Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Nestle Named Top Plastic Polluters For Third Year In a Row (theguardian.com) 158
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Nestlé have been accused of "zero progress" on reducing plastic waste, after being named the world's top plastic polluters for the third year in a row. Coca-Cola was ranked the world's No 1 plastic polluter by Break Free From Plastic in its annual audit, after its beverage bottles were the most frequently found discarded on beaches, rivers, parks and other litter sites in 51 of 55 nations surveyed. Last year it was the most frequently littered bottle in 37 countries, out of 51 surveyed. Coca-Cola was ranked the world's No 1 plastic polluter by Break Free From Plastic in its annual audit, after its beverage bottles were the most frequently found discarded on beaches, rivers, parks and other litter sites in 51 of 55 nations surveyed. Last year it was the most frequently littered bottle in 37 countries, out of 51 surveyed.
The annual audit, undertaken by 15,000 volunteers around the world, identifies the largest number of plastic products from global brands found in the highest number of countries. This year they collected 346,494 pieces of plastic waste, 63% of which was marked clearly with a consumer brand. "The world's top polluting corporations claim to be working hard to solve plastic pollution, but instead they are continuing to pump out harmful single-use plastic packaging," said Emma Priestland, Break Free From Plastic's global campaign coordinator. Priestland said the only way to halt the growing global tide of plastic litter was to stop production, phase out single use and implement reuse systems.
The annual audit, undertaken by 15,000 volunteers around the world, identifies the largest number of plastic products from global brands found in the highest number of countries. This year they collected 346,494 pieces of plastic waste, 63% of which was marked clearly with a consumer brand. "The world's top polluting corporations claim to be working hard to solve plastic pollution, but instead they are continuing to pump out harmful single-use plastic packaging," said Emma Priestland, Break Free From Plastic's global campaign coordinator. Priestland said the only way to halt the growing global tide of plastic litter was to stop production, phase out single use and implement reuse systems.
It is sad seeing waste plasti floating around... (Score:4, Informative)
Imagine the scene of sailing through a nice tropical archipelago and enjoying the view, then looking down a the water and seeing several plastic soda bottles floating around.
That is the unfortunate reality that I have experienced.
Re:It is sad seeing waste plasti floating around.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you dispose of them like a good citizen of Earth?
If not then maybe you are part of the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Well how much would this guy risk in such an endeavor?
If I am walking down the street, and I find a bottle, I may pick it up and put it in a nearby refuge bin. But this guy is on a boat. Being that he was able to stop and enjoy the view for a period of time, I expect he was a passenger on a larger sailing vessel. So trying to get the pollution from the water may be a rather dangerous stunt at the time. Even if he was on a smaller sail boat, which is much closer to the water. The small boat probably doesn'
Re: (Score:2)
All I am saying if it bothers someone so much to post about it then maybe they need to do something about it. It wasn't the big corps who dumped all that plastic in the water. It was citizens. Picking up trash never hurt anyone. Well, except that one guy, but he didn't know an old unexploded grenade was in the pile of trash!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow..that sucks.
I remember as a kid, picking up and collecting glass bottles to return to the 7-11 to get the deposit back on them, that's how we made a bit of money as really young kids.
*sigh*
With all th
Re: (Score:2)
I have to say more and more, I'm thankful I grew up when I did...didn't have to worry about meth cookers, or kidnappers or the plethora of bad things parents and kids have to worry about.
I graduated from high school in 1972. It's almost a certainty there were just as many bad things back then, but, local press tended to gloss over a lot, especially in middle class and upper class neighborhoods, and/or if the perpetrator was prviliged. To the politicians and press of the day, the city/town/village/state/country's image was more important than any individual person's "misfortune", and instituionalized "blame the victim" was a huge disincentive to reporting crimes against person, and even prop
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't mean how a single person "disposes" of them cans. You may be the most eco-conscious person in the world and always separate your garbage and dispose of it as you're told is proper.
But you have no control over what happens later to the collected garbage, and this is what matters. Most of the time what happens after you dispose of your garbage properly is called "increasing shareholder value by lowering the costs".
That is, dumping all that shite into the sea.
Re: (Score:2)
"It doesn't mean" -> "It doesn't matter".
Almost.
Re: It is sad seeing waste plasti floating around. (Score:4, Informative)
No, he's not part of then problem.
You expecting *him* to pick up their trash instead of *them*, is the problem.
He could have done something good, by picking it up. But it's not him to blame if it lies around there.
Re: It is sad seeing waste plasti floating around. (Score:4, Insightful)
The point is that we shouldn't be making these plastic bottles to start with. Sugar drinks and artificial flavor drinks are bad for your health. Just say no.
Get a reusable water bottle with a good carbon filter and stop buying water in plastic bottles.
Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that we shouldn't be making these plastic bottles to start with. Sugar drinks and artificial flavor drinks are bad for your health. Just say no.
Get a reusable water bottle with a good carbon filter and stop buying water in plastic bottles.
Problem solved.
Another option is switching from products packed in plastic to the same products in aluminum cans.
Just say no does not adequately address the challenges of those struggling with addiction to caffinated/sugared/artifical flavoured drinks (much like tobacco, soft drink manufactureres work hard to make their products as addictive as legally possible). And how do you remedy the challenges of water with high mineral content? In some parts of the world, the mineral content of the water negatively impacts the ta
Re: (Score:2)
Any water can be purified by filters, etc. No need to buy water.
My heart goes out to those damaging their health with "addiction" to sugar. Get over it, snowflake.
Re: (Score:2)
Sugar drinks and artificial flavor drinks are bad for your health.
Sugar drinks, maybe sometimes. Artificial flavor drinks, not bad for your health. Stop getting your information from naturalnews.com, that's a website that makes things up.
Re: (Score:2)
Just preposition emergency canteens ... (Score:2)
Imagine the scene of sailing through a nice tropical archipelago and enjoying the view, then looking down a the water and seeing several plastic soda bottles floating around.
Its just the preposition of emergency canteens should you shipwreck.You will have something to store and boil water in. :-)
Re:It is sad seeing waste plasti floating around.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Glass bottles - the recycling system "the public didn't like it"? Citation, please. Kids loved it. Poor people loved it.
Oh, plastic was cheaper, so ROI. And if you're posting this crap here on slashdot, you're not even getting paid to post crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids and 'poor people' bought fewer bottles than comfortably-off adults. Companies primarily serve their customers.
If any of this is a surprise to you, you're far too naive for that UID.
Re: (Score:2)
Glass bottles - the recycling system "the public didn't like it"? Citation, please. Kids loved it. Poor people loved it.
Only in jusridictions with a returnable glass-bottle deposit system in place. Unless there is a deposit to collect, there is no incentive for kids, or poor people, to collect glass bottles.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids loved it. Poor people loved it.
Most people are not poor or kids, so....
Everyone (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people do not care. They do not see that their individual actions do not have a direct impact on themselves.
A while back I berated a group of teenagers for dropping litter in the street, who would pick it up ? They shouted at me "that is what we pay taxes for". My comment "we will pay less tax if the council did not have to clean up after you" just resulted in them shouting abuse at me - which did not surprise me :-(
Re:Everyone (Score:4)
I blame parents for this. Whether you are eco-minded or not, raise your kids with some personal ethics and pride in your community.
Re: Everyone (Score:2)
Most people *in the US* don't care.
Don't assume the world is like you. I don't mean that as an offense, but as a scientifically backed fact, I'm sorry. (At least when looking at US students from the last few decades.)
Around here, you better not throw thrash on the ground in front of anyone. They *will* scold you for it, and demand you pick it back up. Some will even call the cops if you refuse.
The actual problem is, that people don't see it as *theirs*.
They would complain if you'd do it in their house. But
Re: (Score:2)
Most people do not care. They do not see that their individual actions do not have a direct impact on themselves.
Note: even if 90% of people care, the remaining 10% can have a huge effect on the litter in any given area.
Re: (Score:2)
What I don’t get is how everyone seems to hate seeing litter, but it still happens. Whats so damn hard about not dropping trash on the ground?
A fellow poster mentioned a lack of receptacles and awareness. That's true.
It's also a lack of pride.
It's also the birds and vermin who grab the garbage from the bins and toss it wherever.
NOT Everyone (Score:4, Informative)
The problem is that it is not everyone. There is a percentage of people who don't care and they are making all the mess. The percentage varies wildly from culture to culture - generally the more educated people are, especially in respect to the environment, and more into the culture to follow rules, the less the percentage. I come from Greece, which I would say is rather "middle" in this culture scale, as Greeks generally don't follow any rules, but are not uneducated about the environment, with this varying a lot between areas and age. The effect is that you get a minority, yet significant percentage of people polluting the countryside and the (not overwhelming) majority being aghast at this. When I live in the US, the heavy fines prevented polluting in most places, even where the local population would not really have of an environmental awareness. This was not everywhere though, e.g. I went to a beach in Puerto Rico and everybody seemed to be having a barbeque around me, they did use some garbage bins, but they were very small anyway so generally stuff got left on the sand. I dated a Malaysian girl at some point and didn't get to visit her hometown, but she showed it to me on google streetview. Beautiful suburban beachside tropical place... FULL OF LITTER EVERYWHERE. I was speechless, I asked her, what's going on and she couldn't really see the problem! Like "oh yeah, there's a lot of trash I guess". So, if a few populous countries with ocean are like that, there goes the ocean.
Re: (Score:2)
What I don’t get is how everyone seems to hate seeing litter, but it still happens. Whats so damn hard about not dropping trash on the ground?
Not everyone hates seeing litter. I do, and the people you hang out with do, but we are not everyone.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Availability of trash removal services in the form of working bins, cans, dumpsters, etc., but also of course a lack of education and awareness.
And a big part of the education is understanding and acknowledgement of who and what is causing the problem.
This in istelf is a problem, because it is not the usual suspects. Africa, China and Thailand account for almost all the oceanic plastic pollution, while we ban plastic straws, and expect that to cure the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
And based on the brands involved, they also have an insatiable desire for junk food. If you throw an apple core onto the ground it isn't quite the disaster that you get if you throw a candy bar or twinkie package on the ground. If you're one of the "guilty" countries and you give a shit, maybe it's time to levy import duties on these products and use the proceeds for a slush^D^D^D^D^D fund to improve waste disposal?
Re: (Score:2)
And based on the brands involved, they also have an insatiable desire for junk food. If you throw an apple core onto the ground it isn't quite the disaster that you get if you throw a candy bar or twinkie package on the ground. If you're one of the "guilty" countries and you give a shit, maybe it's time to levy import duties on these products and use the proceeds for a slush^D^D^D^D^D fund to improve waste disposal?
The don't care, and the problem is, the plastic they mindlessly toss away is produced in their own country. This is the crux of the issue. If people want to actually do something about this problem, at some point, they will actually have to address the people who are causing the problem, not their narrative target.
In fact, if I were a plastic producer in China, Africa, or Thailad, I would be screaming at the top of my lungs about how the cause is the evil Western countries, who as usual are making things
They already use the alternatives (Score:2)
So it's not like they would suddenly have to retool to stay in business. The feds could just outlaw single use plastics and offer -1% to -2% business loans to retool existing plants to do more cans and bottles provided that they continue to employ their workers.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So it's not like they would suddenly have to retool to stay in business. The feds could just outlaw single use plastics and offer -1% to -2% business loans to retool existing plants to do more cans and bottles provided that they continue to employ their workers.
This is somehow going to get China, Africa, and Thailand to stop polluting?
This is the real problem. You want a problem fixed, you identify where and who is causing the problem. It isn't Europe or the USA, the typical blame targets for all problems.
This isn't plastic we are making, this isn't plastic we are dumping in the rivers that is getting into the oceans.
Our contribution to the problem is plastic microspheres, and we're working on eliminating those. but bamboo and stainless steel straws are m
Re:They already use the alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
This is somehow going to get China, Africa, and Thailand to stop polluting?
Someone else being shitty doesn't give you moral license to be shitty too. Be a better person first then worry about persuading others to be better.
Re: (Score:3)
This is somehow going to get China, Africa, and Thailand to stop polluting?
Someone else being shitty doesn't give you moral license to be shitty too. Be a better person first then worry about persuading others to be better.
I suppose it's the difference between feeling warm and fuzzy, cleaning up and tidying your corner of the house, making sure that nothing intervenes, that makes a person not feel that they are wonderful and caring.
And actually fixing the problem.
It is simply not possible to eliminate 100 percent of waste. But usually, when fixing a problem, you go for the biggest bang for the buck first. If there is a local will, it is also the most cost effective.
My favorite fable related to this issue goes as such
Save the Planet (Score:2)
Re: Save the Planet (Score:2)
Uuum, beer doesn't ruin the energy homeostasis. In fact it is a positive factor for your microbiome.
If you drank nothing but beer, and ate nothing but beans, root vegetables and onions fried in fatback, followed by an apple, you would not get fat, no matter what, ni matter if you ate pure fatback. You would only be full earlier and naturally stop eating.
Easy targets, now what? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is nice and full of good intentions, and there's no denying that the largest producers of plastic are just... that. Now what? What is the purpose of this public shaming? Do you want to do left-wing politics 101 (rich corporations and capitalism bad), or are you genuinely looking for solutions here? I will not even comment on the editorial political side of The Guardian, let's try to get past everyone's political bias, including mine.
What about shaming those who litter their environment with all this plastic waste? It would be just as useless.
I live in a country where the system just works, with 82% of PET bottles being recycled [swissinfo.ch], and the vast majority of the reste goes to (incinerated) waste. Now I totally recognize my first world privilege here, don't get triggered here!
What can be done in other countries, where the recycling culture is not there yet, and the funds required to incentivize it are lacking? In Germany, at least a few years ago (but I think it's still currently applied), there is that Pfand (deposit fee) system where every bottle is taxed like 0.50€, and you have to bring the bottles back to the shop for recycling to collect the deposit fee back. I find this so clever. Rich and careless people who litter will leave their bottle behind, but less fortunate people are incentivized to collect them, bring them back to the shop and collect the fees back. As far as I've seen for myself, it just works, and I can't find many reasons not to spread this system to more countries, even outside the first world.
Shouldn't such solutions be the focus of these NGOs? Or is my right-wing political bias making me blind somehow? I'm quite willing to discuss this further.
Conversely (Score:2)
Most beaches, rivers and parks are owned by governments. The argument could be made that government negligence is allowing this pollution to take place. Where is the enforcement?
The answer is simple. People would loose their minds if government cracked down on this kind of pollution. They'd see it as harassment. It wouldn't be political expedient for the government to do their job.
So put the blame on the company that makes the container. Problem solved!
Re: (Score:3)
I guess it's a cultural thing, because where I live it's being enforced and no one sees this as harassment.
Also, how does the blame shifting towards the corporations help in any way? Do you expect corporation to act morally? It's a system, not a person.
And finally, whoever downvoted my comment without replying, i.e. without bringing any solution on the table, maybe you are part of the problem too?
Re: (Score:2)
>
So put the blame on the company that makes the container. Problem solved!
You'll soon find out that the problem isn't in the first world, and that you'll be ostracised for picking on the plastic producers in the third world.
Re: (Score:2)
I know you were replying to Ol Olsoc, but I for one totally missed the sarcasm of JBMcB although it seems quite obvious after your comment. So thanks for pointing it out. Now I don't know if I should take personal responsibility for that... or blame it on some other group. As a right-wing bigot, I guess the former? (insert some GIF here)
Re: (Score:2)
I know you were replying to Ol Olsoc, but I for one totally missed the sarcasm of JBMcB although it seems quite obvious after your comment. So thanks for pointing it out. Now I don't know if I should take personal responsibility for that... or blame it on some other group. As a right-wing bigot, I guess the former? (insert some GIF here)
Could be - My mistake was assuming that he was taling about the USA as the culprit, where a fairly large subset looks at anyone telling them what to do as harassment and against their constitutional rights to dump plastic. My bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Better than recycling is just not producing so much plastic to begin with. Even in Switzerland only about 40% of PET used in manufacturing is recycled.
For example you could have drink dispensers instead of plastic bottles. Pay your Euro and it dispenses a measured amount into your reusable cup or bottle. Maybe offer to refill for â1.00 and a new bottle for â1.50.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. And thanks for transcending your political side (based on you sig) and looking for actual solutions with the other political side.
Now will you maybe also concede that my solution, although not ideal, would nevertheless be an incremental, easier-to-deploy step towards the right direction?
Re: (Score:2)
Well you're not wrong, and that sort of system does work. I'm just surprised that it's not a thing where you live.
At least in my corner of the US we have them. They're not hard to find, I see them everywhere. They're not a new thing either, been ubiquitous for decades. Honestly, I've never once considered them to be anything but a normal everyday kind of thing.
They usually have various sizes of paper cups available nearby. But many places also sell things like reusable plastic travel mugs that are entitled
Re: (Score:2)
Simply put the top 1% of the global population (ruling class / wealthy elite) are responsible globally for 50% of the worlds pollution.
It is absolutely correct to name and shame the companies owned by said individuals since they have a much more devastating impact on the world than the remaining 99% of people with whom they share this planet.
When people don't take responsibility (Score:3, Insightful)
"Piestland said the only way to halt the growing global tide of plastic litter was to stop production, phase out single use and implement reuse systems."
No. The way to stop litter is for people to stop littering. The people buying a Coke and leaving the empty bottle behind on a beach are the jerks in this story.
But that requires personal responsibility and willingness to clean up your own messes. It's far easier and sexier to gurgle 150 calories of sugar, toss the container onto a beach, and then cry "oppression" at the big corporation that "made you" do it.
Re: (Score:2)
...isn't there a deposit on all bottles now? (Score:2)
What I don't get is this:
(at least here in germany) there's a deposit on ALL bottles - so basically, littering is literally throwing money in the ditch.
are people really this stupid?
Re:...isn't there a deposit on all bottles now? (Score:5, Insightful)
The bottle deposit in Germany is around ten cents. If we're gonna make this a commercial transaction, rather than an ethical issue -- if the reason to return (or discard) your bottle is to save money, not to keep the streets clean -- I'd gladly pay ten cents to drop a bottle on the ground rather than returning it.
And yes, yes, I know, it's both. But beware: the effect of imposing a monetary incentive may not be the intended one [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
I'd gladly pay ten cents to drop a bottle on the ground rather than returning it.
Jesus Christ you're a horrible person. I don't even drop bottles I don't get paid for on the ground. WTF is wrong with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh do go away. The adults are trying to have a conversation.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently the Pfand system is not a thing outside Germany, and it's a shame (see my comment just above yours).
I guess some people are just too busy virtue signaling to spend some time figuring out working solutions and take action. Sad :-(
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently the Pfand system is not a thing outside Germany, and it's a shame (see my comment just above yours).
There's an equivalent system in the US, but only in some states and only for aluminum containers. The infrastructure does exist and is beneficial in other cultures besides Germany. It's just not applied to plastic.
But discussing the developed world on this subject is futile. The entire developed world combined is a rounding error in oceanic plastic pollution. It comes from Asia and Africa and nowhere else.
And no, neither those cultures nor those governments give two shits. That's why the attack on the
Who is really to blame? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Typically to a landfill or The Great Pacific Garbage Patch [forbes.com]
Companies that sell environmentally unfriendly materials should also be responsible for their disposal.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends, but they are either recycled or burnt, a little precentage ends up in a landfill. As far as I know they don't end up in the rivers, ocean or on similar places.
> Companies that sell environmentally unfriendly materials should also be responsible for their disposal.
No. People who dispose of these materials should be responsible for their disposal. We *do* require some companies to pay for the disposal as a second-best solutio
Re: (Score:2)
What, are recycling depots where you can take bottles in for a deposit refund not a thing where you live?
I would suggest that if you choose to live in a place where recycling depots are not available, then that's your own problem, not the company that develops products that are intended to be recycled.
Re: (Score:2)
What, are recycling depots where you can take bottles in for a deposit refund not a thing where you live?
I'm in the US. On the side of my local supermarket are machines that accept bottles and generate a credit that can be redeemed inside the market. I am not sure if this is mandated locally or if its just a corporate initiative by the supermarket chain.
Re: (Score:2)
My point is that companies like Pepsi and Coca Cola both do make their products recyclable.
But the responsibility still falls to the person disposing of it to actually give the used bottle to the appropriate facility.
Perhaps the deposit needs to just be increased to a large enough threshold that people will have more incentive to return them. This would be something that would allmost certainly require legislation, and would probably require some changes to manufacturing so that the amount of deposit
Re: (Score:2)
You could get your community to deploy recycle bins... Are you really expecting trash fairies to magically sort municipal trash and extract recyclables?
Sorting trash can work ... (Score:2)
Are you really expecting trash fairies to magically sort municipal trash and extract recyclables?
Replace "trash fairies" with "low skill workers" (they need jobs too) and that is exactly what my municipality does. They considered multiple sort bins with multiple collections, did an analysis, and found one bin one collection plus centralized sorting was overall a better solution. But then my municipality is more interested in practical effective solutions than greenwashed placebo programs that are really PR efforts. They show the zealots the numbers and the zealots still whine for not accepting their do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Coke and Pepsi don't offer anything other than "buy a brand new bottle". Why can't they let us refill our own bottles for a fee?
And why can't they accept the empty bottles back and re-use them after washing? No need to recycle it into a new PET bottle, just take the old one, clean and refill it and replace the label.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because their business model depends on recycling costs financed by our taxes.
I don't like paying taxes, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
This is a fair question but there's been a recent trend to ignore one's own responsibility change and externalize it to those at the root of the production. It's a shame, because there are plenty of levels and plenty of blame. Any group at any stage of the process can make a major difference, but people would rather point fingers than make a change themselves. Same as it ever was.
1. Voters. They vote in corrupt politicians.
2. Corrupt politicians who submit to lobbyists preventing substantive change to produ
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but I just don't understand why we're blaming Coke and Pepsi instead of the people who litter.
We blame both. At least we have laws to fine litterers. Coke and Pepsi get huge subsidies for their ingredients.
We blame Coke, Pepsi, and Nestle because the waste comes into existence from decisions made in their board rooms and they profit from it. We can talk about waste management all we want, but the manufacturers create the waste. We can at best mitigate their decisions.
That said, we can all unilaterally and immediately stop buying their products since possibly not one is healthy or essential for life.
Companies experiment, customers decide (Score:2)
... the waste comes into existence from decisions made in their board rooms and they profit from ...
You don't understand how companies work. Companies don't care if the process is green or dirty. They care about a profit. What is absolutely necessary for profit, getting the sale.
In short companies conduct experiments. For example introducing a dirtier but lower cost element to production and/or distribution. Consumers then decide if this change is acceptable to them. It is not CEOs who choose the dirtier process, it is the consumers. The CEOs just conduct an experiment. If consumers embrace plastic th
So, the top three bottlers make the most bottles? (Score:5, Insightful)
What are they trying to say with this anyhow? That it's somehow Coke's fault that there are disgusting slobs who won't pick up after themselves? Is plastic itself responsible for being tossed over the side of Chinese shipping vessels or out the window of some a-hole's car?
Plastic is great, litter is bad. Litter was bad before plastic and it's bad now. And this report? Well, it's trash too.
Re: (Score:2)
Or just stop selling disposable bottles, sell refills for reusable bottles. Worked for plastic shopping bags.
Remember the gale of whingeing about how that was basically the end of life as we know it?
Re: (Score:2)
I remember. Same thing will happen with EVs and probably everything else.
Save-the-planet people sipping water bottles. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I personally don't see the point of buying bottled, flat, non-mineral water in areas where tap water is a viable alternative. But it's far from being universally the case. The shaming tactics that you are putting forward have some merits, but they also have their limits. What we need are real solutions to a real problem, not just basic politics, see my comment a few rows above yours.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Environmentally, it's OK as long as there's sugar and color added to the bottled water?
In this case, Coke and Pepsi are likely doing the bottling of both water and sugar-water (soda). It's still their bottles either way.
How many "re-usable" bottles do you own per-capita in your household? How long will those take to degrade when they end up in a landfill? How many of them do you think will be manufactured during your lifetime? Is that better than single use bottles?
What's your overall carbon footprint?
Sugar polluters too. In humans. (Score:2)
And legislation polluters. The worst kind of polluter, by far.
Why blame this on Pepsi and Coke? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pepsi didn't litter. Coke and Nestle didn't either. People buying their products did this. There's perhaps something that Coke, Pepsi, and many other companies can do to mitigate the damage from people that do litter with their packaging but that doesn't obligate them to act.
I also like plastic bottles over aluminum cans. A bottle with a screw cap means I can reseal the container to prevent spills and to keep bugs from flying in take a sip. A clear container means I can determine if a container is full or empty by just looking at it, as opposed to picking it up. I've seen screw caps on aluminum bottles before but those are not transparent. Glass bottles are transparent, recyclable, doesn't contaminate the environment with toxic chemicals, and can be made to fit a screw on cap, but glass bottles are fragile, heavy, and with their higher insulating factor over metal makes it difficult to refrigerate. Until transparent aluminum is invented I expect people will continue to prefer plastic containers over aluminum ones.
I've heard people make compelling arguments against recycling plastic. it's more logical to simply burn the plastic for power in a municipal power plant. This avoids having to truck plastic bottles to some far off recycling plant, instead it can go to a power plant to get burned with other municipal and industrial waste. Most plastic bottles are made of HDPE which has an energy density similar to coal or fuel oil. Like fuel oil it burns down to H2O and CO2. The problem of CO2 emissions can be mitigated by using a process of extracting CO2 from the air, a process a number of people are already investigating to lower the costs to make synthetic hydrocarbons an economically viable alternative to petroleum.
There's a "bottle bill" that puts a deposit on many beverage containers, this is supposed to discourage littering by giving money to those that return the bottles. In seeing how much litter happens I have to wonder how effective this is. There's municipal recycling programs that allow people to just put recyclable packaging on the curb and have the city pick up. If people are responsible enough to separate out containers without this deposit on them, like milk containers, then they can be expected to recycle those that used to hold fizzy drinks.
I believe these "bottle bills" should be repealed but I expect opposition from charities that raise money from this, as well as recycling centers that use this as their business model. This can also mean fewer people will pick them up for the deposit but there can be a market in buying the plastic for fuel or to recycle. I recall seeing once that the metal in an aluminum can costs 3 cents, which makes a 5 cent deposit not much more of an incentive. If the price of the materials go up, out of inflation diluting the value of the deposit, costs of fuel going up and making the material more expensive to produce, then any law requiring a deposit on the bottles rather pointless. People will go around to pick them up to cash in on the scrap value.
Pepsi, Coke, and others are not to blame here. The problem is with people that litter and tactics like a deposit on the bottle to discourage littering will likely become worthless in time. We can look to solving this but I would think that Pepsi and Coke are not the right people to look to in fixing this. I'm not sure the government is where to look either. There's likely a market solution to this. One that is likely to develop naturally. People will want to buy up this discarded plastic as a valuable fuel. If the government is to be involved then it can be in getting out of the way of people burning plastic and/or providing oversight that the plastic fuel is burned in an environmentally sound way.
Even better (Score:2)
Stop drinking that corn syrup brown water. Your body will thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's even better from a health perspective, although... I'd say the specific health problem of sodas is tooth decay / erosion. Other health problems like diabetes and obesity are not specific to sodas or HFCS in particular. It's a diet imbalance problem, and solid data show that it is inversely proportional to education level and mean income. These are two very good hints toward a more general, desirable goal.
There are always several possible approaches to solving a problem. Taking away personal (or co
Re: (Score:2)
Coke, Pepsi, and Nestle are HUGE sellers of bottled water
Re: (Score:2)
THIS. Now I wish I hadn't commented on TFA previously, so I could spend my last mod point upvoting THIS.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a "bottle bill" that puts a deposit on many beverage containers, this is supposed to discourage littering by giving money to those that return the bottles. In seeing how much litter happens I have to wonder how effective this is
They are extremely effective when the recycling deposit (never heard that called a "bottle bill" but whatever) is large enough. When I was in Mexico I bought a soda for 300 pesos (IIRC it was 3000 pesos to the dollar at the time) and the [refillable] bottle deposit was 600 pesos. Of course, the law of unintended consequences made its effects felt there... A lot of vendors would pour the soda into a plastic bag and give you a straw so that you wouldn't have to pay the deposit. So then most people wound up th
Re: (Score:2)
From a regulatory point of view, there are basically two approaches that can be taken: (1) Force the manufacturer or handler to bear the recycling costs and provide straightforward ways with which consumers can return waste for disposal, and/or (2) Place enough of a cost on the bottle/can itself that consumers will more often than not choose to recycle.
In order for (2) to be effective, the cost needs to be significant - the EU average tends to be about 25-33% of the unit cost, depending on the material. The
Re: (Score:2)
Many states have effective bottle deposit programs, why do you think that is a uniquely EU solution?
This 'study' encompasses 55 nations, only one of which could be the US, why are you acting like the solution relies on change in the US alone?
Re: (Score:2)
Pepsi didn't litter. Coke and Nestle didn't either. People buying their products did this. There's perhaps something that Coke, Pepsi, and many other companies can do to mitigate the damage from people that do litter with their packaging but that doesn't obligate them to act.
Legally or ethically? Legally, no, they can externalise as many costs and wreck the environment for a profit.
Re: (Score:2)
I also like plastic bottles over aluminum cans. A bottle with a screw cap means I can reseal the container to prevent spills and to keep bugs from flying in take a sip. A clear container means I can determine if a container is full or empty by just looking at it, as opposed to picking it up. I've seen screw caps on aluminum bottles before but those are not transparent. Glass bottles are transparent, recyclable, doesn't contaminate the environment with toxic chemicals, and can be made to fit a screw on cap, but glass bottles are fragile, heavy, and with their higher insulating factor over metal makes it difficult to refrigerate. Until transparent aluminum is invented I expect people will continue to prefer plastic containers over aluminum ones.
I'm sure the people still living with your waste 500 years years from now all over their beaches and in their bloodstreams will appreciate your moments of euphoria at not needing to reach over and gently move your container to know how much of your drink remains, as will the half-millennium of people living with it in between.
If only the market didn't fail at accounting for their costs into the drink's price, but it did.
Riiiiiiiiiight (Score:2)
It sounds an awful lot like their customers are the ones doing the polluting.
Ranking not indicative of progress (Score:2)
What I dislike about this style of reporting is that the rankings would remain unchanged both if they were doing nothing at all (the standard Guardian position), or if they were all making proportionate improvements (the corporate position). After reading this article, I'm no closer to understanding whether these companies are actually making improvements or not, and it's not clear whoever wrote this article knows, either. I'm also not sure how credible this methodology is for measuring YoY change. I would
Utopia is not an option. (Score:2)
I've noticed a distressing tendency to measure "what is" against some sort of amazing fantastic perfect alternative and then (shock) whatever we're doing today comes off as terrible, irresponsible, and wasteful.
I do not work for a plastic packaging company, to be clear.
SOMETIMES PLASTIC IS A GREAT CHOICE FOR PACKAGING. Sometimes it's even the best choice, and considering that cost is a relatively fluid burden moving up the supply chain, we have a reasonably nimble system for suppliers to have every incenti
The soft bigotry of low expectations (Score:3)
It's no secret that the vast majority of the plastic in the oceans comes from about 10 rivers in Africa and Asia that the locals use as dumps. Specifically, the Yangtze; Indus; Yellow; Hai He; Ganges; Pearl; Amur; Mekong, Nile and the Niger.
In the US, we greatly reduced litter with public campaigns to encourage people- individuals- to put their trash where it belongs. This was a combination of advertising, law enforcement, and infrastructure- specifically, common placement of public trash cans. We've also made huge strides in the engineering of landfills.
By blaming western corporations, Emma Priestland and the 'Break Free From Plastic' organization are all but plainly stating that they think the locals around those 10 rivers are incapable of modifying their behavior and infrastructure.
And that, my friends, is the most racist BS I've seen so far today.
Why, again, can't we just use glass again? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I keep forgetting: why is it we can't just go back to using glass? Yes, I know it's heavy. Yes, I know you have to collect it all back up to recycle it. But it is recyclable 100% so far as I know. So how about we just ignore the problems and go back to glass?
Because it's breakable, and when it breaks, it leaves dangerous shards behind. Combine that with the weight and the fairly high energy requirements for recycling and the negatives outweigh the positives substantially.
So, to be clear (Score:2)
Coca-cola, Pepsi, and Nestle are responsible for their customers not recycling?
I would have thought responsibility to dispose of used containers to rest with the consumer, not the producer.
Just go back to glass already. (Score:2)
The only way to stop it... (Score:2)
... is to stop buying it.
But that would take a gargantuan effort to convince probably 80% of the world population who just don't give a shit.
Seriously, most people refuse to see any connection.
I work with some incredibly bright people, but they persist in constantly buying plastic trinket shit - and sure, drinking shit tons of sugary shit too.
I think the only way to get a connection through, is via more media - and maybe field trips for youth to see the damage.
Instead of going on a field trip to some scenic
Re: (Score:2)