Amazon Still Has a Serious Plastic Waste Problem in the US (theverge.com) 36
Despite making pledges to cut down on plastic packaging, a new report from the nonprofit conservation organization Oceana estimates that Amazon's plastic waste has continued to grow in the US. From a report: The company created 208 million pounds of plastic waste from its packaging in the US in 2022 alone, which Oceana says is enough trash to circle Earth more than 200 times in the form of plastic air pillows. That's a nearly 10 percent jump from the amount of plastic waste it generated the year before, according to the report. The US is a worrying outlier for Amazon, Oceana says. Globally, the e-commerce giant says that it reduced its use of plastic packaging 11.6 percent in 2022 compared to the prior year. But the US is the company's biggest market, and Oceana argues it's where Amazon needs to make a lot more progress.
Let the government step in (Score:3)
They'll put a fee on end-user plastic, like 25 cents for a bag and 10 cents per package for bubble wrap. All customers will have to pay the fee, and politicians can pat each other on the back for solving the problem and the rest of us will just pay 35 cents more for every package we order, using the same amount of plastic we always have.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a plan, good luck with it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm independent....doesn't matter to me what brand they are , as long as they represent my issues.
Re: Let the government step in (Score:2)
Plastic waste getting into the enviroment is everyone's issue fool.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the problem when "the government steps in": The government responds to public perceptions and misinformation.
Amazon's packaging waste is a tiny problem (300 grams per citizen) and is not where the government should focus its efforts on reducing waste.
If the "packaging tax" results in even 1% of consumers avoiding Amazon and driving to shops instead, the carbon footprint will increase.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not confident that my representatives are Big Picture kind of thinkers. Maybe it's just my own bias showing that I'm a cynic.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the problem when "the government steps in": The government responds to public perceptions and misinformation.
Amazon's packaging waste is a tiny problem (300 grams per citizen) and is not where the government should focus its efforts on reducing waste.
I think that number has to be missing something. Maybe they're only counting the super-thin air bags. But lately, they seem to have replaced boxes and air bags with bubble wrap packaging that I think weigh O(30) grams each. I've received way more than ten of those in a year, and maybe more than that in an average month.
If the "packaging tax" results in even 1% of consumers avoiding Amazon and driving to shops instead, the carbon footprint will increase.
Correct, but if a packaging tax results in Amazon doing more deliveries of unpackaged products like Walmart does, the carbon footprint will decrease. The latter seems more likely to me, a
Re: (Score:2)
It's an interesting question. Taxes on plastic bags do seem to lead to the intended outcome (less people using disposable plastic shopping bags) [vox.com]
In Montgomery County, which implemented a 5-cent bag fee, the portion of customers observed by researchers at eight stores in the county who used disposable bags went from 82 percent to 40 percent, while the number of bags per trip also fell, according to Homonoff’s research. Beyond any environmental effects, these policies also seem to be changing the cultur
Re: (Score:2)
That said some sort of tax is probably preferable to bans since in the article above it mentions in places that banned bags it became a cat/mouse game of what a "bag" is.
Or what a "disposable" bag means.
Here one county banned disposable bags, so the local Walmarts in that county switched to a much thicker and sturdier plastic bag instead. They're still free though, so now they're effectively just handing out bags that consume 10x (or more) the plastic of the old ones to skirt around the law.
Article about this: https://www.ctpost.com/news/ar... [ctpost.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Even California experienced this with their ban on disposable bags:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/trav... [msn.com]
They implemented a 10 cent charge for "reusable" bags, but found that customers dumped them almost as often, almost never reusing them, and because the reusable bags were a bigger source of pollution than disposable per bag, it increased pollution.
Re: Let the government step in (Score:2)
I don't get why people don't reuse them. They are actually good enough for that now. I carry a big wad of them in my trunk.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't keep them in my car because the mice will make a nest in them. And I don't really want mouse poop all over my groceries.
So if I remember to grab my bag filled with bags before I go out then great. Else I'm paying 25 cents for a paper bag.
I use the paper bags for holding scraps for composing, as small trash bags in the home office, and throwing out cat litter. So it's not a total waste, just a bit expensive that they're 25 cents a pop.
I still see plastic bags all over the beach and in the river. So I
Re: (Score:2)
If mice are using plastic bags in your car as a nest, you have bigger problems. They will just use another part of it as a nest if the environment suits them, bags or no.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly 10 cents is not enough then. In the UK they often only have reusable bags at 50p (about 0.60 USD) or more, and it seems to be highly effective.
There is another advantage to the reusable bags over just saving money. Most supermarkets support "scan as you shop", where you pick up a scanner at the entrance and scan items as you take them off the shelf. You then put the item directly into your bag, and only need to handle payment at the end. No putting it in the trolley/basket and then scanning and pack
Re: (Score:1)
> disposable bags went from 82 percent to 40 percent
And sales of small trash can liner bags have 10x'ed at the same time (creating shortages initially).
Politicians like to see all effects as first-order.
Re: (Score:3)
That's an interesting knock on effect, do you have link you can share that talks about that?
Would also be interesting to see if it was possible to measure the trash portion of both those things and also the approximate percentage of bags that are in fact re-used after shopping and those that end up in the bin straight away.
Intuition would tell me even if a disposable shopping bag is replaced with a new plastic liner the plastic liner by nature of how and where it is used probably has a much higher likelihoo
Re: Let the government step in (Score:2)
The busy-work activists need to stop (Score:2)
Plastic waste is only a big deal if you mindlessly chuck it into the environment for it to degrade into microplastics. Collect the plastic trash and just burn the stuff. It's basically fuel with extra useful steps. And even though it looks like there's a lot of it, the amount is negligible in comparison to the other fuel we burn. We can keep burning that small an amount for eternity without worrying about the CO2.
Why is this a problem? (Score:5, Interesting)
But worse I don't know what the problem is they want to solve
Is it waste in the oceans? Almost none of Amazon's USA plastic ends up in the ocean. It ends up in the municipal trash. The huge garbage patches in oceans are because many countries use their rivers as garbage disposal.
Is it the volume of landfill sights? I'm not really sure how this is a problem, we have lots of land, most of it is not for any environmental diversity and landfills are an insignificant of amount of the space we use. And if you really hate landfills then burn the plastic. Modern incinerators create more energy with less pollution than coal plants.
Is it the gas and oil that is used to make it? You burn far more fossil fuels when you personally go to walmart to buy in person
Is this a case of the environmentalist being bad at math?
Is this a case of the left wing wanting to sound like they care about the environment but wanting someone else to do something about it?
Re: (Score:3)
Despite making pledges to cut down on plastic packaging, ... Globally, the e-commerce giant says that it reduced its use of plastic packaging 11.6 percent
Oh noes the horrors! They pledged to decrease their use of plastic and then did so.
But according to an environmentalist group making estimates via Mordor Intelligence, their plastic use in the US increased by 10% because Americans love plastic or hate damaged packages. Oh and Amazon doesn't count packaging from third-party sellers, because of course they don't.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem of microplastics and leachates entering our groundwater [sciencedirect.com] and food supply. [slashdot.org]
Re: Why is this a problem? (Score:2)
This is just a jerk off waste of time then. We need to get rid of cars if we want to meaningfully reduce microplastic pollution. Which, of course, we won't do. We are simply doomed.
Re: (Score:1)
Your company uses an obscene amount of plastics at insane scale. If I go to a brick and mortar retailer and bring my own bag, which I do because it's attached to my bike, I can buy a number of items without being burdened by a bunch of plastic waste. If I buy from your Amazon, it will likely get delivered in multiple boxes all stuffed with plastic to pad the extra space.
So in this scenario, no I don't burn more fossil fuels than going to walmart and the reality is getting multiple boxes delive
Re: (Score:2)
What environmental problem are you trying to solve by criticizing the amount of plastic Amazon produces?
OK hear me out on my theory - this is not a direct problem-solving exercise, but more a long-tail payoff (hopefully). To wit:
Amazon are pressured to switch from plastic packaging, and choose some sort of easily biodegradable woodchip based solution - yes this is still carbon based, but via renewable tree forestry, not through fossil fuels.
This wood based solution is perfect for decomposing in landfills - and helps justify methane capture solutions for biofueled energy generation.
Plastic packaging demand dr
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon is in a position to require manufacturers to use less plastic packaging. They use it because it is cheap, but there are other options. A lot of high end gear comes in cardboard now.
Amazon already increases costs in other ways, such as by making returns easier to handle. This is saying that, given how dominant they are, and that their prices are higher than the same stuff on other websites anyway, they could stand to add a few cents for better packaging.
Amazon has switched from using plastic padded en
It's easy to pick the big target (Score:2)
But the problem goes much deeper
Amazon may add a bit of plastic waste when it packs a product, but the product itself often is packed with a LOT more
I just got done filling a trashcan with styrofoam and plastic after my wife bought a bookshelf
None of it was added by Amazon
The USA has a plastic waste problem (Score:2)
Go to a Marriot in Frankfurt. You get a nice Nespresso machine with a little wooden box next to it with a small Nespresso coffee capsule. Use it with the paper cup (or the ceramic mug, your choice), stir it with the little wooden paddle (or the metal spoon, your choice) then next to the box is a Nespresso recycling container with a note saying don't throw them in the bin.
Go to a Marriot in Chicago. You get a nice Keruig machine (okay not nice, that stuff tastes of barf but I digress). Next to it is a little
Paper vs plastic (Score:2)
I don't know why they haven't converted over 100% to a paper-based packaging regime, honestly.
Paper-based envelopes, boxes, and packaging material (eg. usually just rolls of inexpensive paper that get wadded up) seems like a pretty reasonable way to ship things at a very moderate weight gain over plastic padded bags. (My wife has stopped using Amazon for a number of purchases due to repeatedly receiving liquids like hair conditioner in plastic bags, resulting in them getting consistently damaged in shipping
Want it both ways (Score:2)
It's not just packaging, of course - it's also the materials used to produce things.
So-called environmentalists seem to want it both ways. Plastics were touted as an inexpensive alternative to paper, and in many cases metal. They do fulfill that role: we're wasting a lot less metal on small, cheap parts previously made of things like pewter, tin, zinc, nickel, etc. because plastic is not only cheaper, but frequently mechanically better: more durability, lubricity, etc.
The same for packaging: it weighs a lot
filter wish (Score:2)
Can we have a filter that blocks Amazon-related stories posted by msmash? They're all straight-up propaganda.
USA uses metric (Score:2)
For the last 10 years, stories from the USA have used metric values although the country never officially converted. Is this like Canada and the UK where some measurements are still imperial. (Besides the fact, English-speaking countries still measure breasts and penises in inches.) Or did the reporter convert it to pounds to make it 'understandable'. We have the Empire State Building and the Eiffel tower for that, right?
insanity (Score:2)
There is no commerce without packaging.