World News

22059 readers

87 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

For US News, see the US News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Universal ‘chasing arrows’ recycling symbol could be dumped in US (theguardian.com)

submitted 1 year ago by alyaza@beehaw.org to c/news@beehaw.org

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

[...]the widespread use of the symbol on products that are not routinely accepted for recycling is helping stoke “consumer confusion about what is recyclable and/or compostable” and is leading to “deceptive or misleading” claims on packaging, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

At issue is the use of the logo along with the “resin number” of different types of plastics. Resin one and two plastics, such as bottles and jugs, are the most easily recycled products, but those marked with numbers three to seven, categories that include plastic bags, styrofoam and plastic trays, are typically not recycled and are instead sent to landfills or burned.

The placement of the chasing arrows symbol upon these hard-to-recycle single-use plastics “does not accurately represent recyclability as many plastics (especially 3-7) do not have end markets, and are not financially viable to recycle,” the EPA said in its comments.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Paesan@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I agree. But I think the largest problem is how much single-use plastics we have. It is ridiculous to me that we've gotten to the place we are with single-use plastics. The strength of plastics is their durability and longevity, and we've collectively decided that we should largely use them as temporary packaging.

[–] SemioticStandard@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Have we, though? I don’t think consumers have made that decision at all. I think companies have made that decision for us, because it’s so damn cheap. I would strongly prefer to buy products in degradable packaging, whenever possible, but that is so rarely an option. Toilet paper as an example. Why does that need to be sold in thin plastic that gets thrown out? Why can’t it be packaged in paper bags? Probably because manufacturers have decided that the fancy color they can print on plastic has an advantage with their advertising.

I digress. It’s not consumers who are thrilled about single-use plastic. We’re not even the ones doing the vast, VAST majority of polluting. It’s companies.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Your argument that companies made the decision for us is valid up until I start thinking about plastic cutlery.

Nobody is forcing anyone to buy plastic forks/spoons for their picnics or potlucks. That's all a consumer decision based on the convenience of throwing the mess away versus washing dishes.

I don't disagree with you at all, but I feel the need to point out that our hands aren't clean either.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, there are some customer decisions around. But most of the time the choice the customers have is between this package of plastic-wrapped toilet paper or the other package of plastic-wrapped toilet paper.

It's not like there is usually also a package of paper-wrapped toilet paper, no matter how much sense that would make.

[–] Thrashy@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Part of the problem with plastic is that it is so damn good at what we use it for. If you are looking for, say, a lightweight, shatterproof, reasonably non-toxic material to affordably mass-produce a toy out of. plastic is there with few equals. If you need a thin, flexible, airtight membrane to wrap or seal something in, plastic is basically your only option. If you need an unbreakable, corrosion-resistant container for some chemical process, chances are your only choice is plastic.

I would love to see reusable, recyclable, and biodegradable alternatives push plastic out of its most commonplace uses, but for a lot of applications I think the only really viable alternatives are going to be biodegradable bioplastics. A lot of people have had bad experiences with the starch-based alternatives (those are the spoons that dissolve in your coffee before you can stir it, for example) but there are options like PHA coming into the market now that both last for a useful amount of time and biodegrade on a meaningful timescale.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

There is an alternative that fits for many single-use packaging situation: Cellophane. It's been around for over a century. Actually, it's the oldest plastics. It's compostable, and can even be recycled together with paper. Simple solution for many issues. But companies just don't care, so just screw the planet.