
Coca-Cola most common source of packaging pollution on UK beaches: study - cfarm
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/14/coca-cola-packaging-pollution-on-uk-beaches-surfers-against-sewage-study
======
darkFunction
A lot of discussion on this thread revolves around whose responsibility it is
to ensure clean-up of plastic waste (producers or consumers) while ignoring
the fact that companies are using a material that lasts 10,000 years for items
that are single-use. That should be outright illegal unless there are
literally no alternatives.

~~~
RobertRoberts
Is it really debatable about "who" left the garbage on the ground?

Even if something only lasts a couple years, do we still want biodegrading
trash littering everything? (we have raw food products right now, I wouldn't
want those on the beach either...)

~~~
NeedMoreTea
Oh come on.

It's abundantly clear that placing blame and expectation entirely on the
shoulders of consumers is bollocks. Humans drop litter - just look at any
festival, concert, or sports match. When it was your granddad it was mostly
paper bags, maybe wrapped in newspaper, maybe a few crown corks. The glass got
carefully taken home as there was a hefty deposit on those beer bottles! Now
it's knee-deep single use everywhere.

That hasn't changed as you look at poorer countries, or back into the past.
What _has_ changed is extensive industry lobbying pretending it's not fucking
obvious and working to abolish deposit and return schemes, and use of far more
benign materials - like glass. It's as bad as tobacco or asbestos all over
again.

The same plastic industry that fucking lobbied the government against
suggestions that plastic packaging should contain a third recycled plastic.

Not only should it be outright illegal, countless industry's execs are
deserving of lengthy spells in prison or a law that says you can chuck used
plastic in their mansion's garden. :)

~~~
RobertRoberts
There are plenty of places in the world where littering is not socially
acceptable and happens less than other places.

What is the difference between these places? I think it's the people, not the
material their garbage is made of.

~~~
lostlogin
That stuff matters, but of far greater importance is the volume of plastic
made. We make too much. It’s not particularly hard to reduce your usage a lot,
but I think that’s coming at it from the wrong end. The manufacturers need to
be incentivised to do better. Carrot and stick, with the stick getting bigger
over time.

~~~
Liquid_Fire
In Japan everything is overpackaged using ridiculous amounts of plastic (more
so than in Europe, for example), and yet people don't litter.

I think it's important to tackle the issue from both ends.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _and yet people don 't litter._

I don't buy it. See CydeWeys's comments around this thread. Also, having lots
of people cleaning the streets only makes it _look_ like there's little
littering.

> _I think it 's important to tackle the issue from both ends._

Sure. Thing is, tackling it from the corporate end will be ridiculously more
effective than trying to instill new societal norms.

~~~
Reedx
There's definitely a cultural aspect and it makes a huge difference.

[http://japantravelcafe.com/japanese-culture-2/why-the-
japane...](http://japantravelcafe.com/japanese-culture-2/why-the-japanese-
dont-litter)

 _The all-around cleanliness of Japanese mega cities comes as culture shock to
people coming from other big cities in the world. This tidiness is not due to
millions of tax dollars spent on street cleaners and “Let’s-cleanup-our-city”
campaigns. It’s not due to effective public works or community service. It’s
due to one simple thing: They don’t throw their garbage on the floor._

Ever heard the rule, "pack it in, pack it out"? Or "leave the campground
better than you left it"? That means not only do you not litter, you pick up
any litter in case a previous person left something.

Teaching people this when they are kids makes a real impact. It has
compounding effects over time.

That said, companies should _also_ invest more in biodegradable packaging and
using much less packaging generally. Since there will always be some
litterbugs and trash that gets caught in the wind or falls off a truck, etc.
It should be something we tackle from both the producer and consumer ends.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _Ever heard the rule, "pack it in, pack it out"?_

Yeah, in religious congregations of a particularly controlling near-Christian
denomination.

> _Or "leave the campground better than you left it"?_

Yeah, in movies. I hear that Boy Scouts actually adhere to that rule.

I've only ever seen these two rules applied in a pretty top-down fashion as
tight-knit community rules. It's not something I've seen random people
invoking in generic situations, so I'm not sure if it scales to the level of a
city or a country.

~~~
Reedx
It's just like any other cultural norm. And Japan shows that it can scale.

Really, it's just a simple common courtesy. And I say this as an atheist non-
Boy Scout.

~~~
TeMPOraL
If it's "just like any other cultural norm", then we still have a problem - as
I wrote upthread and elsewhere, cultural norms are extremely difficult to
create or change. You're much better off seeking different points of
intervention... like making producers of (what becomes) trash involved and
primarily responsible for reducing the amount of litter.

------
SteveGerencser
The survey found that 10 companies were responsible for more than half of the
identifiably branded rubbish found on the UK’s beaches."

But are they? Isn't this shifting the blame from the end user that improperly
disposes of their trash to the company? Sure, they could do more to reduce
packaging issues, but in the end, it is the consumer that is tossing these
things out rather than recycling them.

~~~
AYBABTME
If you develop an app, and everybody using your app always ends up deleting
their data by clicking on the wrong button, and then people complain that your
app loses data...

...in the end, the users are wrong in the moment, but the real problem is that
your app allows a behavior that has negative outcomes, and the proper fix
isn't to educate people, but to make it impossible for people to click that
delete button so easily, or maybe make the deletion recoverable.

Maybe the users of coca-cola bottles are the problem, but maybe coca-cola
should be made to not make products that have a propensity to be misused.

~~~
liamkinne
Your design example doesn't apply because the end user in this case isn't
directly effected by their negligence.

There is clear evidence that littering is societal. See how clean Japanese
cities are despite almost everything being wrapped in plastic.

~~~
jdietrich
You won't even see many cigarette butts in Japan, because smokers carry a
pocket ashtray.

~~~
new299
Smoking culture in Japan appears to discourage smoking outside. In many places
smoking outside is illegal. However some trains, many shopping centers and
most restaurants have designated smoking areas.

As such you’re somewhat less likely to see cigarette butts on the street in
Japan in any case.

~~~
CydeWeys
You know those little smoking enclosures that some airports have?

Yeah, those are all over Japan outside (albeit not air-tight ones). You only
see people smoking in them or in buildings where smoking is allowed, commonly
bars.

It's a pretty great way of controlling cigarette butt litter, actually.

------
jdavis703
The beverage industry knows they have a festering PR problem. I recently got a
random poll from the American Beverage Association. They were primarily
interested in understanding how people feel about the industry’s
sustainability (or lack thereof). The good news is based on some of the
questions they asked it sounds like they’re considering bringing back glass
containers.

~~~
darkpuma
I hope they do, it would be a huge boon to sea glass enthusiasts.

------
m3nu
Just spent 2 weeks on Sabah, Borneo. Even the very remote beaches hours away
from large human settlements are littered with plastic bottles and grocery
bags. While diving you often see bags floating around. Both, on the surface
and below.

Ironically even the island hopping boat carried a tray of bottled water for
anyone to take. Not sure what % of bottles gets left behind at the end of the
day.

Maybe a small deposit on each bottle would help to essentially pay people to
collect them.

~~~
siedes
A small deposit is no incentive. Now if it were a significant amount like
$.50-$1.00 per bottle you recycle, then you'd have people literally racing to
get those bottles. Then just increase the price on the drinks itself by a bit
to make up for that, which is also a disincentive to discourage a number of
people from buying them in the first place.

~~~
jerrysievert
oregon has 90% redemption rate[1] at 10 cents per bottle, so there is
obviously some incentive.

1\. [https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-bottle-deposit-
redem...](https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-bottle-deposit-redemption-
rate-2018/)

~~~
siedes
Incentive for who though? For the homeless and very poor, who probably will
not even be the ones purchasing those bottles(at least at the same rate as
those in higher economic classes) in the first place? We need to make it worth
it for the good number of consumers who buy these things, so that they don't
litter in the first place and put more thought about those $0.50-$1.00 per
bottle they're tossing out. Yes, this may make it so that less bottles are
available for the homeless/impoverished, but I think we should be doing way
more for them than giving them the scraps that are 10 cent bottles...

~~~
benj111
The UK introduced a carrier bag charge scheme. Overnight usage dropped 80%,
and that was for a 5p charge. Now I don't think many people would stop to pick
up 5p off the street, but people will jump through the hoops to avoid paying
the 5p. These things work, even at a relatively low threshold. Don't forget
you're only aim to nudge what people know they should already be doing.

[https://www.standard.co.uk/futurelondon/theplasticfreeprojec...](https://www.standard.co.uk/futurelondon/theplasticfreeproject/single-
use-plastic-carrier-bag-charges-aldi-a4059211.html)

------
dev_dull
I was a little surprised when traveling in India the first time and I got a
soda. They expect you to wait and give them back the glass bottle once you’re
done. This was at a local stand, of course there’s plastic bottles elsewhere.

At first it felt weird, but then I realized how much better it is for everyone
and for the environment to reuse glass bottles. The bottles are washed and
reused and even if they ended up in the ocean, we’ll, the world was none the
worst for it.

It made me sad we moved away from this. I’d love to see glass used more often
again for drinks.

------
theabsurdman
Good read about how, as far back as the 50's, the beverage industry used the
"Keep America Beautiful" campaign to shift blame and responsibility for
pollution onto consumers:
[https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-
perspec...](https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-
indian-crying-environment-ads-pollution-1123-20171113-story.html)

~~~
judge2020
I wouldn't be surprised if the "#trashtag" movement from earlier this year was
created and spread by beverage companies.

------
PorterDuff
That's an interesting article.

I remember that years ago a project at the University of Arizona was doing
archaeological work on landfills. It turned out that surprising amount of the
non-degrading material found once you dug down a bit was telephone books.

~~~
PorterDuff
Hang on, here you go.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucson_Garbage_Project](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucson_Garbage_Project)

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
_newspapers dumped in landfills as much as over half a century ago, turn up
again as fresh and as readable as the day they were issued._

Amazing.

I imagine if the paper were shredded and mixed with organic matter it might
brake down more rapidly, but layered and trapped away underground evidently
not.

------
DrOctagon
Why can't we just go to 100% aluminium for beverage packaging? The technology
and supply chains etc. are already in place.

~~~
reaperducer
I'm OK with this. Or even glass.

According to the interwebs, it wasn't until the 1960's that plastic bottles
became popular in the United States, but I don't remember them until the early
80's.

Before then, soda always came in cans with pull-tabs that would slice your
toes open at the beach.

~~~
MivLives
As someone who has worked in the beverage industry. Please don't bring back
glass. It's so heavy, it's fragile, and it don't stack efficiently. Beer is
finally moving to cans a change which has only happened in the last few years.
It's easier to move and store, a twelve oz can takes up about 3/5s the space
of a 12oz bottle.

------
mooneater
Even with zero packaging, their product is addictive poison. Buffett has
spoken proudly of how, normally the human body would not be able to drink that
much sugar without getting immediately sick, but the coke formula overcomes
that sugar overload response. Disgusting.

~~~
maxxxxx
That’s actually something I have been thinking about. How do they get so much
sugar into a drink? You could never produce something drinkable with this
amount of sugar.

~~~
tapland
Sugar is very soluble?

It's not at all hard and as prviously stated, fruit juices contain at least as
much sugars naturally.

~~~
beenBoutIT
In the US we get our sugar from high fructose corn syrup unless we spend more
to buy the imported Mexican Coke that's made with real cane sugar.

~~~
reaperducer
_In the US we get our sugar from high fructose corn syrup unless we spend more
to buy the imported Mexican Coke that 's made with real cane sugar._

When I lived in Seattle, I always found it amusing that soccer moms would brag
about buying Mexican Coke at Whole Foods like it was something special. They
could just drive an hour north and buy Canadian Coke, which is also made with
sugar, for half the price!

~~~
Nition
Surely not really half the price if you can buy one locally, and have to drive
two hours there and back for the other.

------
youeseh
Why don't more drinks come in reusable glassware and milk crates? Are single
use cans and cardboard packages cheaper? Safer?

~~~
tapland
Because reusable usually means crushing the class and making new bottles.
Recycled aluminium saves more energy than the glass process.

~~~
MivLives
They're talking about returnables which is how beer used to come. Imagine
instead of just recycling your beer bottles you hauled it back to the store
for it to be sent back to vendor. I've worked around refillable milk
containers and it was a pain in the ass, beer I can only imagine is more so.

~~~
tapland
It would be absolutely nuts if anyone wanted to use non-standard bottles or
specific glass colorings. A standardized bottle that everyone used (only label
as differentiation) would be cool.

------
sameOld_sameOld
Remember the McDonald's styrofoam crisis of the 1980's?

[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/11/nyregion/mcdonald-s-is-
ur...](https://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/11/nyregion/mcdonald-s-is-urged-to-
alter-packaging.html)

------
redorb
20k identifiable pieces of trash, small sample size. Even if it's good math ~
perhaps its a numbers game of popularity in brands? Coke was 15% Pepsi 10% ...
and I'm sure other brands of aluminum can waste we're their proportional
share..

------
jimnotgym
Coke still tastes better from glass bottles.

Glass bottles are reuseable.

Hang on, why not use glass?

------
musgrove
Technically, Coca-Cola consumers are the most common source of packaging
pollution on UK beaches. That's a lot different than what the title states.
Since Coca-cola is the largest seller of beverages in containers, it only is
common sense that would be true. But hey, blame Coke. Let's blame the ocean
for people drowning as well, or the local utilities for people being
electrocuted or gravity for people falling to their death.

~~~
sydd
This is the same philosophy that led to the bank crysis in 2009. Banks were
saying that it's not their fault; rather the government was at fault with its
lax regulations.

------
andrewstuart
I noticed the other day that garbage is everywhere - and it's pretty much ALL
packaging of one form or another.

------
andrewshadura
…on UK beaches.

------
resters
The negative externalities of Warren Buffet's fortune are truly cataclysmic
for the environment.

------
jimmaswell
How about "Litterers most common source of pollution on beaches"?

------
flyGuyOnTheSly
Thank goodness.

Finally, somebody with some clout is pointing fingers at the largest
contributor to garbage... the corporations who produce it.

I live in Canada and Tim Horton's cups literally litter every street corner in
every big city in our country.

I have always thought that they should be responsible for the cleanup of those
cups.

It is absolutely their fault that their customers are throwing their products
onto our ground.

Why should our overburdened local governments carry the cost of picking up a
profitable business' garbage?

~~~
briandear
Shouldn’t the consumer be responsible for throwing their trash away properly?
The local government is a government of the local people: if the people would
stop throwing stuff on the ground, there wouldn’t be so much trash to pick up.
That burden is created by the local people. Should paint companies be held
responsible for graffiti?

~~~
osrec
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the corporation if they are
instilling a polluting culture that benefits them. There are edge cases in
this argument of course, but in my opinion, a large number of companies
produce mountains of wasteful unrecyclable packaging in the name of brand-
building or low cost. They use this to bolster their business, and therefore
they should be ultimately responsible for cleaning it up.

~~~
AmericanChopper
If you wanted to talk about the costs of disposing of packaging, then there’s
some valid points you could make. But to say producers are responsible for
littering is insane. There’s nothing about Coca Cola as a company, or the way
their products are packaged, or the way they sell them that would lead me to
throw the packaging on the ground rather than in the trash can. Anybody that
litters is wholly responsible for that act. If you wanna discuss what happens
to the packaging after it’s thrown in the trash or the recycling bin, and who
bears the costs, then there’s arguments you can make for the producer to have
additional responsibilities, but it’s not their job to make sure the consumer
doesn’t litter.

~~~
osrec
People litter because it's convenient. Corporations ignore litter because it's
convenient. The truth is everyone plays their part in this, but it is my
opinion that those that produce waste must have a plan to deal with it.

For example, Coke could offer to refill their drink bottles, but the truth is,
if you're out and about and want another pint of coke, you need to buy another
container with it, which ultimately will need to be dealt with by your areas
waste management system etc etc.

As a company they contribute so much to waste, and draw such significant
profits that they must at least be somewhat implicated for the production of
this pollution.

Another angle: if cars are being marketed to everyone left right and centre,
and lots of people buy cars that ultimately produce tonnes of greenhouse
gasses, who do you hold ultimately accountable for the pollution? the consumer
who has had adverts/dreams rammed down their throat or the chaps selling the
cars?

~~~
AmericanChopper
>my opinion that those that produce waste must have a plan to deal with it.

Any plan to deal with waste is going to be entirely thwarted by people who
choose to litter. The lifecycle of Coca Cola packaging could become 100% waste
free, but litter would still be created any time somebody chooses the throw
the packaging on the ground. People have an individual responsibility to not
litter, and it really doesn’t have to do much with the discussion on
sustainable packaging. If your starting premise to solving any problem is
‘people are 100% not responsible for their choices’, then you’re never going
to solve anything.

