Maybe stop killing fish and fish will not die as much
I am all for minimizing/eliminating single use plastics. But when i get served a milkshake in a plastic mug, with a plastic lid, and a plastic spoon, but a paper straw because of “save the sea”…
i just wish we used our brains more.
What if dispenser machines had a pay by volume model? You bring your own thing, they fill it, and charge you by how much you use. Would probably need something added to measure flow and set prices, but it’s not like a McDonalds built in the 70s is still using exactly the same machines they were back then.
Gas pump style soda fountains would be absolutely hilarious. Truly the peak of american culture.
Years ago at Universal for Halloween Horror Nights they used bottom fill beer dispensers. They had a connector on the bottom of the cup so you could grab a cup pop it down on the machine and keep going. Say 15 beers in seconds. The beer fills to the exact height needed with the exact desired foam amount on top. No over poors or needing to have any loss. Time was cut down drastically. The cups had to be expensive, but when your charging $10 for $1 with of product you don’t have to worry to much about cup cost I guess. I remember thinking at that moment American Capitalism has peaked haha.
This but in Oregon you’d get yelled at for doing it yourself. :p
Edit: Huh, turns out they lifted that ban in 2023 so now people can pump their own gas.
Could just do it by weight. Put vessel under nozzle. Zero scale, and hold till weight determined for sale, hand to customer. Could likely even have software do it.
Measuring by volume dispensed like gas pumps would be less likely to be abused. I can just lift the cup slightly as its filled and pay less.
If you saw how much plastic is used to get that paper straw to you (logistics) you would just drink from the cup
Also paper cups are lined with plastic to stop the drink from running through it, metal cans are lined with plastic to prevent a metallic taste
Oh, i don’t prefer using it anyway, it got served with it already in.
Honestly how much more expensive would glass mugs/cups be? Like A&W Canada will give you a chilled mug for root beer (and other drinks but the root beer is iconic)
If it’s to go then then paper cups are fine. The paper straws are just annoying…
I hope that’s not one of those fake animal rescue channels. I’ve been avoiding this kind of videos ever since.
That is pretty horrifying. I’m pretty confident these guys are legit though.
I was just going to post this channel.
Why not both?
Getting rid of plastic straws, but not cups and lids was such a stupid thing. There are substitutes for cups, but they cost more, so they weren’t a good option for greenwashing.
If you’re already minimizing seafood intake because of the lead content, you’re already minimizing your personal impact of fishing net use. What we need to do is legislate the use of hemp nets. Hemp was the primary net maternal before the oil industry put their weight behind making hemp illegal under the guise of “The War On Drugs!” and made plastic/nylon nets the default.
Yeah, one can just “drink like a real adult”, like the ones said to me that now want the plastic straws back…
That would be ideal, but each person has limited time and attention. Advocate for both, but put your efforts into figuring out how to change the thing with the larger impact.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-16529-0
It’s more like at the first place, with 26% of the mass. Majority doesn’t mean “half of”.
Nevertheless, even if the fishing industry produced no plastic pollution, it would still destroy the ecosystems directly and indirectly (breaking the food chains by fishing tons of krill and small fish to feed the farms)
Majority literally means the subset making up more than half of the set.
Yeah, “plurality” is the generic word for a leading sum, “majority” absolutely does mean >50%.
The worst thing about paper straws is seeing it poked through a plastic lid.
Cool thing is that here in Copenhagen a lot of privately owned places now also use cardboard lids. As someone who delivers food for a living, I’m also happy about the change because cardboard lids have far more fiction and don’t pop off as easily when transporting.
Noticed the same thing, how can one be concerned about the plastic straws but not the cups? I almost thought that was the joke.
How is called virtue signaling
On an unrelated notes, a huge fraction of oceanic microplastics is from car tyres. Driving is a number one source of oceanic microplastic.
And bad news: electric cars, being heavier, emit more microplastics.
tbf they are only heavier because they are making them SUVs instead of coupes or sedans and trying to convince people that a 150 mile range isnt long enough for them as if they wont just plug it back in when they get home or as if they actually commute 75 miles each way. God forbid they have to wait for it to charge. Electric vehicles have the potential to be the same weight or lighter but car companies all suck.
Yeah, if they built cars people don’t want with batteries smaller than people want to buy, the wheels could just be as bad as normal cars.
If everyone had switched to driving corollas and civics in the year 1990, we would have less micro plastics and a way cooler environment but… people hate each other and don’t give a fuck.
Car tyres are also significant contributors to terrestial microplastics and particulate matter!
Since this is a science community, can I ask what studies directly link these microplastics to the specific adverse affects?
I see a lot of “BPA microplastics are hormone disruptors” and “microplastics found in placentas!” Etc … ok, but are they the same microplastics in these studies?
It sounds like when everyone puts scarequotes around “chemicals”…
I never made any claims concerning effects.
And that also is not healthy
Come on, let’s not doubt that eating car tires is unhealthy.
I breath a lot of car tires when i walk to work…
The obvious solution is netting made out of a dissolvable material!
But then they’ll have to replace them more often. Unless this is referring to commercial fishing. My first thought was for people trying to feed their kids, but while I was writing I realized the big fishing companies are way more likely to be close to 100% responsible
It will absolutely cost more to do things responsibly.
For sure, but commercial fisheries can afford it by simply selling their fish at a higher price. The people feeding their family, might not have the kind of resources needed for that to be viable
The people feeding their families have done so without plastic for thousands of years. Even without plastic, they still have all other technological advancements available to them. Yes, it will get harder and it is unfair. But it’s entirely possible. And we can also fight that injustice. Tax the rich.
I’m not talking about people with ancient tribal knowledge. Everybody who can, absolutely needs to do their best to reduce plastic. But there are people who live in poverty that feed themselves and others by fishing, who don’t have the time or knowledge to weave their own nets, and frankly don’t have the capacity to care about anything that far into the future.
Making it sound like it’s just as much an individuals responsibility as it is a corporation is not the right strategy, and is simply unfair to a lot of people that aren’t 100% sure they’ll be going to sleep with a full stomach. Everyone on the planet should be trying to reduce plastic, but when the fingers start pointing, they should only be pointing at corporations. Pointing any amount of fingers at anyone else is what the corporations want. Tax the rich.
But what if we pass the responsibility down to the consumer instead of dealing with industrial waste that’s often more of a matter of cost than practicality?
Then I won’t get reelected.
You can call yourself God emperor and have Facebook shovel your bullshit into everyone’s face, that seems to work.
Yeah, I simultaneously want to comment that the left panels are a wild fantasy, as I’ve never seen an actual human say that we should focus on plastic straws. As far as I can tell, that’s propaganda put into the world by companies trying to discredit genuine efforts.
But at the same time, it’s not even like you have to focus on straws. You can simply not use them, because it is just a stupid concept to produce something that’s immediately trash, and then also go and do other things in life. Believe it or not, most activities in life don’t involve straws.
Straws become the focus because people like them and find them useful and make them a part of their culture and then proposed bans threaten to take them away. People do focus on them, I’ve seen plenty of online arguments about straw bans and the ethics of straws, which happens because they are a part of the lives of the people arguing about them, unlike fishing nets which they never use or see.
There is a side of environmentalism that comes off as being smugly superior about your lifestyle and disparaging and seeking to shame and control in small ways (usually poorer) people who don’t live that way, with the pretext that it’s about saving the planet. To me that sort of thing seems like it’s mainly just a dumpster fire of political capital, purely counterproductive.
There’s a smug side to anti-environmentalists where they like to pretend they can’t do anything because they’re a little bit poor. And that it they couldn’t possibly do anything.
Have they not seen the turtle video?!
That was not a single-use plastic straw. It was a reusable straw like the one people started buying to avoid single-use ones.
No, someone else is doing something worse than me so I’m absolved. I can do what I want.
Just stop eating fish.
No need for nets.
No, that would inconvenience me. I would prefer to virtue signal. /s
stop eating all animals tbh.
Checked the username, can confirm. Very annoying.
If you call that one comment “very annoying” you need to get more used to reading opinions you don’t agree with. That was the shortest, least preachy thing ever.
Fair.
They just wanted to point out they noticed the username somehow.
Are you…ok? Do you really not understand that this was a polite wink at the other person’s username?
Being a programmer isn’t an excuse for having zero concept of normal conversation.
In the same way I believe they made an incredibly unnecessary reference to being an “annoying vegan” on a comment utterly unannoying, I believe you’ve made a really stereotypical reference to my profession on something totally unrelated. Yes. I am okay. Are you?
Actually you are desensitized to manic behaviour. they’re the one behaving like a maniac. You got triggered by a single comment so much you had to go and lookup a persons’ history. Are you intentionally looking for a fight just because there are crazy vegans out there? This person was reasonable and did suggest something that is true. We can give up eating meat. You can disagree… but sheesh? stalking their profile?
edit: noticed you are not the original commenter. I meant the person who replied to parent comment, not you.
did you try that?
There was no trying. I just did it.
it didn’t work
It did a tiny percentage. We’ll need more people to get a bigger percentage.
it’s not clear it did anything at all.
It’s not like somebody is throwing nets in the water because I don’t eat fish.
they don’t care whether you eat fish. they’re throwing the nets regardless.
Yes. Yes I did.
it didn’t work
Why?
looks like this comic is saying it’s not working. do you have some evidence it is?
Bud we were talking about not eating fish. The question was why you think not eating fish would be ineffective at solving this problem.
Or…are you literally just saying that 1 person not eating fish won’t stop fishing? Cause if so, I really should just block you.
I really should just block you.
please, do
Pick up an economics textbook
this is handwaiving, not evidence
But aside from donating to NGOs dedicated to cleaning up ocean litter, the average person has very little way to reduce the number of plastic nets in the water. It requires lifting fishermen out of poverty, teaching them more sustainable fishing practices, and cracking down on littering, all things that require international cooperation.
Or organise a boycott on eating fish.
It requires lifting fishermen out of poverty
Bruh. These aren’t 1 dude in a boat with a long line. These are billion dollar corporations running fleets. And yes, we need international cooperation to bring them to heel. Like with farmers, however, make no mistake that the people doing this kind of pollution are at all ignorant or unaware of what they are doing.
Even the adrenaline junkies on Deadliest Catch are running multiple million dollar businesses
the average person has very little way to reduce the number of plastic nets in the water
Besides the obvious and 100% viable option of just not eating fish.
have you tried that?
It seems to be working well after about 6 years.
seems like this comic indicates it’s not doing enough
Seems the problem is beyond finding a ‘cure-all’. Multiple strategies will be necessary.
I’d prefer an effective strategy
…which somehow doesn’t include producing less garbage?
Now I feel better about my weird dietary preferences.
I’m doing my part!
I also do not enjoy the taste of fish. High five haha
The average person cannot make the connection between the food they eat and the animal it was. People act so appalled by the torturous conditions in animal farms, and then stop at McDonald’s on their lunch break to pick up some chicken nuggets, totally unaware of the irony
Yeah eating fish is not sustainable, especially considering how global fish population is dropping rapidly. Sadly, my dad loves fish…
You could go the rest of your life without eating another fish and you would be fine.
to be fair that was a regulator decision. they seem to have went for the low hanging fruit of something relatively easy to replace without impacting the bottom line.
not gonna save the world by a long shot, but its a better than nothing sort of deal im surprised they even bothered with in the first place.
My conspiracy theory is it was chosen to deliberately harm the optics of environmentalists. Something with minimal useful impact and maximum inconvenience would turn people against the whole idea of environmentally friendly alternatives.
thats not something i do not shy away from. those fucks are that manipulative.
I see a lot of people who share your opinion. I used to work rehabbing sea turtles and EVERY turtle we received alive or dead had straws/bags in their gut. It might not seem super important but those products look more like jellyfish and turtles have poor eyesight.
The nets commercial fishing boats make the most plastic waste by a lot but declining a plastic straw and bringing your own bag to shop WILL save a life.
I think it’s also a product of the guy on the left likely has never used and will never use a fishing net. It’s kind of like the tarrifs on Canada. America wasn’t ever complaining that drugs were being trafficked over the the Canadian border but that is the reason they are giving for the tarrifs. The truth I see is one of the highest imports from Canada to the U.S. is Aluminum. Coke already stated if Aluminum costs go up, they will simply make more of their products in plastic bottles instead to keep their costs down. Those plastic bottles are made from petroleum which funds much of the GOP’s campaigns. He is simply paying back oil executives by ensuring aluminum prices rise. Cokes profits stay the same, Oil companies profits go up. Where does the money come from? Working class Americans
As much as I’d like a valid reason to shit on the Republican government (and there are many), this is not one of them.
Borders arw closing because globalization is declining world-wide. That has to do with reduced growth and progress, and is not due to the whims of a politician. The borders have been closed before the 20th century; what makes you believe that “borders open” is an invariable and ultimate truth? If that were really so, why weren’t global borders so open before the 20th century?
I think it’s also a product of the guy on the left likely has never used and will never use a fishing net.
What? This an absolutely absurd assertion. Fishing cooperatives are incredibly common. Find one near* you and go inside.
Also, who do you think are the ones cleaning up the mess, actually cutting the nets off, and doing the research? It’s not the guy trying to max out his investment portfolio, that’s for sure.
That data has to be scewed by region. Over half the population can’t swim well enough to save themselves from a current. If I asked 10 people in my life when they fished last, 9 of them would say not in the last 10 years. Likely 10 of them would say they have never used a fishing net. A rod and reel is all you ever normally see.
There are people who fish all the time, and there are people who have never seen the ocean or an actual large lake. Many of the people I meet have never been on a boat.
I lived in Panama City Beach for 5.5 years and went fishing once, and never with a rod or nets. We went flounder gigging, so just a spear really.
