this post was submitted on 18 May 2023
24 points (100.0% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5285 readers
1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Recycling in the US (and many Western countries, for that matter) is a sham. It always was.

In reality, most of the plastic placed in recycling bins were never turned into new products.

Now China has stopped taking that waste, the myth of near infinite consumption without the guilt of waste has been exposed for the lie that it always was.

That's not to say that we shouldn't aim for a sustainable circular economy. Of course we should.

But we'll need much bigger changes to make it happen.

"For decades, we were sending the bulk of our recycling to China—tons and tons of it, sent over on ships... But last year, the country restricted imports of certain recyclables... Waste-management companies are telling [municipalities] there is no longer a market for their recycling.

"These municipalities have two choices: pay much higher rates to get rid of recycling, or throw it all away.

"Most are choosing the latter.

"When [its kerbside recycling] program launched, Franklin [in New Hampshire] could break even on recycling by selling it for $6 a ton. Now the transfer station is charging the town $125 a ton to recycle, or $68 a ton to incinerate.

"This end of recycling comes at a time when the US is creating more waste than ever. In 2015, the most recent year for which national data are available, America generated 262.4 million tons of waste, up 4.5% from 2010 and 60% from 1985."

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/china-has-stopped-accepting-our-trash/584131/

#Recycling #CircularEconomy #Politics @green #ClimateChange #Environment

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] siobhansarelle@tech.lgbt 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@energisch_ @cooopsspace @ajsadauskas @skyfire101 @green

Legislation would be good, to stop this, before that though, possibly avoiding places that do use excessive plastic packaging.

Avoiding online shopping could be good, but for some people that might mean using a car to go and do the shopping, which likely has a greater impact on the environment than the packaging, or having it delivered by a single vehicle that delivers to many homes,

[–] skyfire101@aus.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@siobhansarelle @energisch_ @cooopsspace @ajsadauskas @green I recently had a book delivered from Amazon where they had sort of gone to far the other way. While a paper bag may be good environmentally, it was lousy for a large hardback book which ended up bent. They used to use a nice rigid cardboard book sized carton for sending books.

[–] siobhansarelle@tech.lgbt 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@skyfire101 @energisch_ @cooopsspace @ajsadauskas @green

That sounds more like an issue with shipping than with Amazon’s packaging.

Books just need to be handled differently and then probably placed with similar items.

[–] siobhansarelle@tech.lgbt 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] skyfire101@aus.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

@siobhansarelle @energisch_ @cooopsspace @ajsadauskas @green yes it's, only a slight bend now. It is sitting under some heavy books on a flat surface.

[–] siobhansarelle@tech.lgbt 1 points 1 year ago

@skyfire101 @energisch_ @cooopsspace @ajsadauskas @green

There are people that would have sent the book back.

There are publishers that throw out books for very minor issues.

I used to live near one and could get perfectly good books for free. They lock it all up now.

[–] siobhansarelle@tech.lgbt 1 points 1 year ago

@skyfire101 @energisch_ @cooopsspace @ajsadauskas @green

This also reminds me: lots of paper is not recyclable either.