Update. I bought glass straws so I can drink #coffee again. About to have my first sip after a week long detox 😁
🇳🇱
@Gina Why do you need a straw to drink coffee, let alone a glass one ?
@freemo Because I just did a week of teeth whitening. Don't want to stain them again. Also I'm not sure if paper or plastic straws are good in hot coffee.
Even though this will still stain the back of my teeth. Worth it.
@Gina plastic is probably fine in coffee, but yea that makes sense :)
@freemo Plus, these are infinitely reusable as well.
@Gina That is true, but plastics are weird in that they are a secondary product. So by not buying it you dont really reduce the rate they are produced. Even if no one bought plastic the plastic would still be produced and just thrown away never seeing use since its a byproduct of other primary processes.
The problem is since plastic is a secondary product off nonrenewable sources (natural gas and gasoline) you have no impact on reducing production by reducing consumption of plastics directly. You'd have to stop the production of gasoline and natural gas to have that outcome.
@freemo
I only know that plastics are made from oil. But I have a hard time believing that it would have *no* impact (at all).
Plastic production is still production with its own emissions (f.e.) and the result, plastic, is FAR more harmful then most people (seem to) realize.
It's really bad for the environment and affects/infects the whole food chain and thereby also ends up in human bodies.
Also, I'm fine with keeping (more) fossil fuels in the ground ;-)
If no one bought any plastic at all then you'd have a plastic-like liquid waste that would come from gas refineries and similar sources. This slurry would have all the harm of plastic and just skip the consumer and go straight to the dump.
This, I'd argue, is in fact **worse** than people not buying the plastic at all since the overall volume of waste is the same regardless. The difference is that if people dont buy the plastic (which at least for a time keeps it out of the trash) then other products need to be produced to fill that need as well. So take plastic straws being replaced with glass ones, you have the same plastic waste being produced by buying a glass straw, but now you have the additional burden of a glass straw being produced on top of that.
@freemo
> This slurry would have all the harm of plastic and just skip the consumer and go straight to the dump.
I'm doubtful of the claims you make, but I don't have better insights to counter (most of) it.
But going straight to the dump itself is already a win. Then it won't end up in the environment and oceans and (severely) affecting life everywhere and ending up in our food chain.
That is *quite* a big win already.
Yes if properly handled and making it to the dump is one small positive aspect. But the downsides as I mentioned dont really make up for that, as now we are mass producing all the objects plastics used to server without reducing the plastic waste itself.
For the situations where we cannot avoid liquid fuel, like airliners, people are working on other sources than fossil fuel.
Actually just buy less gasoline and non-renewable fuels, the production of plastic will automatically reduce regardless of its demand (the cost to make it as a primary product would be prohibitive and it just wont be made even if there is demand since the price would be enormous).
I agree with @FreePietje ; If you are correct about plastic being the inevitable side-product, a big solid block of plastic in the landfill must be better than a thousand little trinkets, packagings, device parts etc sent all over the world.
There's also the further energy use and pollution from turning it into the many different consumer-grade types of plastic.
@FreePietje @Gina
I'd argue the money into the machine isnt as important as the pollutants and where they go.
The plastic slurry is liquid not solid usually (large/heavy alkanes and related chemicals). I do agree that if look in isolation it is better to throw that directly into the ground and regulate its disposal better. The problem is, as I stated, your offsetting that by now **also** replacing all the products made of plastic with things made from wood, glass, or metal which all have their own economic and enviromental costs with it as well.
Doesnt change my point.. the plastic waste is created regardless. Adding on top of that another thing that needs to be produced to replace it, no matter how renewable, doesnt change the fact that not only do we have the same waste being produced but now we also have the waste produced from an additional product to replace it.
Yes glass straws are nicer than paper since glass straws can be reused, but this isnt helping matters when its a new source of waste just added on top of the plastic waste.
@freemo @FreePietje @clacke hey folks, this is an interesting conversation but maybe consider untagging @/Gina@fosstodon.org so she isn't spammed by the entire thread?
I'd be happy to but usually I wait until the person requests it.
For starters we have no idea if she is interested in the thread or not, so best to have her ask.
Second, you can just right click the thread and select "mute conversation" so its really never needed in the first place.
That said if she asks I'd have no problem doing that.
@freemo This is not true. Plastics (or polymers) are made from monomers. The most common monomer is ethene or ethylene which is a flammable gas and not a 'plastic like liquid waste'. Ethene is produced by a process called steam cracking where large hydrocarbons from the petrochemical industry are first converted into ethane. If plastics were not produced the large hydrocarbons could be used for other purposes (like gasoline).
Yes I explained this, long chain alkanes mostly as I said. Those long chain alkanes are a liquid as they arnt usually "cracked" except when making plastics and also why I pointed out natural gas can be used too.
@freemo My point is that there is no slurry that ends up as waste if we don't make plastics out of them. If no plastics was made out of oil or natural gas it could (and would) be used for any number of other purposes like fuel or lubricant. Such is the beauty of organic chemistry.
And contrary to what you wrote even if you want to make plastic you first have to crack the long hydrocarbons to create ethane (C2H6) and then the monomer ethylene (C2H4).
I didnt get into the cracking process, so not really contrary, but yes, you'd have to crack the wastes and do some things to them before they appear as plastics.
As for the waste going to other users, yes and no. Most of the uses of long-chain hydrocarbons are all secondary products like plastic, so really doesnt change the equation much here, most of them are even single use. So really no matter how you dice it, even if you can keep it out of going direct to the landfill, the general idea is the same, and that is, dont use plastic and you havent done much of anything, those chemicals still get made and either thrown away or used for something, many such things being even worse for the environment (such as lubricans which generally tend to get out into the environment).
@freemo @ericbuijs @FreePietje Yall I just wanted to drink coffee.
@freemo Ah crap :(