this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
317 points (91.2% liked)

memes

9940 readers
2996 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Norodix@lemmy.world 48 points 2 days ago (2 children)

A study comparing the environmental impacts of various single-use beverage containers has concluded that glass bottles have a greater overall impact than plastic bottles

But... but... Glass is not single use. That is the whole point. I don't like this article.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If you have single use bottles, aluminum like soda cans is lowest impact. But any reusable solution (meal, plastic, or glass) is much much better.

[–] MelastSB@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What about the plastic lining in the can?

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I think that's a whole lot less plastic than if it was the whole thing.

[–] deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

a lot less. we're talking ~2 microns (ie: 2 micrometers or 0.002mm). For context, the width of an "average" human hair ranges from 18 to 180 microns (there's a lot of variability due to age, ethnicity, and lifestyle).

If you want to see for yourself, you can dissolve the aluminum to leave just the lining (scrub any paint off the outside of the can first). You can use a solution with pH either lower than 3 or higher than 12.5. For context, draino is about 12 on the pH scale, and coca-cola is about 2.5, but the closer you are to neutral, the longer it will take (so while you could theoretically use the soda inside the can, that will take quite a while). There are sulfuric acid drain cleaners that get down into the 1 to 2 pH range (though note that pH is a log scale, so that's on the order of 10 to 100 times more acidic than the cola and will fuck your shit up if you aren't careful).

For whatever you choose to use, be sure to look up safe handling and disposal recommendations before attempting, or simply watch this youtube video instead!

[–] MelastSB@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Sure, but it's plastic in addition to the aluminium can. Might be better overall but not exactly ground breaking ecologically speaking.

Must be profitable, though, or they would have disappeared

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago (6 children)

But… but… Glass is not single use.

When used for mass-produced beverages it very much is. Hell, plenty of beverages still use disposable glass bottles today, and that's not even getting into the fact that glass bottles use to be the standard, which is part of the reason why there's so much nostalgia around them.

In the same vein, plastic is not inherently single-use. If we're comparing multi-use plastic and multi-use glass, then the same calculus applies.

[–] reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net 16 points 2 days ago

But in the meme it’s the kind of milk bottle you return to the store for $ and they wash and refill it. Not really covered by that study I don’t think

glass bottles have a more damaging overall effect, largely because they are heavier and require more energy for their production.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 2 days ago

Lots of countries have deposits on bottles and they will very much be reused. If that's not being done it's a cultural/political problem not a glass bottle problem.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's mostly just the us that no longer have recycling for bottles. Most modern countries have automated collection machines.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Recycling is explicitly mentioned in the link.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I know, what I'm saying is no glass bottle is explicitly non recyclable there's just a lack of ability to recycle in the us for whatever dumb business monster reasoning.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Single-use bottles includes recyclable bottles. The point of single-use is that they're discarded in some way by the consumer at the end of use, including discarded via recycling, not retained.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They're only single use if they aren't recycled, the article states that as well.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They’re only single use if they aren’t recycled, the article states that as well.

... would you care to quote that, because I'm pretty sure it says otherwise.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But as these bottles are largely single-use, many of them are discarded and dumped in the earth’s ecosystems, where they constitute a significant portion of all environmental waste. 

They only counted recyclable bottles as single use if discarded anywhere but a recycling center assuming they may or may not be recycled so they assume it's trash until it's recycled or degraded.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They only counted recyclable bottles as single use if discarded anywhere but a recycling center

That's literally not what the quote says.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But as these bottles are largely single-use, many of them are discarded and dumped in the earth’s ecosystems, where they constitute a significant portion of all environmental waste.

Let's break it down.

"But as these bottles are largely single-use" - does not define 'single-use' but implies that the following statement is about single-use bottles

"many of them are discarded and dumped in the earth’s ecosystems, where they constitute a significant portion of all environmental waste." - says that many of the aforementioned are dumped and constitute environmental waste.

That's it. That's the entirety of the quote you provided.

Where do you get that single-use is defined as only the unrecycled bottles from THAT?

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That is the definition....., they're used a single time and dumped into the environment. That's what single use plastics are, I've legit never heard of anyone aside from you refer to glass as single use.

They say glass new and recycled but accept that a large amount of glass bottles still end up in the ecosystem.

I didn't say it defined single use glass, that's just a you thing. It defines sickle use for the article in which it is used solely to describe items that are used once and dumped into the ecosystem. It is specifically never referred to in reference to glass in the article.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

No, my name's Dan.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 4 points 1 day ago

I've yet to see a reusable plastic milk bottle. The glass bottle pictured is literally one that you return to the store for a deposit and they return to the dairy, where it gets sterilised and reused. These are quite common where I live, and the plastic alternative is single-use "recyclable" plastic.

[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Maybe the mass produced soft drinks are the problem.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

The tiny individual-use bottles, at least.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago

Except for the past 100 years glass recycling and re-use has been a net loss, on who pays for it, who wants to do it, who still just throws stuff out, and how it's implemented. Back in the 70's, when soda was in glass, something like 3% of the bottles were being returned.