Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok, we seem to have a plastic crisis in the oceans, and evidence for it has reached pretty undeniable levels.

So the thing I want o know is can we do anything about it now or is it too late to prevent a global exo disaster as sea life becomes contaminated by waste plastic?

I'm not stating an opinion, i'm soliciting them.

It's never too late to absolutely baldly state "there's nothing we can do" but I think most experts agree that plastic levels in the sea and plastic use generally is approaching a tipping point where any remediation will need to pro-actively and aggressively reduce the amount in the sea. It is not enough to state we will try and reduce plastic use; we are well beyond that stage now - we need to aggressively reduce plastic levels across the board. The problem comes in getting unilateral agreement to do something - as a society, we have built a house on sand with our dependency on single-use plastic in every sphere of human life and we will struggle and continue to struggle to reduce that dependency, even more so in developing countries whose use of plastics will only increase. Sadly, these developing countries in Africa and sub-continental India don't have anything like the recycling or disposal regulations that the West has painstakingly put in place. Even in the West, we are no better. A surprisingly small amount of plastic is actually usefully recycled - most plastic can only be down-cycled, so for example, plastic bottles aren't normally re-used into more bottles as is common perception but instead get turned into carpet underlay, for example. Clearly, demand for carpet underlay is never going to outstrip supply of plastic bottles; there is only so much you can recycle. Getting accurate and honest stats on how much and what is actually recycled is surprisingly hard. As consumers, we just tip our waste into the recycling bin and assume we have done our bit; out of sight, out of mind but sadly, that really isn't the case. We need to start standing up and demanding visibility on the waste process instead of blindly assuming the waste companies are actually doing what they say.

It is the same with the climate agreements; Kyoto and Paris et al. Agreement can be reached that something should be done and agreement can even rarely be reached on what to do but that will only mollify the situation not rectify it. The Paris agreement, assuming all countries agree and then actually do what they say, won't stop global warming, merely slow the rate. As with plastic use, slowing the rate is not enough - we must reverse the trend and we need to start now. However, if you are able to get unilateral agreement and enforce actual action and deeds, then you are a better man than I. Governments of all types are inherently short-termist - simply put, the political will does not exist to do anything. It needs, dare I say, almost a societal revolution to effect change at this point and unfortunately, I think people, despite what they say, are still too wedded to plastic use to do anything.

something definitely needs doing. Its something I personally worry about, and I think more people are now, but its just so difficult.. When I buy groceries, a pack of pears or peppers in a plastic bag is cheaper than buying them loose. It makes no sense. the amount of unnecessary plastic in packaging is staggering.

I also think about the result of our hobby. plastic sprues? how many of those are thrown away each day? is there something GW could do about that?

and does the acrylic in the waste paint water affect the environment? I'm not sure of the answer to that one, maybe someone can enlighten me.

Recently I have been disgusted by a series of revelations about the supposed recycling of plastic in the UK.

Since 20 years ago, my family has been assiduously recycling everything possible. Now we find that a lot of plastic can't be recycled, can't be exported any more to China for re-use, and gets incinerated or put into landfill. Why did we bother? Why can't the government get its act together and pass some laws to make the recycling system effective, instead of a useless Potemkin village?

There is similar news today about recycling food waste.

That being said, you're right that a lot of the problems are countries like India where there is huge plastics use and no attempt at recycling.

Not only the oceans are full of crap, so are the rivers and streams in remote areas. It's not just lareg pieces, it is micro-fibres which are invisible to the eye but accumulate in shellfish and so on.

We need to reduced plastic use to important functions. For example, we could switch back to glass bottles and charge a deposit so people will recycle them. That system worked like a charm in the 1960s, when I grew up.

We can attack plastic macro-garbage with equipment like the experimental boom system for collecting floating rubbish out of the various ocean gyres. We can attack micro-garbae with filtration systems. We can hope to discover or invent a micro-organism which can digest plastic.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


We need to reduced plastic use to important functions. For example, we could switch back to glass bottles and charge a deposit so people will recycle them. That system worked like a charm in the 1960s, when I grew up.

We can attack plastic macro-garbage with equipment like the experimental boom system for collecting floating rubbish out of the various ocean gyres. We can attack micro-garbae with filtration systems. We can hope to discover or invent a micro-organism which can digest plastic.

I absolutely agree but it is only really useful to do so if everyone agrees to do and then actually follows through - sometimes harder said than done. I think more pressure needs to be placed on business and government to start regulating and legislating as that is the only way to get proper action. Putting the onus on people to sort their waste and diligently recycle will not be enough. Here is a good article on the challenges faced by the public here in the UK:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-45496884

One of the more salient points in that article; if any of the plastic is contaminated with food waste, most likely it will be sent to landfill rather than re-used. Here at home, we wash out tinned cans after use before putting them in the recycling, same with microwave meal containers etc but who knows if that is enough? Same with pizza boxes - if you put a pizza box in for recycling, even if it is clean, if it has just a single grease spot, it won't get recycled.

Take Coca-Cola as an exaggerated example; notwithstanding their enormous demand for supplies of caffeine and water to produce their product, they are also one of the largest, if not the largest, producer of single-use plastic bottles. If people really wanted to make a statement and make a change, a boycott of Coke products would do it. How quickly do you think Coke would introduce recycled and recyclable plastics if people stopped buying their products? Almost immediately, I guarantee it. Same if the government legislated that plastic bottles must contain x% of recycled material and adhere to certain recyclable standards. Sadly, getting people to act in a co-ordinated and concerted fashion, even with the strength of public feeling such as it is, is almost impossible . Same with trying to get the government to act who are much more concerned with short-term issues especially when they can kick the metaphorical can down the road for longer.

Going back to glass is fine but it has one major downside - is smashes into little pieces. I don't know about your area but where I live, certain scrotes take great pleasure in smashing bottles on the pathways. Walking the dog through the common becomes a hazard in itself having to dodge tiny shards of glass.

You want to know the Irony. Said plastic island is allready a new habitat for Seabirds and fish.

As for plastic recycling: burning it for exemple in a incnerator to burn other rubish is infact not that bad. If you fill landfills however then you got a problem.

I want some studies on 'burning not that bad.'. That's a pretty bold claim that absolutely needs science.

On the face, it seems unlikely, as those chemicals and reactions to heat are going to produce other chemicals and waste products. Fire produces outputs, nothing is destroyed, just converted to other forms in different states.

Actually Coke is one of the big companies at the forefront of minimising plastic use in the drinks industry, on average their bottles weighs 27% less than in 2007

they were one of the first to use plastic labels and dyes and glue in them that are recycled along with the bottles

and they're already using 25% recycled plastic in their bottles with the aim to go higher (tricky as beyond this it tends to make the bottle cloudy as even high quality recycled plastic isn't as clear as new stuff)

(not that i'm suggesting that this is primarily about environmental consciousness although looking good is no doubt a benefit, it's mainly about manufacturing costs)

they also developed a plant based biopolymer bottle tech, (but I think it's not suitable for pressuried stuff so it's more in use for juices and other bottled stuff rather than soft drinks)

Even when recycling is inefficient I still do so to create an economic incentive to find better ways of doing it.

As for plastic buildup, there is a solution on the table of genetically engineering bacteria & plancton to digest it. The missing piece is an enzyme able to do so, which nothing has evolved yet. I suspect some vigorous artificial adaptation scenarios could produce such, but failing that if we wait long enough some microbe will manage it. Look at what happened with nylon. However, how long it will take for us/nature to produce such an enzyme is entirely unknown; the ecological devestation will likely have already happened.

Voss wrote:
I want some studies on 'burning not that bad.'. That's a pretty bold claim that absolutely needs science.

On the face, it seems unlikely, as those chemicals and reactions to heat are going to produce other chemicals and waste products. Fire produces outputs, nothing is destroyed, just converted to other forms in different states.

https://www.beobachter.ch/umwelt/abfall-das-marchen-vom-plastik-recycling

To explain this: Since Plasticrecycling is not worth it economically aswell as energetically (not to mention chemicals used for it) it is often driven to cheaper neighbouring countries, granulized and then reused (approximately 50%) whilest the last 50% are driven back into switzerland to be sold to Kehrrichtverbrennungsanlagen, (basicallly what we call specific burning incinerators, which ofcourse have to meet typical swiss standards) ergo you pay for the recycling in Switzerland, for half of it to be made inneficently into raw plastic again whilest also using terrible ammounts of energy, whilest the rest is driven back and burnt anyway. So excuse me but since our incinerators have to meet ecological standards aswell as seeing as the stuff is brought into other countries (which btw is industry nation standart procedre for plastic recycling) you might aswell spare the pollution through transport and the waste of elictricity.

Edit: of course if we talk about nations in which reglements and laws are pro coorperations (USA or third world countries) where standards are either too low or non existent in the first place, then yes, don't burn plastic, but in my country it is neither worth it, nor common sense to recycle it.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Even when recycling is inefficient I still do so to create an economic incentive to find better ways of doing it.

As for plastic buildup, there is a solution on the table of genetically engineering bacteria & plancton to digest it. The missing piece is an enzyme able to do so, which nothing has evolved yet. I suspect some vigorous artificial adaptation scenarios could produce such, but failing that if we wait long enough some microbe will manage it. Look at what happened with nylon. However, how long it will take for us/nature to produce such an enzyme is entirely unknown; the ecological devestation will likely have already happened.

They are working on fungi to do that last i checked. but i recall some sort of special beetle larva that can eat plastic (with help from gut microbes)

pretty cool stuff.

as for burning..... its going to be very hard to do without some kinda special catalytic converter or filter unit for the massive variety of plastics available all which have different byproducts. that and burning would probably create a ton of greenhouse gasses which probably wont help the current situation (though then again i have no idea if plastic eating fungi or beetles at that mass of scale wont do the same).

Then then again, you gotta ask what kinda damage does cutting off all plastic and going into 100% recycled products and packaging going to do. last i checked paper production takes an ass load of water and various chemicals for bleaching and finishing. also what will end up happening to all the unused petrol byproducts normally used for plastics.

 Desubot wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Even when recycling is inefficient I still do so to create an economic incentive to find better ways of doing it.

As for plastic buildup, there is a solution on the table of genetically engineering bacteria & plancton to digest it. The missing piece is an enzyme able to do so, which nothing has evolved yet. I suspect some vigorous artificial adaptation scenarios could produce such, but failing that if we wait long enough some microbe will manage it. Look at what happened with nylon. However, how long it will take for us/nature to produce such an enzyme is entirely unknown; the ecological devestation will likely have already happened.

They are working on fungi to do that last i checked. but i recall some sort of special beetle larva that can eat plastic (with help from gut microbes)

pretty cool stuff.

as for burning..... its going to be very hard to do without some kinda special catalytic converter or filter unit for the massive variety of plastics available all which have different byproducts. that and burning would probably create a ton of greenhouse gasses which probably wont help the current situation (though then again i have no idea if plastic eating fungi or beetles at that mass of scale wont do the same).

Then then again, you gotta ask what kinda damage does cutting off all plastic and going into 100% recycled products and packaging going to do. last i checked paper production takes an ass load of water and various chemicals for bleaching and finishing. also what will end up happening to all the unused petrol byproducts normally used for plastics.

Case in point in regards to paper.
Technically speaking you don't need to bleach paper, respectively it does not need to be bleached that strongly as say print paper and even that can be lowered, now if we say, use it again for bags etc. to transport food then of course it would be favourable if it would've not been bleached in the first place.

Its definitely possible. personally i have no issue with eating out of a brown paper take out tray vs a bleached white one.

but i think thats one of the biggest issue in today's world.

a LOT of stuff corporation do is not entirely based on manufacturing limits (besides like maybe metal production for construction or industrial applications that require VERY specific ratios and control) but based on aesthetics. im no plastic wizard but imho i feel like its possible to recycle at least 80-90% of most plastics but it isnt simply because of the color mixed recycling would make. but thats my tinfoil hat speaking.

for example i know a lot of farms throw away blemished and weird shaped produce just because it wouldn't look nearly as nice on the stand. some process it into other goods like canned or dried things but i dont know what % does that.

 Desubot wrote:
Its definitely possible. personally i have no issue with eating out of a brown paper take out tray vs a bleached white one.

but i think thats one of the biggest issue in today's world.

a LOT of stuff corporation do is not entirely based on manufacturing limits (besides like maybe metal production for construction or industrial applications that require VERY specific ratios and control) but based on aesthetics. im no plastic wizard but imho i feel like its possible to recycle at least 80-90% of most plastics but it isnt simply because of the color mixed recycling would make. but thats my tinfoil hat speaking.

for example i know a lot of farms throw away blemished and weird shaped produce just because it wouldn't look nearly as nice on the stand. some process it into other goods like canned or dried things but i dont know what % does that.

A: pristine white carries positive connotations therefore it is used above common sense baseline. Basically esthetic plays a huge role in sales.

B:50% of all plastic are those damned packings which we are (atm) not really capable or recycling. Which makes the whole situation paradox in a way as people clearly try to gather it and want to recycle it but the quality of the packings themselves does not allow it.
Now there are two options, 1. Change the Material away from plastic, but hopefully not Aluminium.
2. Enforce better quality and recycling standards like PET on packings, which potentially costs the end User more money now.

 Desubot wrote:
Its definitely possible. personally i have no issue with eating out of a brown paper take out tray vs a bleached white one.

but i think thats one of the biggest issue in today's world.

a LOT of stuff corporation do is not entirely based on manufacturing limits (besides like maybe metal production for construction or industrial applications that require VERY specific ratios and control) but based on aesthetics. im no plastic wizard but imho i feel like its possible to recycle at least 80-90% of most plastics but it isnt simply because of the color mixed recycling would make. but thats my tinfoil hat speaking.

for example i know a lot of farms throw away blemished and weird shaped produce just because it wouldn't look nearly as nice on the stand. some process it into other goods like canned or dried things but i dont know what % does that.

http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff3200/fc03169.htm

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Its definitely possible. personally i have no issue with eating out of a brown paper take out tray vs a bleached white one.

but i think thats one of the biggest issue in today's world.

a LOT of stuff corporation do is not entirely based on manufacturing limits (besides like maybe metal production for construction or industrial applications that require VERY specific ratios and control) but based on aesthetics. im no plastic wizard but imho i feel like its possible to recycle at least 80-90% of most plastics but it isnt simply because of the color mixed recycling would make. but thats my tinfoil hat speaking.

for example i know a lot of farms throw away blemished and weird shaped produce just because it wouldn't look nearly as nice on the stand. some process it into other goods like canned or dried things but i dont know what % does that.

A: pristine white carries positive connotations therefore it is used above common sense baseline. Basically esthetic plays a huge role in sales.

B:50% of all plastic are those damned packings which we are (atm) not really capable or recycling. Which makes the whole situation paradox in a way as people clearly try to gather it and want to recycle it but the quality of the packings themselves does not allow it.
Now there are two options, 1. Change the Material away from plastic, but hopefully not Aluminium.
2. Enforce better quality and recycling standards like PET on packings, which potentially costs the end User more money now.

Wait why not aluminum. i though that was one of the few metals that recycling is more efficient that producing new stock.

 Desubot wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Its definitely possible. personally i have no issue with eating out of a brown paper take out tray vs a bleached white one.

but i think thats one of the biggest issue in today's world.

a LOT of stuff corporation do is not entirely based on manufacturing limits (besides like maybe metal production for construction or industrial applications that require VERY specific ratios and control) but based on aesthetics. im no plastic wizard but imho i feel like its possible to recycle at least 80-90% of most plastics but it isnt simply because of the color mixed recycling would make. but thats my tinfoil hat speaking.

for example i know a lot of farms throw away blemished and weird shaped produce just because it wouldn't look nearly as nice on the stand. some process it into other goods like canned or dried things but i dont know what % does that.

A: pristine white carries positive connotations therefore it is used above common sense baseline. Basically esthetic plays a huge role in sales.

B:50% of all plastic are those damned packings which we are (atm) not really capable or recycling. Which makes the whole situation paradox in a way as people clearly try to gather it and want to recycle it but the quality of the packings themselves does not allow it.
Now there are two options, 1. Change the Material away from plastic, but hopefully not Aluminium.
2. Enforce better quality and recycling standards like PET on packings, which potentially costs the end User more money now.

Wait why not aluminum. i though that was one of the few metals that recycling is more efficient that producing new stock.

Risky for health, supposedly.
Also a Material that again requires a lot of energy to make, now if we had a way to easily get rid of nuclear waste it would not be a problem but since most nations over here are hellbent on replacing nuclear plants with coal Energy that would be like solving a infection in your foot by shooting it, repeatedly, with a Shotgun.

IIRC they put aluminum in your toothpaste, its pretty much the first and last thing to touch your mouth daily

i dunno. im not a doctor so i cant really say aluminum is absolutly not harmful to you. also iirc most of those aluminum places are near water based electrical plants because of the massive amount of electricity required. though it doesnt stop some folks with a propane furnace from just melting cans aluminum casting is fun. but that also has the hidden cost of shipping to those specific locations. and in general would be the same problem with almost any material recycled or otherwise.

it seems like the swiss are cheesed considering they probably dont have many options for alternative energy that isnt coal or nuclear. dont yal have a lot of wind?

Energy is on a good track though. New technology is making it more viable, coal companies have to add lawsuits over respiratory health to their bottom line, and climate change increasingly intruding into everyday life provides a strong incentive. Note that in the US, solar employs more people than coal.

 Desubot wrote:
IIRC they put aluminum in your toothpaste, its pretty much the first and last thing to touch your mouth daily

i dunno. im not a doctor so i cant really say aluminum is absolutly not harmful to you. also iirc most of those aluminum places are near water based electrical plants because of the massive amount of electricity required. though it doesnt stop some folks with a propane furnace from just melting cans aluminum casting is fun. but that also has the hidden cost of shipping to those specific locations. and in general would be the same problem with almost any material recycled or otherwise.

it seems like the swiss are cheesed considering they probably dont have many options for alternative energy that isnt coal or nuclear. dont yal have a lot of wind?

Water + mountains = Hydroelectricity.
Btw to create 1 Ton of Aluminium you need the same ammount of energy you would need to create 4 tons of paper or 27 tons of glass.
And yes aluminum is supposedly one reason why Dementia and alzehimers show up in force lately.
Energy though never was a problem for us ever since Hydroelectricity came up aswell as nuclear plants.
Wind is beeing promoted as is solar energy.

Edit: do note that switzerland itself does not use coal plants since well terrible for forrests and we lack a mining industry aswell as the Ressource aswell.
However the big Kanton ( germany) aswell as poland are closing their nuclear plants in favour of coal ones....

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
Actually Coke is one of the big companies at the forefront of minimising plastic use in the drinks industry, on average their bottles weighs 27% less than in 2007

they were one of the first to use plastic labels and dyes and glue in them that are recycled along with the bottles

and they're already using 25% recycled plastic in their bottles with the aim to go higher (tricky as beyond this it tends to make the bottle cloudy as even high quality recycled plastic isn't as clear as new stuff)

(not that i'm suggesting that this is primarily about environmental consciousness although looking good is no doubt a benefit, it's mainly about manufacturing costs)

they also developed a plant based biopolymer bottle tech, (but I think it's not suitable for pressuried stuff so it's more in use for juices and other bottled stuff rather than soft drinks)

But they could do more. For example, Coke could actually sell the syrup to the public at a normal cost, so people can mix their own sodas. Sodastream, and systems like it, could work as a good way to reduce that waste we see from soda cans and bottles, but the big soda companies won't get on board with it and instead try to go with extremely overpriced alternatives that people won't bother with.

We could improve the drinking water supply, or provide better at-home filtration systems to cut back on all the waste of bottled water.

Part of the problem is too many of the industry leaders drag their feet. They know the problem, they know where they need to be in 20-30 years, but they refuse to sacrifice today's profits/market share to do it. They're taking baby steps when it's time for great leaps.

 Desubot wrote:
IIRC they put aluminum in your toothpaste, its pretty much the first and last thing to touch your mouth daily

i dunno. im not a doctor so i cant really say aluminum is absolutly not harmful to you. also iirc most of those aluminum places are near water based electrical plants because of the massive amount of electricity required. though it doesnt stop some folks with a propane furnace from just melting cans aluminum casting is fun. but that also has the hidden cost of shipping to those specific locations. and in general would be the same problem with almost any material recycled or otherwise.

it seems like the swiss are cheesed considering they probably dont have many options for alternative energy that isnt coal or nuclear. dont yal have a lot of wind?

afaik, the problem with aluminum isn't the solid, its the gas. When I was in high school we had a metal shop, complete with plasma cutter, Mig/Tig welding supplies and the like. . . Well, one semester I'm in the class, and we receive delivery of new equipment that the district had purchased (I later found out a board member bought on the recommendation of an "industry expert" without actually reviewing requirements and the like) for us in the form of new aluminum capable welders (it's been a long long time, but apparently there are some major differences at the business end of a welder between what can be used on steel vs. aluminum)

anyhow, We were joyfully using the new, fancy aluminum welder for about a week before it being dramatically shut down by our teacher during our class. He was at his computer overlooking the class, and suddenly jumped up and walked very briskly toward us, waving his arms shouting to stop what we were doing. . . Apparently our school's metal shop facility ventilation fans were not rated for aluminum, and thus we had to cease using the stuff until the welder, or the ventilation system were "fixed". . . I'm sure you can guess which one got fixed (hint, the guys who had aluminum based projects had to redraw and re-fab their entire projects)

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
We could improve the drinking water supply, or provide better at-home filtration systems to cut back on all the waste of bottled water.

Good - and relatively inexpensive - water filtration systems exist today. I have a Brita filter on my kitchen sink that works wonderfully - what comes out tastes far better than bottled water that tastes of plastic. And it's a HECK of a lot cheaper per gallon than bottled water too.

I try to explain that to people, and yet they still buy those stupid, awful-tasting bottles...

 Vulcan wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
We could improve the drinking water supply, or provide better at-home filtration systems to cut back on all the waste of bottled water.

Good - and relatively inexpensive - water filtration systems exist today. I have a Brita filter on my kitchen sink that works wonderfully - what comes out tastes far better than bottled water that tastes of plastic. And it's a HECK of a lot cheaper per gallon than bottled water too.

I try to explain that to people, and yet they still buy those stupid, awful-tasting bottles...

Aye, bottled water just always seemed stupid to me. I find it funny when city people complain about well water too, when they're drinking that city water that tastes like a swimming pool.

At the very least, if you're gonna bottle water it should be locally sourced. None of this artisan Fiji water crap that costs more than a soda.

Nothing will be done because the more ecological restrictions are embedded the more lucrative it will be to bend, break or ignore them.

This is true of all environmental issues, overfishing for instance. Quote breakers get more money, and fish are worth more when there is a catch limit, so its a double incentive to break fishing restrictions.

Now criminals and smugglers can possibly be dealt with, though not usually with much effect, however it gets immeasurably more problematic when the offenders are sovereign nation states.

This is where we currently are at. Ecological catastrophe is at our door and we need to get everyone on board to have a chance of stopping it. Even then there will be consequences for prior actions. Those who ignore the ecological warnings and take resources and grow infrastructure will be better placed to control more when resources become more problematic to resolve.

Europe is doing its best to comply with ecological needs, the US, Russia and China are not. The latter three will be in a far better position to secure remaining resources as the collapse occurs, its a combination of prisoners dilemma and king of the hill at the same time.

Basically, we are all in the gak.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
Actually Coke is one of the big companies at the forefront of minimising plastic use in the drinks industry, on average their bottles weighs 27% less than in 2007

they were one of the first to use plastic labels and dyes and glue in them that are recycled along with the bottles

and they're already using 25% recycled plastic in their bottles with the aim to go higher (tricky as beyond this it tends to make the bottle cloudy as even high quality recycled plastic isn't as clear as new stuff)

(not that i'm suggesting that this is primarily about environmental consciousness although looking good is no doubt a benefit, it's mainly about manufacturing costs)

they also developed a plant based biopolymer bottle tech, (but I think it's not suitable for pressuried stuff so it's more in use for juices and other bottled stuff rather than soft drinks)

But they could do more. For example, Coke could actually sell the syrup to the public at a normal cost, so people can mix their own sodas. Sodastream, and systems like it, could work as a good way to reduce that waste we see from soda cans and bottles, but the big soda companies won't get on board with it and instead try to go with extremely overpriced alternatives that people won't bother with.

We could improve the drinking water supply, or provide better at-home filtration systems to cut back on all the waste of bottled water.

Part of the problem is too many of the industry leaders drag their feet. They know the problem, they know where they need to be in 20-30 years, but they refuse to sacrifice today's profits/market share to do it. They're taking baby steps when it's time for great leaps.

The problem is that you can never expect a publically-owned company, responsible to share-holders, to start behaving responsibly in this manner if it is going to hurt their bottom line.

So the government, in (what should be) it's primary role of protecting the citizenry, needs to step in and regulate. But the problem is there, in the UK at least, you have a government that has traditionally cared little for environmental concerns, and is absolutely ignoring it in light of the current massive elephant in the room.

Really you could apply the above to any of the current ecological challenges - we seem unable to curb are animalistic natures to consume on a macro-economic level, and it's going to be future generations looking back on this one and shaking their fists and wondering at our absolute inability to moderate.

 Desubot wrote:
Its definitely possible. personally i have no issue with eating out of a brown paper take out tray vs a bleached white one.

but i think thats one of the biggest issue in today's world.

a LOT of stuff corporation do is not entirely based on manufacturing limits (besides like maybe metal production for construction or industrial applications that require VERY specific ratios and control) but based on aesthetics. im no plastic wizard but imho i feel like its possible to recycle at least 80-90% of most plastics but it isnt simply because of the color mixed recycling would make. but thats my tinfoil hat speaking.

for example i know a lot of farms throw away blemished and weird shaped produce just because it wouldn't look nearly as nice on the stand. some process it into other goods like canned or dried things but i dont know what % does that.

In the UK, most supermarkets use black plastic trays for meat and ready meal products because it makes the food colours look better. The trays are made of recyclable plastic, but they can't be recycled because the machines which read the labelling cannot correctly read the shiny black against shiny black embossed symbols. Therefore they get burnt or put into landfill.

This has come to light recently, and the mood of the public is such that several supermarkets have already promised to change from black to some other colour.

Some UK supermarkets offer "wonky" fruit and veg, which is the blemished or imperfect stuff which is perfectly edible but has less "eye candy" factor to it. Waitrose tried this and it failed initially because they charged more for their windfall apples than for their perfect apples. However once that was corrected, the stuff began to sell.

After, if you want to blend an apple into a smoothie, or slice a mushroom into a stew, the original shape and skin doesn't matter.

A lot of this stuff is still sold in plastic trays and bags, though.

 Vulcan wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
We could improve the drinking water supply, or provide better at-home filtration systems to cut back on all the waste of bottled water.

Good - and relatively inexpensive - water filtration systems exist today. I have a Brita filter on my kitchen sink that works wonderfully - what comes out tastes far better than bottled water that tastes of plastic. And it's a HECK of a lot cheaper per gallon than bottled water too.

I try to explain that to people, and yet they still buy those stupid, awful-tasting bottles...

Don't forget the synthetic estrogen released by the plastics, especially when they're left in the sun.

 Mr Nobody wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
We could improve the drinking water supply, or provide better at-home filtration systems to cut back on all the waste of bottled water.

Good - and relatively inexpensive - water filtration systems exist today. I have a Brita filter on my kitchen sink that works wonderfully - what comes out tastes far better than bottled water that tastes of plastic. And it's a HECK of a lot cheaper per gallon than bottled water too.

I try to explain that to people, and yet they still buy those stupid, awful-tasting bottles...

Don't forget the synthetic estrogen released by the plastics, especially when they're left in the sun.

That's also a big thing when microwaving stuff in plastic containers.

No wonder the young girls look... bigger... now than they did when I was that age...

 Grey Templar wrote:
Aye, bottled water just always seemed stupid to me. I find it funny when city people complain about well water too, when they're drinking that city water that tastes like a swimming pool.

I was born in NYC and lived there until I was around 25 or so. NYC is sort of an outlier in water quality - it comes from the Catskills and is some of the best in the country - so it wasn't until I was an adult that I realized city water elsewhere can be pretty gross.

The last road trip I was on, I had been trying to be healthier, and I still wound up drinking soda at a lot of stops after ordering and sampling the local water - mostly across stretches of the never-ending state of Illinois.