"Demand reduction, efficiency optimization, lifetime extension, and reuse/recycling are win-win strategies to reduce emissions effectively. Solely focusing on switching to alternative materials is not
I’m much less worried about plastics from a GHG perspective than I am from the ubiquitous nature of their chemical imprint on biological lifeforms. It’s an interesting study and shows how things aren’t often what we expect. The need to rethink plastic packaging has a lot more to do with the long term impacts on mammal and marine health and how the degraded nature of this petroleum product is in everything now. Is carbon in the atmosphere more dangerous than microplastics everywhere? I doubt the question would ever get properly asked. We are so myopic in our focus when it comes to the environment.
How dare we consider such things as indirect impacts when weighing the benefits of products that are clearly earmarked by the all-knowing wizards of tyranny for destruction because they're petrochemical-dependent!!! After all, the miracles that have come from petrochemcicals (which are NOT "fossil fuels" & therfore not limited in supply or access) are too numerous and essential to life (particularly given third world/poverty-stricken advancement considerations using them) to be jettisoned over alarmist delusions that are couched in malthusian demintia-ridden rationale. Once they're eradicated enough of us, then they'll have a surplus on hand for themselves to continue their luxurious, opulent and (by then) unaccountable, sated lifestyles unfettered by conscience or by bothersome realists who exercise independent, critical thinking and rational assessment skills to evaluate the relevance & implications of anything elites have deemed as being forbidden or dangerous.
That was a mouthful, Richard. I do agree.
I’m much less worried about plastics from a GHG perspective than I am from the ubiquitous nature of their chemical imprint on biological lifeforms. It’s an interesting study and shows how things aren’t often what we expect. The need to rethink plastic packaging has a lot more to do with the long term impacts on mammal and marine health and how the degraded nature of this petroleum product is in everything now. Is carbon in the atmosphere more dangerous than microplastics everywhere? I doubt the question would ever get properly asked. We are so myopic in our focus when it comes to the environment.
How dare we consider such things as indirect impacts when weighing the benefits of products that are clearly earmarked by the all-knowing wizards of tyranny for destruction because they're petrochemical-dependent!!! After all, the miracles that have come from petrochemcicals (which are NOT "fossil fuels" & therfore not limited in supply or access) are too numerous and essential to life (particularly given third world/poverty-stricken advancement considerations using them) to be jettisoned over alarmist delusions that are couched in malthusian demintia-ridden rationale. Once they're eradicated enough of us, then they'll have a surplus on hand for themselves to continue their luxurious, opulent and (by then) unaccountable, sated lifestyles unfettered by conscience or by bothersome realists who exercise independent, critical thinking and rational assessment skills to evaluate the relevance & implications of anything elites have deemed as being forbidden or dangerous.