News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Plastic recycling remains a 'myth': Greenpeace study. Parent comment

Re:Plastic recycling remains a 'myth': Greenpeace study by gs17 on Monday October 24, 2022 @11:07AM (#33317690)
They're much more easily recyclable, at least. The continued existence of aluminium cans for drinks makes me feel the weight can't be that big a dealbreaker, too. I'd imagine a lot of plastic in things like packaging simply wouldn't be there anymore at all (e.g. getting rid of clamshells for paper-based shells), or would be significantly reduced.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plastic recycling remains a 'myth': Greenpeace study by gruez on Monday October 24, 2022 @11:35AM (#33318078)
>They're much more easily recyclable, at least.

Yeah but if they end up using more energy, which one should we go with?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plastic recycling remains a 'myth': Greenpeace study by warkdarrior on Monday October 24, 2022 @12:36PM (#33318939)
The only environmentally friendly way is for each person to travel to the place of manufacture on foot, pick up the items they want, without any packaging, and then walk back to their homes. Nothing else is acceptable!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plastic recycling remains a 'myth': Greenpeace study by blockwriter on Monday October 24, 2022 @01:00PM (#33319253)
I will say that I would be in favor of a blanket ban on clothes made with synthetic fibers. An exception could be made for winter jackets, wetsuits, and the like, but I welcome sartorial tyranny.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plastic recycling remains a 'myth': Greenpeace study by tuatoru on Monday October 24, 2022 @07:01PM (#33323783)
Aluminum is worth recycling, but post-consumer paper and card is a nightmare to recycle because of all the contaminants. Food scraps. Staples and other bits of metal. Plastic tapes. Labels. China clay coatings for the printed surfaces. (Looking at you, Apple.) Best to just burn it in high-temperature furnaces as bio-energy.
[ Parent | on HN ]