We don't have to get rid of plastics.
Get rid of cars (which emit the most micro-plastics), fishing nets (which cause the most plastic pollution in the ocean), plastics in clothing and packaging where it isn't needed.
Then use bio-degradable plastics for whatever's left. And single use plastics only for the tiny reminder of use cases where it's needed, like medicine.
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
196 points (95.8% liked)
Ask Lemmy
26249 readers
1518 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Getting rid of cars is generations away in the US, at minimum.
Guess we'd better get started right away, then.
The best way to get people out of cars is to give them good alternatives, so I think you need to start by improving infrastructure and public transport.
Yep. The big issue is that the US landscape was designed for cars from the get go va Europe where cars were an afterthought. You don’t get rid of cars by making them forbidden or too expensive you get rid of them by making useless or less useful than alternative options a.
American cities were designed before cars as well. The difference is that the car and fossil fuel industries lobbied for cities to be completely redesigned around cars in the 50s and 60s. And governments all across the US bulldozed their own cities to do it.
Suburban areas were designed after.
Yes but the highways that connected them to urban and productive areas were made by destroying the old downtowns
load more comments
(3 replies)
You don't have to get rid of cars, my dude, just tires.
I don't trust biodegradable plastics anymore. The in between stage of biodegration is micro plaltics. This may be an issue even if it's from organic sources.
load more comments
(1 replies)
We don't need to ban every single bit of plastic. It's fine to keep it where it's absolutely necessary. Some of the examples you provided definitely aren't necessary though, like individually wrapped cutlery (wtf) or beverages (can use glass).
So many things are unnecessarily wrapped in plastic. We use bubble wrap in situations where paper would be a perfectly fine buffer for shipping. We use plastic bags when paper and reusable bags work perfectly well.
I get so frustrated about it not even because I'm scared of the environmental impact of all this plastic floating around, although that does suck, but because plastic is currently absolutely crucial for modern medicine. One day maybe we'll find alternatives but until then I think a rational society would be preserving the limited life-saving miracle material for uses that aren't as basic as "use it to take home groceries, then throw it away."
Canada is in the process of "banning single-use plastics". Although you still see them everywhere, there are many places that have switched some stuff like plastic grocery bags, plastic straws and plastic utensils to cloth grocery bags, paper straws and wooden utensils.
The point OP is making still holds true in Canada though. I can’t go buy a plastic bag at my grocery store, but the store can use a ridiculous amount of wrap to sell produce, and there are tons of food products where you buy a bag full of smaller bags(and some full of even smaller bags. Pre-made salad is a big one) that I can buy easily and usually for fairly cheap.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Well for one: most of the things listed already have a solution:
Food? Glassware and Metal containers. Or Even reusable single type plastic containers, like a tupperware.
Sterile medical supplies already are packed in a paper bag. The ones that are in plastic actually aren't.
Medicine can also be packed into glass and metal containers.
Beverages can be put in cans or Reusable Glass bottles or you simply drink tap water. (I know in some countries that's not safe but it should be)
And honestly your cafeteria is the most ridiculous example. Get a dishwasher and use real cutlery. Or bring your own cutlery from home. (Is it actually a cafeteria or just a glorified break room?)
Sterile medical supplies already are packed in a paper bag. The ones that are in plastic actually aren't.
Uh... What? Sterile medical instruments are absolutely packed in plastic, paper is too permeable and will lead to contamination. Even if it looks like paper it's still lined with plastic. Have you ever worked in a medical setting before?
Me putting paper into the autoclave for the sake of the environment
load more comments
(1 replies)
My only note here is that canned beverages have a layer of non-recyclable plastic on the inside to prevent chemical interactions between the contents and the metal. Glass bottles are fine though as (aside from plastic labels) they're fully recyclable.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I loathe plastic waste, but here's a conundrum I read about.
Elementary school kids learned about environmentalism, wanted to do better. They got the school to dump plastic utensils and plates in favor of steel. No brainer, right?
Turns out the energy cost for making the steel meant they would have to wash those items 1,000+ times to make up for the plastic energy production. Still, no brainer, right?
Then they added in the energy costs for washing those items 1,000+ times. Not remotely worth doing. (Factor in loss, it's even worse.)
We got ourselves in a hella mess. Getting off plastic is going to mean cheap, clean and abundant energy. I mean shitloads of power. I'm all in for nuclear, at least as a stopgap.
The primary concern with single-use plastics is not energy consumption but plastic waste. That, of course raises the question of how to weigh one kind of environmental harm against another, and I do not have a good answer.
My instinct here is that not generating so much trash is the energy use in this case, but I can't prove that.
It's a balancing act for sure. You have to understand what's good for the climate isnt necessarily good for the environment. However I believe we have to understand that cleaning up the plastic in the world is imho harder than recapturing co2 since you can't just build a big machine wherever you want and it does it's job. Plastic you have to hunt down manually, and good luck doing that for micro plastics
But I don't think your example works as well as eg plastic Vs glas bottles. Your energy dilemma can be solved simply by having photovoltaic panels and/or hooking the dishwasher up to a renewably generated hot water supply.
Also even in your calculations which I assume are not optimised 2000+ wash cycles is only like 6 years of use. And I still think that's a no brainer.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Start with the easy wins and replace the others as options come available. We don't have to fix everything at once.
One way is to keep the plastic but make it out of something renewable instead of out of petroleum products. It can have the same short term properties but eventually disintigrate instead of turning into microplastics or releasing harmful particles when burned.
What does the source of the monomer have to do with disintegration, microplastics and harmfulness when burned? PE is the most commonly used plastic in the world. It's made out of ethylene, which is about as simple as a molecule can be. Nothing prevents you making renewable PE, except it's cheaper to make from fossil sources.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Single use consumer plastics should be banned.
I don't think individual shrink wrapping of utensils is a necessary use, every time I pull that thin plastic off something I think we are all going to hell.
But as others have noted, we don't need to eliminate all use, we need to radically reduce use and find a technology to deal with the remaining amount.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Bioplastic - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioplastic
The solution is not perfect though...
Life cycle analysis studies show that some bioplastics can be made with a lower carbon footprint than their fossil counterparts, for example when biomass is used as raw material and also for energy production. However, other bioplastics' processes are less efficient and result in a higher carbon footprint than fossil plastics.
the plastic problem is separate from the carbon problem though… we don’t ban plastics because we’re concerned about climate change; we ban them because we are worried that microplastics are causing significant health effects to both humans and most other animals
load more comments
(3 replies)
Obviously. I doubt bioplastic had even 1/100 of the money and research of their fossil counterparts.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It'd be better to come up with ways to efficiently break them down chemically so they can be remade into new plastic.
the same issue is happening with helium. its crucial for a lot of forensic processes and scientific research but we are rapidly running out of helium. but haha balloon go up!
This has never been true. The 'great helium shortage' was just complaining about not being able to get cheap helium.
We are more than capable at capturing it from fracking and other sources. We just didn't want to since it costs money lol.
Why the news ran with it for years is beyond me when it was one google search away from being debunked lol.
https://www.innovationnewsnetwork.com/how-helium-gas-obtained/32109/
Doesn't the truth still remain through that it's not an unlimited resource, it's absolutely crucial for modern life, but also we use large quantities of it on absolutely mundane bullshit?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I’m probably going to hell for saying this, but… I’m not that worried about plastic pollution? Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to minimize single use items and plastic ending up places it shouldn’t, but if it’s the best option for food / medical safety or cheaply producing something with a lower carbon footprint… we should probably just use it without too much guilt? The world is almost certainly better because of plastic in my opinion.
How can we get away from plastic as a safety layer?
We don't need to get away totally.
It will be good enough if we avoid most of it.
You can buy bamboo utensils individually wrapped in wax and brown paper. For most one time use items we already have a non-plastic alternative, it's just less convenient.
The answer is that we’re not going to get away from plastic
view more: next ›