
A historian unpacks the origins of our plastic addiction - molteanu
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/21/history-of-america-love-affair-with-plastic
======
pessimizer
It's not a "throwaway culture" that's the problem, that's blaming the victim.
It's governments who shield business from dealing with externalities, and the
fact that if you're not going to be responsible for the ultimate disposition
of those plastics as a business, your only concern is for margin.

We don't have a nuclear waste problem because we have some cultural nuclear
addiction, or chrome in the soil because we have a chrome addiction. What we
have are weak governments where if their regulatory agencies weren't captured,
they wouldn't exist at all; the only regulations that get passed are ones that
force small operators out of the market, or allow massive companies to offload
liability to subcontractors.

edit: How about stopping all of the sin taxes (which are done because they
simultaneously bring in revenue and theoretically cut government health care
costs), and introduce some environmental taxes. They'll get passed down to the
consumer anyway, and they can make the choice with their wallet. Cutting sin
taxes in proportion to environmental taxes would make it revenue neutral, but
it certainly wouldn't be environmentally neutral.

------
blue_devil
So the irony is people started using plastic for its indestructibility, yet we
make disposable stuff out of it?

------
8bitsrule
The terms 'single-use' and 'throwaway' often confuse the discussion. For
example, some plastic components -- those in in a car, in a refrigerator, in a
sound-system, in a thick plastic rope -- are 'single-use', but are useful over
a long period.

Some short-term forms of plastic use are a very poor energy investment. That's
a problem because energy is finite, waste is a long-term threat. This is in
part a design problem, in part a problem of ignorance, in part a problem of
ignoring/hiding externalities for lower costs and quick profits ... etc. etc.

It's unfortunate that plastic has often become the only available option. I'd
be glad to pay more (money, time) for some containers that I don't -have-
bring home and -have- to toss into the recycling bin knowing their fate.

It looks as though until enough people are willing to make that choice, this
ongoing energy waste (being charged to the accounts of future generations)
will never end.

------
yogthos
TLDR: consumerism

------
carapace
(I apologize for re-posting a comment from a week ago, but I feel these
technologies are important enough to warrant more exposure.)

Two promising technologies:

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

Heat and pressure turn plastic back into oil.

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

Oxidize plastic in a molten salt bath, exothermic reaction, produces synthesis
gas. "... destroys all organic materials while simultaneously retaining
inorganic and hazardous components in the melt."

------
Merrill
It all goes back to Christian Friedrich Schönbein, who invented nitrocellulose
in 1845. This became celluloid, used in photography as well as other things
like billiard balls. It was the first real plastic.

The other application was nitrocellulose as guncotton, which led to the
development of smokeless gunpowder and the family of high explosives, such as
TNT.

Christian Friedrich Schönbein also discovered ozone and the electrochemical
effects leading to the fuel cell.

150th Anniversary: Death of Christian Friedrich Schönbein
[https://www.chemistryviews.org/details/ezine/11085246/150th_...](https://www.chemistryviews.org/details/ezine/11085246/150th_Anniversary_Death_of_Christian_Friedrich_Schonbein.html)

------
battletested
> our plastic addiction

I didn't know I have a plastic addiction. But industry and governments do,
because of the easy money it generates. They are addicted to money, I can see
that.

~~~
manmal
Let's call it our plastic habit, or convenience. We do tend to forget reusable
bags at home, and then have to take groceries home in a plastic bag. We do
prefer plastic straws over reusable ones out of metal or other materials,
because they have a number of benefits. We are used to furniture that's
durable and easy to clean. Etc.

It's convenient to use plastics. Either lawmakers make it more inconvenient,
or someone invent a comparable alternative that's biodegrading or
unproblematic. Else, I think nothing will change.

------
yourapostasy
Medical use of plastic is convenient for infection control. Alternatives [1]
were sought-after even back when plastic was introduced into the medical
field. It was thought back then we would "figure it out before it becomes a
problem".

I think our mental model around the deployment of plastic is flawed. The
logistical tail of plastics use falls upon an externalized public commons,
while much of that logistical tail cost is embedded into alternatives like
glass. No one accounts for the cost of disposal management of plastic syringes
to the point that microplastics don't end up in our biosphere, while
autoclaving glass syringes and recycling chipped glass syringes is tallied up
against glass. An apples-to-apples cost comparison can be more closely
approached if mostly-closed loop systems were built for all uses, and some
kind of target virgin feedstock utilization percentage was set, and
microplastics as an acceptable outcome was denied the plastics industry.

[1]
[https://www.standard.co.uk/futurelondon/theplasticfreeprojec...](https://www.standard.co.uk/futurelondon/theplasticfreeproject/singleuse-
plastic-in-medicine-and-how-we-can-cut-it-down-a4020416.html)

~~~
dredmorbius
There's a fairly credible argument that changing accounting (and possibly tax)
standards miht addres many present flaws of market economics.

Externalities, and zero-basis natural resource inputs, are not presently
accounted for. Most economic theory fails to even consider them.

~~~
notfromhere
Tragedy of the commons is a very common topic in economics

~~~
dredmorbius
Rule of Capture and Hotelling's rule aren't ToC, strictly.

------
WalterBright
I number of plastic items I have from the 60's to 90's have degraded. The
plastic has become brittle and has taken on an ugly yellowish hue.

I replaced a damaged shingle on my roof with a piece of plastic, thinking the
plastic was indestructible. Within about 3 months, the plastic had
disintegrated under the onslaught of the sun.

~~~
agumonkey
Marine grade plastics maybe ? or UV coated plastics.

Or maybe just no more plastics but cellulose based :)

~~~
vanderZwan
I heard there is a fairly sustainable way to produce cellulose building
materials. Pretty well-established too ;)

~~~
navaati
Wow, it took me some time. For the other slow brains like me: he's talking
about wood. Good joke tho :).

------
sans-serif
> Most Americans’ daily routines depend on single-use items and throwaway
> plastic packaging, much of it flowing into streams and oceans, polluting our
> ecosystems.

This is unsubstantiated sensational bs. Plastics do end up in landfill or
incinerator, but the US does not have waterway pollution problem.

~~~
mikojan
That's great. What about the countries you're shipping your plastic waste to?

~~~
cannedslime
No one ships plastic waste unless you mean E-waste... The OP was about the
fact that no western country just throws household plastic waste into the
water, it goes to landfills or is very often incinerated, plastic is a pretty
good carbon source for combustion you know...

~~~
mikojan
> No one ships plastic waste unless ...

Yes. Unless we do. Which we are. And it ends up in the water. And we remain
responsible for the foreseeable consequences of our actions.

~~~
cannedslime
Ok, we apparently still ship plastic waste to India and Malaysia. Though about
85% is incinerated, at least here in Denmark. Crazy really. Most plastics
can't be easily recycled, it actually makes sense just to burn it really.

------
kuu
Cheap, lightweight, resistant... The plastic has really good properties, it's
normal that we like it. The environmental impact was not that easy to
foresee...

~~~
Brakenshire
Plastic itself isn’t the problem. However, there are a lot of manufactured
items which are the right shape, but made of absurdly inappropriate materials,
like toys. Spatulas that melt in contact with a frying pan, or chrome foil on
plastic for the edge of a phone, which scratches and flakes at at the merest
touch. That’s not to say that you can’t design a heat resistant spatula, or a
phone with plastic edges which will be resilient and won’t mark. The problem
is the temptation that plastic provides to sell something which looks just
about right but doesn't work at all in the long run. If designed properly
plastic materials can last for a long time.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Plastic means you can design in obsolescence, if we take off the metal hinge
support here then this bin will break in 24 months and we can sell a new one.

Look at something like the handle on a paint roller. A wooden handle will
probably last a lifetime, plastic handle - with carefully measured amount of
plastic - can be designed to break the second time you use it: At which point
we go to the shop and buy another cheap piece of crap that will do the same.

Honestly I think a cm more metal in the handle, and a few grams more plastic
and they'd last a lifetime ... but what capitalist company wants to make goods
that last a lifetime, that harms profits.

~~~
wool_gather
Luxury brands (watches on the order of Omega, for example[0]) and makers of
professional tools routinely use the longevity of their products as a
marketing point.

[0]:"You never actually own a Patek Philippe – you merely look after it for
the next generation."

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Yes, but the longevity doesn't effect the market because they're things rich
people collect. People buying them on the whole won't buy fewer because "this
one still works", so the rarefied market changes the market forces
considerably.

Another example is high-fashion, where things aren't necessarily made any
better than low end goods, and it probably doesn't matter because rich people
(women mainly, it seems) will wear an item once. So again longevity isn't
really a factor as long as it appears to be well made.

