Plastic producers have known for more than 30 years that recycling is not an economically or technically feasible plastic waste management solution. That has not stopped them from promoting it, according to a new report.

“The companies lied,” said Richard Wiles, president of fossil-fuel accountability advocacy group the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), which published the report. “It’s time to hold them accountable for the damage they’ve caused.”

I don’t think it’s so much that anyone lied about anything, it’s that people have ignored two really huge contributing factors to the entire recycling cycle. Remember the three R’s?

Reduce consumption. Reuse things that aren’t damaged. Recycle when it becomes unusable.

Plastic containers don’t need to be melted down and remade into anything; they can be cleaned and reused. But we just throw them away, or send them to be recycled immediately, and still consume more; completely ignoring the first two R’s.

All these containers could be, and maybe should be, going back to the manufacturer they came from to be washed and reused. And we consumers could try and consume less things that come in such packaging or containers since that’s the only way they will make fewer things in them, though that’s easier said than done.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

I’m going to be pedantic, but there is one R missing, the one with the most impact : Refuse.

So it’s Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

If you can, buy products that don’t have plastic in them at all. This is the biggest impact you can have as an individual.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s just reduce

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

At this point, it’s a bit philosophical. I like refuse because it is clear that if you can not buy thing, it is better than simply reducing that same thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Plastic containers don’t need to be melted down and remade into anything; they can be cleaned and reused. But we just throw them away, or send them to be recycled immediately, and still consume more; completely ignoring the first two R’s.

Except a plastic bottle start leaking cancerous shit after a week or so iirc

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/08/health/bottled-water-nanoplastics-study-wellness/index.html

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Well that’s exactly the lie they sold. Reduce? Reuse? Absolutely. No question.

Recycle? If it makes sense. Should you recycle magazines? Sure, I’m sure it’s possible… But that glossy coating means you’d have to put it through a bunch of rounds of chemical baths or something to separate that plastic crap off. Same with cardboard - if it’s glossy, it’s probably not going to turn back into wood pulp, and if it’s oily it’d also ruin the batch (after a certain amount) so no pizza boxes either.

It’s like that for just about anything you want to recycle - you have to look at the cost. And I mean full cost - the energy cost, fossil fuel used to produce required chemicals, the river those chemicals end up eventually, the environmental opportunity cost of bothering with it vs creating it fresh, and finally the man hour and infrastructure costs

Even if we publicly funded it, it’s still an externality to the producer.

And that’s the lie. It’s like bailing out a cruise ship with a drinking cup… Theoretically it seems like “hey, if we can just move faster and we all do it, it could work!” But the numbers won’t work. You can’t scoop water up infinitely fast, and the geometry is going to limit how many people can increase the speed of bailing out water.

The only way this works is by plugging the holes or building enormous systems to offset the water coming in.

Reduce, reuse, recycle is a lie because it was never possible. Not for plastics - paper works pretty well, glass can work (but it’s a lot of energy if you don’t reuse it), metals work if the price is right.

But plastic barely works to create an inferior product (where only a portion of the material is recycled - you always have to add new plastic, sometimes only a few percent, sometimes more than half). You also have to sort it, ship it, wash the crap out of it, and deal with all the micro plastic-infused solvents. Because plastic sheds from heat, cold, UV light, mechanical pressure, and looking at it funny - every step of the process, you’re dusting the surroundings in micro plastics. Even rainwater is full of micro plastics. And generally, it all ends up washed into the nearest body of water and the soil

And what’s worse, is everything is coated in plastic if not made of it originally.

The only answer is to make companies stop wrapping everything in plastic… Yeah, it’s super convenient and cheap, but we could figure out better options.

People are so worried about the AI alignment problem, but the corporate alignment problem is a much bigger threat - we have to make them want it, because the campaign to “reduce, reuse, recycle” bought them 40 years of complacency

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

People are so worried about the AI alignment problem, but the corporate alignment problem is a much bigger threat

🤯

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Plastic, which is made from oil and gas, is notoriously difficult to recycle. Doing so requires meticulous sorting, since most of the thousands of chemically distinct varieties of plastic cannot be recycled together. That renders an already pricey process even more expensive. Another challenge: the material degrades each time it is reused, meaning it can generally only be reused once or twice.

The industry has known for decades about these existential challenges, but obscured that information in its marketing campaigns, the report shows.

Nope, they just lied. It wasn’t just that people weren’t re-using, people ARE reusing plastic products. But industry lied about the viability and cost to recycle the material.

At a 1956 industry conference, the Society of the Plastics Industry, a trade group, told producers to focus on “low cost, big volume” and “expendability” and to aim for materials to end up “in the garbage wagon”.

Then they pushed non-reusability.

An internal 1986 report from the trade association the Vinyl Institute noted that “recycling cannot be considered a permanent solid waste solution [to plastics], as it merely prolongs the time until an item is disposed of”.

Despite this knowledge, the Society of the Plastics Industry established the Plastics Recycling Foundation in 1984, bringing together petrochemical companies and bottlers, and launched a campaign focused on the sector’s commitment to recycling.

They’ve always known recycling to be a short term solution but hid that to get around the inevitable legislation against plastics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Problem is that reducing on an individual level is difficult to impossible because I don’t control how things are given to me, i.e. takeout or how produce is packaged.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Agreed. Individual conservation will never have the impact legislation can. For an example look at reusable grocery bags. Only a small minority of people used them when it was optional. But when localities banned disposable bags everyone had to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

No fucking shit

permalink
report
reply
-7 points

Haha okay, classic America and the “It cant be done” attitude. Keep licking the boots of your corporate overlords. If only there were any countries that just recycle everything anyway, right?

permalink
report
reply
12 points

I believe you’re confusing recycling with what your local recycling program will accept. It’s convenient if they accept all plastic “recycling numbers” but many of those numbers are aspirational, with no known way of actually recycling that type of plastic. Manufacturers knew this, but promised that the technology to do so would be forthcoming. It has not been forthcoming, and current and future generations will suffer for it.

But even when plastic is recyclable, it’s still shit, and we should be trying to minimise its use in everyday consumer products.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The thing is, chemists knew it. Nobody wanted to hear it. There are only three things worth recycling: Aluminum, glass, and electronics.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

That’s extremely reductionist and inaccurate. Most metals can be recycled easily, not only aluminium.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Aluminium is typically used as is though, while many other metals are used as alloys. I suspect that it makes things much easier when you don’t have to worry about composition.

Note that I don’t really know anything much about metals or recycling, so I might be completely wrong.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Aluminium is typically used as is though

That would result in some shitty products. Aluminium is also mostly used as alloy, pure aluminium is pretty soft.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_alloy

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Waste metal is basically always going to be purer and easier to deal with than metal ore, so it’s worth recycling nearly anything that it’s worth mining the ore for. Aluminium’s particularly recyclable because it’s expensive to make it from ore, and much less expensive to melt existing aluminium.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Glass is marginal at best for recycling. It’s good for reuse. Cardboard is almost as good as aluminum for recycling

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Everytime I buy something from a local shop or a western brand, it comes packaged with minimal plastic, and a lot of well thought out materials. Even if they use plastic, its always a very thin plastic and very “soft”. Can’t describe. But when I buy ANYTHING from aliexpress you can tell it came from china just by looking at the packaging. It has SO MANY LAYERS of plastic, and very hard and thick plastic. If you buy for example a single keychain comes with 20x the weight of it in plastic. They smell so much to plastic chemicals too, something that “western plastic” doesn’t smell like. Every time I have to drink from a paper straw I remind myself that a 10x10cm sticker I bought came with 5kg of plastic and still arrived damaged from shipping.

We don’t need to reduce even more. We need to somehow force china to reduce it. I am againt taxes for everything, but maybe tax the amount/weight of plastic that comes on stuff you get from china. And find a way to tax the sender, not the buyer. Maybe that will make chinese companies to actually think about reducing they 50 tons of useless plastic waste they make each second.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

“Hurr durr, China’s the problem, not my shit consumerism”

Fuck off with the astroturfing, corporate bootlicker.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’ve noticed that Japanese candy often has a ton of packaging. There’ll be a box of small mints and you open it to find each one individually wrapped.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments