[itake]

"Zero waste" is misleading.

> End the use of plastic in the consumption of food and hygiene products.

How is the food transported without plastic? Cars, trucks, and bicycles all use some form of plastic and emit carbon waste when heating the steal and plastic in their construction.

Is the food sourced from farmers that do not use plastic in their farm equipment or tarps? If so, how does this impact price and yield?

[the_gastropod]

Lol. This is about the level pedantry I guess I should expect on HN. But... yes. It's obviously a bit of an exaggeration. Like zero-emissions vehicles, "zero waste" is a colloquial expression. Vegans probably eat hundreds of small bugs every year—does that mean they're not really vegan?

The point is that it's an effort to approach, as closely as is possible, zero. You'll never reach 0. But you can do a hell of a lot better than status quo.

[bogomipz]

No, it's not pedantry at all. It just sounds like you are not at all familiar with New York City. Delivery services almost exclusively use e-Bikes(which must be charged) and gas powered scooters. Further in New York City you have always been able to walk a few blocks and pick up your own groceries, stick them in your canvas bag and then put the trash in the city provided recycling bins. This actually was the "status quo" before the endless onslaught of vc-backed food delivery services. It still is the status quo for many. Lastly the city also runs a program called ZeroWaste where you can also bring your foods scraps for composting.[1] There are literally hundreds of ZeroWaste drop off locations which are often located in parks and green markets. You can actually pedal a bike in a dedicated bike lane or take the train to get there.

[1] https://www.grownyc.org/compost

[the_gastropod]

Heh. I lived in NYC for over a decade and used to volunteer with GrowNYC in Brooklyn :)

Beyond that, I'm not sure your point?! The city-run "ZeroWaste" drop off locations certainly produce some waste (heat waste from the vehicles transporting the compost bins, for instance?). My point was: the ZERO is not literally zero. It's "significantly less" than status quo. Even Bea Johnson, of "Zero Waste Home" fame, proudly displays her small jar of waste she collects every year. She's never pretended there's literally no waste in her life.

[bogomipz]

So you accuse others of pedantry and then go on to make a statement such as:

>"The city-run "ZeroWaste" drop off locations certainly produce some waste (heat waste from the vehicles transporting the waste, for instance?).?"

Brilliant.

My point was very clear - you don't need a delivery service to get your groceries with minimal environment impact in a place like NYC. I clearly articulated all the ways that already exist to accomplish that with very little effort and no lifestyle change. If you lived in NYC for a decade then surely you should know this.

Honestly your comments read more like trolling than anything else. Also the constant "heh" and "lol" is very tiresome and not all conducive to a productive discussion.

[the_gastropod]

...Whoa. There's a gross misunderstanding happening somewhere. I apparently haven't articulated myself well here. Let me try to recap:

1. itake criticized the term "Zero Waste" because zero waste things don't literally produce zero waste. I suggested that was a bit pedantic, because it seemed obvious. Nothing produces zero waste. My hunch is maybe you read more into this statement than was there?!

2. You responded suggesting I must be unfamiliar with New York City?! (It's not clear how you arrived at this?!) I understood you to believe that it's fair to criticize the term Zero Waste for not being literally Zero Waste. Then—as I understood it—you suggested that ZeroWaste programs in NY were status quo, and good examples of Zero Waste.

3. I responded explaining that I did live in NY. Was very familiar with GrowNYC. And that even good examples of Zero Waste (GrowNYC programs) still do literally produce waste, and I was therefore confused by your response. Are you arguing that it's pedantic to criticize the term "Zero Waste" for not literally producing no waste or aren't you?!

I wholeheartedly agree with you! I'm not sure where you think I'm being inconsistent or unfair?! The co-opting of "Zero Waste" by marketing departments used to peddle unnecessary nonsense is rather gross.

[itake]

"zero container waste" would more clearly define their mission. They should not mislead consumers by diluting the term "zero waste".

If another business offers similar services, but using exclusively zero emission vehicles (at a higher cost?), then environmentally conscious consumers will not have correct information to make their purchasing decisions.

[the_gastropod]

Yea, I get your point. I think part of the problem is many people first hear about "Zero Waste" from some corporation marketing their product/service as zero-waste. The term has been in-use environmentalists since the late 90's, and was really popularized by Bea Johnson's book "Zero Waste Home" in the 2000's. It's a bit of a bummer it's been coopted by the likes of Unilever and Proctor and Gamble as a way to green-wash and make money.

[gretch]

I don't think it's pedantry, I think it's misleading to non-technical consumers, the ones that can't easily differentiate a true fact of your product and an aspirational goal.

The damage is that when they find out 'the truth' they're gonna become cynical and jaded, and they'll be forever turned off to the cause that you so dearly care about. You can already see it in the rest of these comments.

[akira2501]

> "zero waste" is a colloquial expression.

Zero waste is an industry marketing term that you are masquerading as a colloquial expression.

[the_gastropod]

It's increasingly _become_ adopted as an industry/marketing term. But that's not the history of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_waste