• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In the System Change scenario, if consumers received 20 euro cents back when they return packaging to seller, it would lead to significantly lower net costs for returnable beverage and personal care bottles compared with single-use options.

    I’m skeptical. I remember when you could get 10 cents back for every glass bottle you returned here in Indiana when I was a kid and people still didn’t bother. And 10 cents then was worth a lot more than 20 Euro cents now.

    Also, isn’t most plastic packaging non-recyclable anyway?

    • Ramenator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We have that cashback system in Germany, each bottle has between 7 to 25 cent surcharge and it works extremely well. And those bottles are basically pure PET, which is extremely recyclable.
      And reusable is nearly always better than recyclable

    • ABCDE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s always picked up by people to get money in Germany and Denmark (if the original purchaser doesn’t get it back).

    • trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, isn’t most plastic packaging non-recyclable anyway?

      Polyethylene (grocery bags (LDPE), drink containers (PET), ziploc bags (MDPE), etc.) and polypropylene are both relatively easy to recycle.

      Polystyrene (styrofoam), and PVC are not.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How much energy does recycling them use? Because that’s another issue I see. If recycling LDPE, PET or MDPE ends up having a bigger carbon footprint than just throwing them away, that should be a factor.

        • trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You have to sort the plastic, shred it, wash it, melt it, and form it. It takes time, energy, and money. It isn’t free and it is right to recognize that. I don’t think there is a way that recycling can have a lower carbon footprint than just outright throwing something away.

          That said, if you’re throwing something away and need to manufacture something to replace it, I’m not sure that you shouldn’t be comparing the carbon footprint of recycling to the carbon footprint of new manufacture rather than disposal.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It isn’t free and it is right to recognize that.

            They’re paying people to recycle, they’re not charging them for it. So it is free for people to recycle and whoever is paying for recycling is losing money.

            But otherwise, fine.

            • trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I only meant free in the sense that recycling obeys the laws of thermodynamics. You don’t get something for nothing.