this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
400 points (98.3% liked)

News

36327 readers
4021 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

For things that can't be recycled, I would agree. But if it can be, then it still needs to be brought to a recycling facility to make that happen. Without this incentive, a lot more of it will end up in landfills.

[–] Electromechanical_Supergiant@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If the companies had to pay per bottle, do you really think they'd still be using single use packaging like that?

They'd install refill stations in stores and sell you a reusable bottle that you can fill up from their metered tap at the refill station.

Companies created the problem of single use packaging; the onus is not on individuals to solve a problem created by companies.

[–] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not if it costs more to develop, install, and maintain a refill system. Much more likely they would just raise the price to the consumer anyway.

[–] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If gov'ts had kept on top of the companies and created prohibitive rules around single-use plastics (and chemical use ... see PFOS/PFAS) in the 70's, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Instead they just let companies do whatever they wanted 'cause capitalism is god.

[–] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

And now it's so far gone that doing the bare minimum for the environment is great for their image so let's dump more money into advertising that than actually making a meaningful change.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

If the companies had to pay per bottle, do you really think they’d still be using single use packaging like that?

If it's the same 5/10/25c per container, then they very likely will. Consumers have already decided that this price is worth paying for the convenience, so it makes little difference if companies paid this and passed on the cost to consumer, or if it's transparently shown as a separate reimbursable fee. In the end, all the costs get passed on to consumers and it's left to us to vote with our wallets. I think the main issue is that the cost of producing containers doesn't reflect the true long term cost, and the solution to that is probably to impose a tax based on the amount of material used. That way, consumers making the choice that's right for them will also mean making the choice that's right for everyone else.