Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mc32 1071 days ago
Also, what are viable alternatives? It seems like a game of whack a mole. Ban one chemical, use a new one, years later new one is worse.

We could go back to pre plastics, enjoy less sterile things along with more disease, etc. someone’s gotta make the calculus.

4 comments

> We could go back to pre plastics, enjoy less sterile things along with more disease

Hint: it's actually about money, not sterility.

A foodstuff packed in a glass jar with a metal screw-top isn't going to spoil any faster than the same thing in a plastic container, but the glass weighs more, and costs more, so if all other things are equal the retailer will of course opt for the supplier with the cheaper and lighter packaging.

> A foodstuff packed in a glass jar with a metal screw-top isn't going to spoil any faster than the same thing in a plastic container,

In fact glass is easier to sterilize; it isn't porous and holds up to high heat and chemical disinfectants like bleach. This makes it superior to plastic for food preservation.

But that doesn't matter because everything nowadays is designed as "single use"
What do we do about frozen foods? (If not plastic, they have plastic linings or coatings). What about the butchers, are we back to newspaper with newspaper inks?

And wat do you do about food delivery, lunch service, fast-food, single serve, sauce packets, airport food, vending machines, etc...

Interesting, I like the idea of pre-plastic. Some hypothetical "solutions" (i.e. brain farts) I'll toss out into the ether:

Ban all levels of plastic for the _packaging_ of food and goods.

Incentivize multiple-use and/or highly recyclable materials metal(aluminum), silicone and glass containers for food, rather than "convenience" and single-use.

Single-use plastics can be regulated and limited to medical/hospital use only.

This could also have a benefit of promoting smaller supply lines for things that spoil. Increasing small town economies, farms, mom & pop shops.

Plastics selling point is convenience and cost-reduction for consumers and businesses.

We could place regulation on the distillation ranges for the barrel oil.

As for the forever chemicals... We (U.S.) can approach the problem similar to the E.U. - Prove first, the safety of the chemical by outside labs (disallow testing by the company who benefits from the use of said chemical) before hitting the market. Whereas the current U.S. model is - I get to use whatever chemical I see fit, unless you prove to me wrong.

I have been, personally, figuring that I should wear mostly cotton clothing and glass / ceramic (as opposed to plastic) dishware. Limiting material choices for household items would be politically impossible, but I would like it to become a popularized "trend", which retailers will then cater to.

Companies should market based on using "traditional" non-toxic materials (still modern and industrial, just not absurd), and consumers can respond by giving their business.

The answer is to have an allowlist but that's a political nonstarter.

If we cut plastic use to just medical devices and food storage that would be a massive win.