Re:Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021
by catalogia on Sunday July 12, 2020 @04:29PM
(#23814497)
> 2) Landfills are on scarce land which will run out oneday, making waste disposal more expensive.
Case 2 is an interesting case, it's a startlingly widespread fear yet seems ridiculous when you think about it for more than a few seconds. Slate Star Codex concluded it's alarmism sparked in the 80s by the media's coverage of the Mobro 4000 trash barge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobro_4000
Point 5 ("5. More And More Trash Piling Up Until The Whole World Is Just A Giant Mountain Of Trash"): https://web.archive.org/web/20190102054648/https://slatestar...
Re:Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021
by lopmotr on Sunday July 12, 2020 @09:42PM
(#23816373)
Oh, I've never heard of drowning in rubbish! With 5) I'm referring to geological effects causing landfill land to collapse and get washed away. That happened recently in New Zealand and a river ended up full of rubbish from a disused landfill.
Re:Canada aims to ban single-use plastics by 2021
by catalogia on Monday July 13, 2020 @12:59AM
(#23817324)
Sorry, I mean Slate Star Codex's point 5 addresses your point 2. I communicated that poorly.
Incidentally a nice (rather amusing) example from pop culture of the "landfills are filling up and we'll soon drown in trash" meme is Futurama episode 'A Big Piece of Garbage'* (S01E08) It's essentially a parody of that NYC trash barge incident and the movie Armageddon.
1) Landfills leach toxic chemicals into the water table.
2) Landfills are on scarce land which will run out oneday, making waste disposal more expensive.
3) It can be inconvenient to build over a landfill because you might hit a bale of plastic when drilling holes for your piles.
4) Plastic bags can blow away from landfills and end up in the sea.
5) Landfills may eventually erode into the sea.
1) Isn't true of all plastics or all landfills but nobody wants to encourage the use of the harmless ones. 2) and 3) are such small problems, it doesn't make sense for the whole world to pay whatever it costs to slow them (not even stop them). We'll never run out of land, just prime land in existing cities which is already mostly "lost" to development anyway. 4) is easily solved or a non-problem and probably even worse for recycling. 5) is just a response to a recent news event.
Nobody wants to consider if recycling or banning products costs more than the purely financial future landfill cost problem. I've tried asking someone about the relative costs when they gave me reason 2) and they just responded by saying that their conscience feels better knowing they're doing what's right.
Some of their ideas to solve it cause increased greenhouse gas emissions, like you mentioned with the energy cost. Many people even want to burn it!