 30%+ of waste. Switching to glass solves the problem instantly. It puts pressure on the companies and not the public. Tourists in Croatia do n

Fishing nets are 30%+ of waste. Switching to glass solves the problem instantly. It puts pressure on the companies and not the public. Tourists in Croatia do not bother collecting the 7 cent tax on plastic containers. Having a different bottle cap won’t improve that. A small percentage of collected plastic waste is recycled. All of the infrastructure that will never be built requires public funding and is more expensive than just switching to glass. Do we want to solve the marine waste problem or do we just want to spend money every year to try to avoid it? The paper straws with forever chemicals is a side effect of this single use plastic directive. How was this not predicted?

jsnell 3y ago
Yes, fishing gear is a major contributor to marine plastic litter. It's not a coincidence that this directive then tackled that as well, not just bottle caps like you originally claimed. But obviously the solutions for fishing gear are very different than the solutions for plastic bottles. The tethered bottle cap is not supposed to solve the problem of making people recycle the bottles, other parts of the directive do that. It solves the problem of the bottle being separated from the cap, such that if the bottle gets recycled so does that cap. Or if the bottle gets thrown in the trash, so does the cap.
- vjerancrnjak 3y ago
  I'm not sure why you're reframing my statement. I still consider the bottle cap redesign as the weirdest recent directive, based on no evidence. Just because there's bottle caps on beaches, where are the bottles? Now we won't see bottle caps (if the design works) but where will the bottles with these caps be? I am aware that bottle cap redesign was part of a bigger directive. I am aware of that directive because we are already in the polluting paper straw world. Fishing gear proposal shows the same half-assed attempt at waste collection as is separating plastic, paper and rest. But that is less weird to me.

jsnell 3y ago

Yes, fishing gear is a major contributor to marine plastic litter. It's not a coincidence that this directive then tackled that as well, not just bottle caps like you originally claimed. But obviously the solutions for fishing gear are very different than the solutions for plastic bottles. The tethered bottle cap is not supposed to solve the problem of making people recycle the bottles, other parts of the directive do that. It solves the problem of the bottle being separated from the cap, such that if the bottle gets recycled so does that cap. Or if the bottle gets thrown in the trash, so does the cap.

vjerancrnjak 3y ago
I'm not sure why you're reframing my statement. I still consider the bottle cap redesign as the weirdest recent directive, based on no evidence. Just because there's bottle caps on beaches, where are the bottles? Now we won't see bottle caps (if the design works) but where will the bottles with these caps be? I am aware that bottle cap redesign was part of a bigger directive. I am aware of that directive because we are already in the polluting paper straw world. Fishing gear proposal shows the same half-assed attempt at waste collection as is separating plastic, paper and rest. But that is less weird to me.