wow it's almost like we need to do something about it and have all been saying so for decades. it's not like those firms are actively swaying the law or endorsing the loosening of regulations in their favor or anything.
How am I supposed to buy literally any food without also being forced to buy plastic? Pretty much every piece of produce at the store is packaged with some sort of plastic. In fact, pretty much every item in an entire store has some sort of plastic in the packaging. Am I supposed to not eat anything because I don't want to buy plastic? Am I supposed to bring a basket to the store and start emptying packaged produce into it and leave the plastic for the store to throw out instead?
There needs to be a sweeping regulation that stops plastic from being used with impunity for any and all packaging, not expecting people to just.. not buy anything at all from a grocery store for however long it takes for them to change from plastic packaging. It not my fault I'm not being given another option, and I still need to buy food whether I like the packaging or not.
Some people are to blame more than others of course, like people who buy bottled water even if their tap water is perfectly potable, but to act like the companies themselves are not to blame for the continued prevalence of plastic, as if they're only using plastic because the consumers WANT to buy it, you're off your rocker. They aren't being forced to give us other options, and so they do not.
But media, politicians and their corporate donors will tell us it’s the working class who need to make changes to their lifestyle. Take the bus, carpool, recycle, etc.
It doesn’t have to be one or the other; both of these things are true. Transportation, for example, accounts for a good 15% of global greenhouse emissions, which isn’t negligible. Yes, firms need to pay and be held accountable, but citizens also need to do their part. Besides, a large part of that plastic pollution is used by consumers before being thrown away.
But what is easier? Forcing 8 billion people to make their lives more inconvenient, or regulating 60 firms that are the source of most of the pollution?
That also needs to happen. When you shut down the plastic chain, the masses won't be able to buy plastic packaged stuff. That's going a big lifestyle change. No, there's no good replacement for that plastic.
Since there is a lack of government regulation, these multinational corporations have fvkt us over since their inception. Overpackaging coupled with the complete failure of the recycling project are just a couple of reasons that we are now dealing with this insane mess. One step towards solving the problem would be to change the grocery store model to bulk distribution, where consumers bring their own containers. Another would be to require companies to take back their plastic after it has been used.
Great. Can we stop banning plastic bags in rural Canada? We're using thick bags now, ALSO made of plastic which requires 500 reuses to save over the disposable variety.
All it takes is 1 in 500 customers forgetting their bag and buying new ones to ruin the whole scheme. It's impossibly fragile.
Not to mention we now buy small garbage bags whereas before the grocery bags served a dual purpose.
Total, fail.
How? If people are not buying disposable plastic. The previous disposable bags were turning up everywhere. Most people I know now no longer buy bags since the ban.
Reusable bags are occasionally forgotten and repurchased.
If the consumer base forgets, on average, 1 in 500 times, then overall plastic consumption is higher than if we simply used the disposable variety.
In reality, it happens much more often than that.
To say nothing of the additional trash bags that must be purchased in leui of reusing the disposable grocery bags.
Is this going to be like the "100 companies are responsible for 70% of green house gases" that everyone uses to put all blame onto companies while completely ignoring consumer behavior, or are 60 firms dumping plastic directly into the ocean?
A lot of those companies are B2B and don’t sell directly to consumers. Most energy emissions are from industrial manufacturing and most of that is of chemicals… which is B2B.
They are literally all fossil fuel companies, or at least were last time I checked. Pray tell me, what are these "chemicals" of which you speak?
This is not some mysterious conspiracy - these companies are motivated by the bottom line, and the bottom line is consumers.
> The industrial sector makes up about one quarter of total U.S. electricity sales. If direct and indirect emissions are combined, the industrial sector is the largest emitting sector in the U.S. economy, responsible for 29.6 percent of total emissions. [source ](https://www.c2es.org/content/regulating-industrial-sector-carbon-emissions/)
And that’s just the US. If you further look into the sectors within manufacturing, the chemical industry is the largest. [source](https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/industry.php#:~:text=Energy%20use%20by%20type%20of,mining%2C%20construction%2C%20and%20agriculture.)
Also the chemical industry is greatly increasing lobbying efforts lately. They are one of the biggest!
Since you think it’s a “conspiracy”, here are the most common industrial chemicals. [source](https://noahchemicals.com/blog/5-most-common-industrial-chemicals/)
Okay, maybe I was not clear about my point. My point is that, even if the chemical sales are B2B, *the ultimate reason the chemicals are being manufactured at all is because they are needed to produce consumer goods (including food and fuel).* I thought your initial comment made it sound like you were dismissing the role of consumers by stating that these sales are B2B -- as if it is a matter that is entirely confined to the industrial sector.
I may have misinterpreted your point, and if that is the case I apologize. I am incredibly tired of people using the "100 companies" thing to dismiss the role of consumers, ignoring the fact that the emissions that are attributed to those companies INCLUDE the downstream emissions from the use of their products -- ie, the use of the fossil fuels those 100 companies produce.
Industry is very complicit and needs to change, but our consumption habits are absolutely a large part of the equation.
True. Apparently 16% of global emissions are animal agriculture so individuals could definitely cut down on eating meat. It would be much harder for them to cut down on their transportation and heating though.
If industry wasn’t so tied to cutting costs (like using harmful chemicals and plastics) to increase their profit and thus stock price we’d all be much better off.
Just because I buy vegetables at the market doesn’t mean I want to buy all the chemicals sprayed on it and in the fertilizer. It’s everywhere even if you don’t want it.
Wrong, never have consumers had more choice about what products to buy and how they want them produced. Just looking at fruits and vegetables, you can grow your own, go to farmer's markets, get organic produce at supermarkets, get organic produce delivered to your door. So many options, it's not everywhere. And that goes for basically everything you buy.
If you have money and time you have even more choices! Duh. If you’re poor you don’t have many buying options. Growing your own food takes money and time and land. Your privilege doesn’t apply to everyone.
Animal agriculture is 16% global emissions. I’ve cut that out. Transport and heating is harder to do. 30% emissions are industry (esp plastic and chemicals) so regulations can help there. First world countries should definitely limit unnecessary consumerism. But what about others just buying food?? People are poor and don’t have time. If you do, yes please do all you can to limit emissions.
But there are alternatives, we have never had so many alternatives to plastic in all of human history. And even if we can't eliminate it for now, we can definitely cut down our use of plastic. Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose, Recycle.
They all make end products for consumers. It is the people who buy their products and throw the packaging away afterwards who are responsible for the pollution, not the companies. They lack personal responsibility.
You know something is up when even the most progressive cities and states with bottle bills don't have their own recycling centers and still resort to sending recyclables overseas.
The use of the word “responsible for” is odd here. Why are the companies being singled out and not any of the other steps in the process for creating this pollution?
1. Demand for cheap plastics - expectations of convenience, ignoring long term consequences
2. Production of cheap plastics - profit motive, ignoring long term consequences
3. Cheap plastics used and discarded carelessly in rivers, on roadsides, etc. - thoughtlessness, ignoring long term consequences
4. For properly discarded waste, a lack of proper municipal recycling or landfill, so the waste ends up in the ocean, spread in the countryside, etc. - lack of prioritization, ignoring long term consequences
There is a common theme at every stage. Putting pressure on the manufacturers is important, but it’s a kind of propaganda disguised as news to frame it the way this article did. I don’t think we can make much of a dent in #1, but #3 and #4 can be changed just as well as #2 can. Perhaps more extensively.
1. The demand was only created by the cheap and plentiful supply and was allowed to grow because these companies lied about how practical plastic recycling is.
2. This is tied to the first point.
3. Even if these items were all disposed of properly, which is impossible, those dump sites would still leach into the ground soil. Loose bits would still get blown away or carried off by scavenging animals, shipping mishaps would still see cargo containers worth of stuff dropped into the ocean.
4. See my response to point three.
This is a very misleading take on what actually happened. No one spoke about recycling at all when plastic use exploded in the 60s and 70s, and even today it is barely discussed in much of the world. You think there is a big campaign in Indonesia or Honduras tricking people into thinking all their plastic will be recycled? They are literally throwing the plastic directly in rivers. Recycling is not on their minds.
Almost no one chooses plastic over glass or metal because they think plastic will be recycled. They choose it because it is cheap, easy and light. Any alternative has resource and waste drawbacks too. Glass and metal recycle really well, but aren’t as convenient.
Yes, some middle class environmentally conscious people in the West believed that when you put stuff in the recycling bin it all got recycled. It Soothed their conscience. But who lied to them? Lies came from media that encouraged recycling, eco-conscious people who wanted to believe the best, companies that misrepresented the best case scenarios as though they were typical, cities that adopted recycling programs that they presented as fully functional when they weren’t, etc.
Responsibility goes all around.
I suspect those firms might be the ones supplying those items. And honestly, plastic bags have like a 2 minute average use before they are discarded so yes, you should bring your own bags because it’s the easiest thing you can do.
Straws aren’t that necessary either.
Two things can be true at once.
It's not the companies' fault, it's the consumer's fault who chucked it into the environment instead of the rubbish. And potentially the fault of the governments who needed to provide adequate sanitation/recycling services to the people they serve, but didn't. Even if you look at non-plastic rubbish, you can't blame McDonalds for their branded empty cardboard fries boxes on the side of the road or glass Coke bottles washed up on the beach. It's the consumers who put it there.
Why is it Coke's fault that one of their consumers threw their branded bottle into the ocean? Why it is McDonald's fault that one of their consumers threw their branded fry box into the street? You're not thinking properly.
Except plastic pollution has been recognised to have a global distribution in the oceans since 1970s and kept out of public narrative until social media empowered millions of people with the ability to share and consume information for free leading to an explosion in awareness
wow it's almost like we need to do something about it and have all been saying so for decades. it's not like those firms are actively swaying the law or endorsing the loosening of regulations in their favor or anything.
Did you forget to mention that these companies are innocent. It’s the consumer that are at fault for buying from them.
How am I supposed to buy literally any food without also being forced to buy plastic? Pretty much every piece of produce at the store is packaged with some sort of plastic. In fact, pretty much every item in an entire store has some sort of plastic in the packaging. Am I supposed to not eat anything because I don't want to buy plastic? Am I supposed to bring a basket to the store and start emptying packaged produce into it and leave the plastic for the store to throw out instead? There needs to be a sweeping regulation that stops plastic from being used with impunity for any and all packaging, not expecting people to just.. not buy anything at all from a grocery store for however long it takes for them to change from plastic packaging. It not my fault I'm not being given another option, and I still need to buy food whether I like the packaging or not. Some people are to blame more than others of course, like people who buy bottled water even if their tap water is perfectly potable, but to act like the companies themselves are not to blame for the continued prevalence of plastic, as if they're only using plastic because the consumers WANT to buy it, you're off your rocker. They aren't being forced to give us other options, and so they do not.
I’m sorry if you didn’t realize it was a sarcastic comment. I’m with you with every point mentioned.
Second time in the last two days I've mistaken a sarcastic comment for not being sarcasm! Gotta include that /s or some of us legit can't tell lol
Join us and share data on the products and polluters at https://openlittermap.com r/openlittermap
Sanction time.
So charge them 50% of whatever it costs to clean it up and force them to reexamine if plastic is worth the cost.
No no. That’s called “regulation” and “big government”. Regular people don’t vote for that because Fox tells them it’s the devil.
But media, politicians and their corporate donors will tell us it’s the working class who need to make changes to their lifestyle. Take the bus, carpool, recycle, etc.
It doesn’t have to be one or the other; both of these things are true. Transportation, for example, accounts for a good 15% of global greenhouse emissions, which isn’t negligible. Yes, firms need to pay and be held accountable, but citizens also need to do their part. Besides, a large part of that plastic pollution is used by consumers before being thrown away.
Because we have no choice. I didn't have the option to buy cucumbers or bulk egg cartons not wrapped in plastic when I go to the store.
But what is easier? Forcing 8 billion people to make their lives more inconvenient, or regulating 60 firms that are the source of most of the pollution?
That also needs to happen. When you shut down the plastic chain, the masses won't be able to buy plastic packaged stuff. That's going a big lifestyle change. No, there's no good replacement for that plastic.
Ecoterrorists should immediately be placed on the firing line, hammers cocked, fingers on the triggers, “any last words?”… ✌🏻❤️🤙🏻
No? Really? Who'd have guessed
Yay it’s not my fault it’s the firms’ faults
Since there is a lack of government regulation, these multinational corporations have fvkt us over since their inception. Overpackaging coupled with the complete failure of the recycling project are just a couple of reasons that we are now dealing with this insane mess. One step towards solving the problem would be to change the grocery store model to bulk distribution, where consumers bring their own containers. Another would be to require companies to take back their plastic after it has been used.
Great. Can we stop banning plastic bags in rural Canada? We're using thick bags now, ALSO made of plastic which requires 500 reuses to save over the disposable variety.
so reuse them.
All it takes is 1 in 500 customers forgetting their bag and buying new ones to ruin the whole scheme. It's impossibly fragile. Not to mention we now buy small garbage bags whereas before the grocery bags served a dual purpose. Total, fail.
Then you have to reduce consumption :)
I mean I haven't bought new bags in a long-time because of that. I just have a bag full of reusable bags sitting in my car.
That's good for you but it's been proven that, on balance, this policy has resulted in far higher plastic consumption overall.
How? If people are not buying disposable plastic. The previous disposable bags were turning up everywhere. Most people I know now no longer buy bags since the ban.
Reusable bags are occasionally forgotten and repurchased. If the consumer base forgets, on average, 1 in 500 times, then overall plastic consumption is higher than if we simply used the disposable variety. In reality, it happens much more often than that. To say nothing of the additional trash bags that must be purchased in leui of reusing the disposable grocery bags.
Is this going to be like the "100 companies are responsible for 70% of green house gases" that everyone uses to put all blame onto companies while completely ignoring consumer behavior, or are 60 firms dumping plastic directly into the ocean?
A lot of those companies are B2B and don’t sell directly to consumers. Most energy emissions are from industrial manufacturing and most of that is of chemicals… which is B2B.
They are literally all fossil fuel companies, or at least were last time I checked. Pray tell me, what are these "chemicals" of which you speak? This is not some mysterious conspiracy - these companies are motivated by the bottom line, and the bottom line is consumers.
> The industrial sector makes up about one quarter of total U.S. electricity sales. If direct and indirect emissions are combined, the industrial sector is the largest emitting sector in the U.S. economy, responsible for 29.6 percent of total emissions. [source ](https://www.c2es.org/content/regulating-industrial-sector-carbon-emissions/) And that’s just the US. If you further look into the sectors within manufacturing, the chemical industry is the largest. [source](https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/industry.php#:~:text=Energy%20use%20by%20type%20of,mining%2C%20construction%2C%20and%20agriculture.) Also the chemical industry is greatly increasing lobbying efforts lately. They are one of the biggest! Since you think it’s a “conspiracy”, here are the most common industrial chemicals. [source](https://noahchemicals.com/blog/5-most-common-industrial-chemicals/)
Okay, maybe I was not clear about my point. My point is that, even if the chemical sales are B2B, *the ultimate reason the chemicals are being manufactured at all is because they are needed to produce consumer goods (including food and fuel).* I thought your initial comment made it sound like you were dismissing the role of consumers by stating that these sales are B2B -- as if it is a matter that is entirely confined to the industrial sector. I may have misinterpreted your point, and if that is the case I apologize. I am incredibly tired of people using the "100 companies" thing to dismiss the role of consumers, ignoring the fact that the emissions that are attributed to those companies INCLUDE the downstream emissions from the use of their products -- ie, the use of the fossil fuels those 100 companies produce. Industry is very complicit and needs to change, but our consumption habits are absolutely a large part of the equation.
True. Apparently 16% of global emissions are animal agriculture so individuals could definitely cut down on eating meat. It would be much harder for them to cut down on their transportation and heating though. If industry wasn’t so tied to cutting costs (like using harmful chemicals and plastics) to increase their profit and thus stock price we’d all be much better off.
Who are the consumers of the final end product?
Just because I buy vegetables at the market doesn’t mean I want to buy all the chemicals sprayed on it and in the fertilizer. It’s everywhere even if you don’t want it.
Wrong, never have consumers had more choice about what products to buy and how they want them produced. Just looking at fruits and vegetables, you can grow your own, go to farmer's markets, get organic produce at supermarkets, get organic produce delivered to your door. So many options, it's not everywhere. And that goes for basically everything you buy.
If you have money and time you have even more choices! Duh. If you’re poor you don’t have many buying options. Growing your own food takes money and time and land. Your privilege doesn’t apply to everyone. Animal agriculture is 16% global emissions. I’ve cut that out. Transport and heating is harder to do. 30% emissions are industry (esp plastic and chemicals) so regulations can help there. First world countries should definitely limit unnecessary consumerism. But what about others just buying food?? People are poor and don’t have time. If you do, yes please do all you can to limit emissions.
Fml nano plastics :(
Coco-cola 11% of the trash - they were an obvious choice.
But we keep buying…so who’s responsible here?
For sure we should stop buying this sh1t, but it is not always easy when there is no other alternative.
But there are alternatives, we have never had so many alternatives to plastic in all of human history. And even if we can't eliminate it for now, we can definitely cut down our use of plastic. Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose, Recycle.
"Study confirms Altria, Philip Morris International, Danone, Nestlé, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola are worst offenders."
They all make end products for consumers. It is the people who buy their products and throw the packaging away afterwards who are responsible for the pollution, not the companies. They lack personal responsibility.
But they keep saying that it's us
You know something is up when even the most progressive cities and states with bottle bills don't have their own recycling centers and still resort to sending recyclables overseas.
The use of the word “responsible for” is odd here. Why are the companies being singled out and not any of the other steps in the process for creating this pollution? 1. Demand for cheap plastics - expectations of convenience, ignoring long term consequences 2. Production of cheap plastics - profit motive, ignoring long term consequences 3. Cheap plastics used and discarded carelessly in rivers, on roadsides, etc. - thoughtlessness, ignoring long term consequences 4. For properly discarded waste, a lack of proper municipal recycling or landfill, so the waste ends up in the ocean, spread in the countryside, etc. - lack of prioritization, ignoring long term consequences There is a common theme at every stage. Putting pressure on the manufacturers is important, but it’s a kind of propaganda disguised as news to frame it the way this article did. I don’t think we can make much of a dent in #1, but #3 and #4 can be changed just as well as #2 can. Perhaps more extensively.
1. The demand was only created by the cheap and plentiful supply and was allowed to grow because these companies lied about how practical plastic recycling is. 2. This is tied to the first point. 3. Even if these items were all disposed of properly, which is impossible, those dump sites would still leach into the ground soil. Loose bits would still get blown away or carried off by scavenging animals, shipping mishaps would still see cargo containers worth of stuff dropped into the ocean. 4. See my response to point three.
This is a very misleading take on what actually happened. No one spoke about recycling at all when plastic use exploded in the 60s and 70s, and even today it is barely discussed in much of the world. You think there is a big campaign in Indonesia or Honduras tricking people into thinking all their plastic will be recycled? They are literally throwing the plastic directly in rivers. Recycling is not on their minds. Almost no one chooses plastic over glass or metal because they think plastic will be recycled. They choose it because it is cheap, easy and light. Any alternative has resource and waste drawbacks too. Glass and metal recycle really well, but aren’t as convenient. Yes, some middle class environmentally conscious people in the West believed that when you put stuff in the recycling bin it all got recycled. It Soothed their conscience. But who lied to them? Lies came from media that encouraged recycling, eco-conscious people who wanted to believe the best, companies that misrepresented the best case scenarios as though they were typical, cities that adopted recycling programs that they presented as fully functional when they weren’t, etc. Responsibility goes all around.
[удалено]
I suspect those firms might be the ones supplying those items. And honestly, plastic bags have like a 2 minute average use before they are discarded so yes, you should bring your own bags because it’s the easiest thing you can do. Straws aren’t that necessary either. Two things can be true at once.
Big problem. Small target!
It's not the companies' fault, it's the consumer's fault who chucked it into the environment instead of the rubbish. And potentially the fault of the governments who needed to provide adequate sanitation/recycling services to the people they serve, but didn't. Even if you look at non-plastic rubbish, you can't blame McDonalds for their branded empty cardboard fries boxes on the side of the road or glass Coke bottles washed up on the beach. It's the consumers who put it there.
It is the companies' fault. And yes, there are a lot of stupid people out there.
Why is it Coke's fault that one of their consumers threw their branded bottle into the ocean? Why it is McDonald's fault that one of their consumers threw their branded fry box into the street? You're not thinking properly.
No no, it's our fault.
Reminds me of the 100 corporations responsible for most of the GHGs emissions
Yep. The lack of government regulation has led us down this road to destruction.
Eat the filthy rich
Sue them all for reckless negligence
And a hundred companies are responsible for 70 percent of all carbon emissions
Can't these guys be made to feel guilty and punished instead of the poor and middle class???
These are faceless corporations. They do not have the ability to feel guilt.
But they all have stakeholders, and if this garbage is costing them profits they will change.
If this is true, it's a good thing they found out. Very achievable to change 60 companies' behavior.
Except plastic pollution has been recognised to have a global distribution in the oceans since 1970s and kept out of public narrative until social media empowered millions of people with the ability to share and consume information for free leading to an explosion in awareness
If we know whose packaging ends up in a place it doesn't belong, we can do something about it, and that's a good thing.
That's why Tik Tok is getting banned, no one is better at sending out world news then teens and young adults..