this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
590 points (98.5% liked)

News

23311 readers
3596 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Steve@communick.news 61 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (9 children)

Which isn't the individual single use plastic bags every single item comes in.
It's just the one final plastic bag, all the other plastic bags are carried in.

I don't have a problem with the move myself. I'm single, with a supermarket just up the street. I use my own hand basket for my groceries. I never even use a cart.
But this policy always strikes me a tackling the smallest, least effective part of the problem. Banning plastic packaging would be FAR more effective. But also much harder. So this is just a way for politicians to seem like they are doing something, when they really aren't. In other words it's pandering.

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 43 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Like @TheTechnician27@lemmy.world said, this is closing a loophole that was in the original grocery bag reduction law.

[–] Steve@communick.news 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I'm saying it shouldn't be praised as a solution, but recognized as a very small step forward. Afterwhich we ramp up the pressure for real solutions.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago

I don't think anyone is calling this the single solution to anything.

It's simple another small step on the path.

Take enough steps and you'll keep moving towards a goal

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social -1 points 1 month ago

No, no, they've expended their political capital on this and that's about all we'll get from them, but just as long as someone tells you to not let perfect be the enemy of good, you must be satisfied with the outcome even if it achieves little to nothing.

Arguing against it or pointing out flaws means that you're now arguing against "what's good" and that's morally and ethically wrong and shows that you're an outsider to the in-group.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We can't afford to think like this. Climate is such an unthinkably massive issue that we need all of it, and then some more, and then some more.

There is no project big enough that we don't need 50,000 more projects of equivalent scope to get things where they need to be.

[–] Steve@communick.news 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Think like what? Think this is just one small pice. Small enough that it almost doesn't matter, and shouldn't take any energy or news inches from the larger problem of plastic packaging? Because honestly, it sounds like we're on the same page there.

Also plastics aren't much of a climate issue. They're part of a more broad environmental issue.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

It might be unclear if you're advocating a comprehensive plastic policy, or whataboutism directed at just one other use of plastic.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

California has been working toward legislation that reduces plastic in packaging. It's not as good as it should be, but it represents about as much departure from the status quo I think California can reasonably get when people raise so much fuss over even superfluous things like plastic straws and grocery bags (and because California is already really throwing around their weight here in compelling out-of-state producers to change their manufacturing). And this new law is just closing a loophole on a 2014 law that at worst was actively making things worse or at best was making the law fail to address the issue. This isn't "pandering"; it's addressing a real, ongoing, actual issue in a sensible way.

[–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 1 month ago

Excellent! That should be bigger news than this little stuff.

[–] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah. The whole shit-show is depressing really.

Firstly, you're entirely correct - it's a tiny part of the problem.

Secondly, it shifts the "blame" for plastic on to consumers. "Oh we've been so bad all this time using plastic shopping bags".

Thirdly, it provides a feeling of resolution. "I'm so happy now we've done the hard work to buy these $0.10 reusable shopping bags and solved the plastic problem".

Fourthly, you have to wonder how many plastic shopping bags were actually single use. For example, a lot of them were made from recycled plastic, and a lot of them were re-used as garbage bags, which are now purchased anyway.

On balance, I think it's within the realm of possibility that these laws do more harm than good. Honestly, just tax plastic producers and see how quickly producers using plastic to package their products magically fine innovative new alternatives.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

to buy these $0.10 reusable shopping bags

This literal exact sentence tells me you didn't read past the headline; those shitty $0.10, thicker "reusable" plastic bags are exactly the loophope in the 2014 ban that this 2024 law is designed to close. The thing you're accusing this law of allowing people to do is the one thing it expressly outlaws. Media literacy is dead.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

On balance, I think it’s within the realm of possibility that these laws do more harm than good. Honestly, just tax plastic producers and see how quickly producers using plastic to package their products magically fine innovative new alternatives.

Seriously. The way to solve this is to simply put a tax on all plastic packaging. Use those funds to subsidize plastic recycling. Set the tax at whatever level is necessary to make recycling viable. And if the most viable 'recycling' method is to just burn the plastic in an incinerator, so be it. Yeah, it's expensive to build an industrial incinerator that can properly scrub and filter out all the nasty fumes plastic gives off when it's burned. But it can be done. It's more expensive than just stuffing the plastic in a landfill, but by burning it, we solve our plastic problem in the here and now, rather than letting it slowly leach out into the environment for future generations to deal with.

Recycling plastic will always be difficult, and it may never be practical for some cases. But all plastics burn. And if you have the right incinerator, they can be burned without releasing toxic fumes into the air. Tax plastic packaging, all of it. Tax it, and use the funds to subsidize plastic waste incineration. Plastic is made from oil, and it still can be used as a fuel. Burn it and be done with it.

[–] Steve@communick.news 1 points 1 month ago

I wouldn't limit it to plastic packaging. Micro-plastics come from all plastic.

[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Packaging is more effective to ban but also a lot more nuanced. Plastic packaging was developed over a lot of years and the products are designed for it so it would need to be a much longer term project.

[–] Steve@communick.news 0 points 1 month ago

All the more reason to advocate for it, and not be distracted by a nearly meaningless win.

[–] pedroapero@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

Looking at comments outside of Lemmy, I'm appaled by the number of people shocked by this already. Apparently, "just reuse your f-ing bags" is already too hard for a lot of people. We need to start from the easiest.

[–] zeekaran@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Banning these plastics is not about environmentalism. It's about litter and having visually cleaner cities.

[–] Steve@communick.news 1 points 1 month ago

It seems easy to argue liter is part of environmental concerns and policy. Environment is a very flexible term.

[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What do you do wrt vegetables? I always end up using those thin plastic bag to wrap them, even uf I bring a big reusable bag to carry it all out

[–] Steve@communick.news 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I have a hand-held basket I got more than a decade ago from Staples. I just put all the loose fruit and veg in that.