• Rhaedas@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    I have to credit ChatGPT4 for this answer.

    Credit, or a warning?

    From my understanding a big part of the problem with PET is the availability, either because it’s such a small percentage of plastic and demand is too great, or because it gets lost among all the rest and so is mixed or ruined for recycling.

    Honestly the debate on which material is better totally ignores the real problem - consumption demand. Reduce used to be the first ‘R’, but it was not friendly to the capitalistic mindset or an exploding population, so Recycling became the big focus along with the subtle blaming of the consumer for not being THE solution when they didn’t participate.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Credit, or a warning?

      Yes.

      Initially it was giving me answer that glass is better, but when I asked for the sources it searched the internet and gave me that answer. I guess there is a lot of text (just general articles) about recycling and glass, saying one thing, but the actual studies published in journals show different picture, at least with PET.

      In general, I found very helpful to ask the same question different ways and ask for the sources, otherwise it will give “common knowledge”, which can be wrong, or misleading.

    • Overzeetop@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      To take a contrarian view, the plastics wins handily in the reduce scenario. The plastic required to make a bottle is somewhere around 1/25 of the material required compared to glass. It’s high tensile strength and fracture toughness means a huge reduction in material processed per container.

      The flip side to that is convenience - the ability carry and dispose of a 1/2 ounce plastic container, vs a pound of glass container - makes it ideal for conditions where you are less likely to recycle.