Killing our planet with plastics
- Thread starter begreen
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
not much fanfare!https://www.usatoday.com/videos/new...s-bill-aimed-reducing-sea-pollution/38125451/
from the Anchorage Daily, $10mil/5 yrs. quote from the article and link.
"Speaking with reporters after the signing, Sullivan said much of the waste comes from a handful of Asian nations, including China, Vietnam, and the Philippines. The countries lack proper controls, and waste is bulldozed into rivers that carry it to oceans. More than 8 million tons of plastic trash is dumped into oceans globally." pretty convenient ?https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/env...ska-lawmakers-praised-by-trump-cleanup-group/
from the Anchorage Daily, $10mil/5 yrs. quote from the article and link.
"Speaking with reporters after the signing, Sullivan said much of the waste comes from a handful of Asian nations, including China, Vietnam, and the Philippines. The countries lack proper controls, and waste is bulldozed into rivers that carry it to oceans. More than 8 million tons of plastic trash is dumped into oceans globally." pretty convenient ?https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/env...ska-lawmakers-praised-by-trump-cleanup-group/
Last edited:
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Germany started an interesting practice about 25 years ago, in that all manufacturers were made liable to take back all products and packaging they manufacture, disassemble, recycle, or re-use them. It was over the top, and manufacturers truly didn’t know how to handle this (was Mercedes to take back 25 year old cars, disassemble them, and somehow re-use the materials?), but it shows a line of thinking that I like.
If the costs of managing the waste from packaging were somehow placed back onto manufacturers (or importers) of these products, you would see a revolution in packaging design. Yes, the cost is ultimately passed on to the consumer, but by incentivizing manufacturers to reduce that overall cost (to remain competitive), the overall costs (and waste) would be lowered.
Same result as a tax or surcharge or deposit. Levying a tax on Mfg for single use non biodegradable products they produce will quicky lead to that same Mfg finding a way to make it biodegradable or at least easily recycled. The old adage applies:Whenever you tax something you get less of it ,subsidize it, you get more.
I would love to see plastic grocery bags outlawed. We were on vacation last year in the FL Keys, and we were behind a garbage truck that was overloaded, and plastic bags were popping up and blowing all over. You know they'll find the water and stay there for the next 500 years. Nothing wrong with good ol paper.
Germany took a strategic, leadership role in cradle to cradle concept that has dramatically reduced waste in the country. Since 1996 the country has reduced total net waste by 37 million tons. This is a thorough program that had different phases for different industries. It didn't apply to past manufacturing only future production. Manufacturers were given time to tool up. They were required to design with waste avoidance, waste recovery and environmentally compatible disposal in mind. It's been quite successful in segwaying the country to a more circular economy. The seed for this started with the EPEA program between 1987 and 1992 which developed a concept called: “Intelligent Product System” for transforming the linear economy into an economically and environmentally sustainable system of intelligent products.
"In 1991, Germany adopted its Packaging Ordinance, which requires all manufacturers to collect and then recycle or reuse their packaging after it is disposed of by consumers.
Making corporations responsible for their packaging to the end of its life cycle encourages them to package goods with fewer materials in order to minimize recycling and disposal costs.
The Ordinance focuses on improving three categories of packaging:
- Transport packaging (crates and shipping boxes)
- Secondary packaging (non-essential boxes, such as around bottles of vitamins)
- Primary packaging (casings that come in contact with the product, such as toothpaste tubes)"
(broken link removed to https://earth911.com/earth-watch/trash-planet-germany/)
Last edited:
![[Hearth.com] Killing our planet with plastics](https://www.hearth.com/talk/data/attachments/230/230833-ac88df4fec07d4640e7073aadc5d5998.jpg?hash=9_qhuOWlJV "[Hearth.com] Killing our planet with plastics")
![[Hearth.com] Killing our planet with plastics](https://www.hearth.com/talk/data/attachments/230/230834-9e0dc829dc0cd73a465f83513bdf4636.jpg?hash=oQCKixBlQC "[Hearth.com] Killing our planet with plastics")
outstanding comments by the folks here, your gov't responds with action directly relating to the thread and ZERO,ZERO COMMENTS? unless I've missed it no other person here has mentioned the bill when it was moving thru? what is up !here this reminds me when webby sold out and nobody saw it? speakin of the webmeister, last seen may 2017, howse he doin?
Stop trying to politicize the thread. One act does not indicate a general trend. There is a long list of industry appointees by the current administration that are completely reversing environmental controls in favor of industry.
no politics intended here, never mentioned the administration, you did!. I did mention Government. it is a very small move made by unanimous consent without amendments. here a link for those that may be interested. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/756
It's good to see the funding extended and any small step is welcome. Some big steps would be also.
PS: Thanks for providing the link to the actual bill. I was too lazy to look it up.
PS: Thanks for providing the link to the actual bill. I was too lazy to look it up.
Last edited:
meanwhile else where, 3000 families live in a 200 acre Jakarta dump? https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...-landfill_us_5b9fcc13e4b013b0977d47ce.article claims pickers earn Indonesia min. wage!
sportbikerider78
Minister of Fire
Obviously, because people want them.
What US company is dumping plastic in the ocean?
Ashful
Minister of Fire
This is failure in government, on every level. Meanwhile, they’ve been running a surplus of 15% - 20% every year, due to various administrative blockages on spending and procurement.
In this case, the fundamental problem is that they’re producing garbage quicker than they can process it. That mountain is still growing, every day. This is a clear case where waste reduction could and should be heavily incentivized, it is a home-grown problem.
Plastic certainly is everywhere.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...d-human-poop-pilot-study-ueg-week/1736745002/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...d-human-poop-pilot-study-ueg-week/1736745002/
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Really makes you wonder about the spun plastic fiber whole-house or local-use water filters that so many have installed in their homes, today.
Yes iv got one of those and the filter sure isnt paper. Also lots of nasty things water treatrment plants DONT take out of municipal water supplies when sourcing it from rivers like drugs and now micro plastics.
https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-09-05/if-youre-drinking-tap-water-youre-consuming-plastic-pollutants
My water supply comes from mountain lakes, so were first use, but everyone downstream that sources from streams and rivers gets the recycled stuff that comes out of our local waste treatment plant. But after it goes through my chlorine removal filter which is mostly plastic,all bets are off.
Last edited:
No one CEO is standing there throwing plastic into the ocean, it just finds its way there, haven't you seen the giant plastic patch in the ocean. Google it.
sportbikerider78
Minister of Fire
I have a 5 stage RO system for just drinking water. Love it.
Yes...and as we discussed earlier in this thread...it's not caused by the US. Thus, banning bags in the US isn't going to solve the issue of a growing mass of plastic in the ocean.
It would only stop the occasional bag from a careless citizen/municipality.
All countries are responsible for this issue. And it's not just in the oceans but the rivers that feed them. Recently testing found some rivers in England that exceeded previous high levels of microplastic measurements in Korea. There are lots of causes, not just plastic bags. Washing polyester and fleece clothing puts lots of fibers into the environment. Like it or not, this is ubiquitous now and showing up in us.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science...-worst-recorded-microplastic-pollution-world/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/10/22/659568662/microplastics-are-turning-up-everywhere-even-in-human-excrement
sportbikerider78
Minister of Fire
When we talk about banning something as incredibly useful as a plastic bag. Let's have some evidence to bring the table before we just start banning stuff and hoping we see a change in the environment.
If the US isn't dumping plastic in the ocean, that is a good thing. If the plastic is getting into our rivers/groundwater and making its way to the ocean, clearly that's an issue. Let's look at how that is happening and what we can do to stop it, rather than just banning random items. For all we know, other plastic items are a much bigger issue then bags.
Since it is ending up in human waste, it must be in the drinking water. Time to take a look at how they filter that water for the masses.
Environmentalists lose all credibility when they just yell "ban". Bring evidence of an issue and the root cause of that issue so we can make logical decisions not emotional responses.
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Screw the plastic bags. We should ban polyester clothing! [emoji14]
It all comes down to one thing: too many effing people. If you want to regulate something, that is the solution to all problems. Incentivize population stabilization, or reduction. China actually set the bar for this, more than 30 years ago, but this was aided by their more socialist economics.
It all comes down to one thing: too many effing people. If you want to regulate something, that is the solution to all problems. Incentivize population stabilization, or reduction. China actually set the bar for this, more than 30 years ago, but this was aided by their more socialist economics.
Ashful
Minister of Fire
BTW... I hate hearing any talk of “banning” anything. It’s not American. Live free or die, eh?
We should never be talking about “banning” various products or solutions, but incentivizing the communally-responsible choices. Bush should not have “banned” incandescent light bulbs, he should have insisted the laws were written to just incentivize more responsible choices. Don’t you dare ban my 6.4 liter sedan, just make it financially painful enough to drive a low-MPG car, that the masses choose the more socially-responsible path. People would quickly go back to Tupperware, or washing and re-using their Zip-Lok baggies (my grandmother used to do this), if those baggies were 6x their current price. But, they’d still be there, for those few cases when you really need a disposable solution.
This allows us our freedoms, to choose what is right for us, while effecting the mass changes that are often needed. You just need to make the less socially-desirable solutions a little painful.
We should never be talking about “banning” various products or solutions, but incentivizing the communally-responsible choices. Bush should not have “banned” incandescent light bulbs, he should have insisted the laws were written to just incentivize more responsible choices. Don’t you dare ban my 6.4 liter sedan, just make it financially painful enough to drive a low-MPG car, that the masses choose the more socially-responsible path. People would quickly go back to Tupperware, or washing and re-using their Zip-Lok baggies (my grandmother used to do this), if those baggies were 6x their current price. But, they’d still be there, for those few cases when you really need a disposable solution.
This allows us our freedoms, to choose what is right for us, while effecting the mass changes that are often needed. You just need to make the less socially-desirable solutions a little painful.