• fidodo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    3 months ago

    I always find the plastic straw thing being lumped in with climate change to be really annoying. Banning plastic straws isn’t about climate change, it’s about litter and waste. The problem with them is that they were getting all over the place and fucking with ecosystems. Fighting climate change is part of environmentalism, that doesn’t mean all environmentalism goes towards fighting climate change.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      3 months ago

      Reminds me of the plastic soda rings that ended up destroying enormous amounts of sea life just by getting trapped around animals’ necks and torsos.

      Now we just use cardboard to hold beers, its functionally the same price, and the only thing filling up the oceans are the aluminum cans and the paper waste.

      • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        At least aluminum degrades better than plastics, is easier recyclable, and is worth much more (all incentives to recycle). We should add 50cts. on each alu can which is returned when you return the can. Watch how fast this issue resolves itself, then.

        Paper is also at least very recyclable to the point that making paper out of paper is less Energy intensive than paper from wood. Only issue is bleaching, I guess?

    • Syl ⏚@jlai.luOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      Banning plastic straws isn’t about climate change, it’s about litter and waste.

      Climate change is also a consequence of our productivism and “waste”, by burning fossile fuels. We create too much stuff, we consume too fast that Earth can’t restore itself fast enough.

      Banning plastic straws was common sense, but it’s not enough.

    • ColonelPanic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also, at least in the EU, the laws have not just banned public straws but also a bunch of other single-use, non-degradable items. Plastic cutlery, qtips, and takeout food containers were banned too or severely limited. And there’ve been a lot of improvements that incentivise reusable containers over throwaway ones too.

      • Kühe sind toll@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        The thing with single use containers is, that its not really existent. Its not enforced and a lot of restaurants don’t care. I’ve never seen a single reusable food container in my entire life.

    • AgileLizard@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Even though I think banning unnecessary plastic items is fine and can lead to sensible innovation/more reuse, the debate around it is just a misdirection. Way more microplastic is due to car tyres or.fishing nets. Those have very big industries behind them that will fight tooth and nail against any regulation.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The real crime of this meme is tying climate change to the hypocrisy of some elites. Yes, some are hypocrites who fly private jets while preaching climate change. they’re dumb. But the majority of my conservative friends use exactly this hypocrisy as evidence that climate change is a problem, and I see plenty of people here on Lemmy using it to justify not making any personal changes in their lives.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    3 months ago

    In other news, emissions from private jets still represent barely anything compared to emissions from freight transport of crap people want delivered at their door tomorrow.

    • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      68
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Drop in a bucket maybe but it’s for like 0.001% of the population. Which is an insane number per capita at this scale. Magnitudes is one of the biggest things people miss when talking about emissions, one single billionaire pollutes more every single day than thousands average people.
      Every single one of us has to make efforts to combat climate change but some a lot more than others.

      • FatCat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Scoffing at others who are better off has always been the favourite strategy of middle class polluters shifting responsibility.

        “I am living within reasons, look at him.” Says everyone all the way up the economic ladder… 🤭

        • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          Why can’t anyone think of the shareholders!..

          Also that’s literally the point of my comment. Better off people pollute more so they should make the most effort. It’s pretty simple really.

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s also a drop in the ocean from the pollution dumped out by farms.

      People need to stop obsessing about private planes and Tylor Swift bullshit distractions. If all private jets disappeared tomorrow nothing would change in the fight against climate change.

      • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        We absolutely need to keep obsessing over private planes. That’s the privilege of a handful of people with massive repercussions for all of us. It’s not a zero sum game we need to tackle farming, fossil fuels, plastic and food waste, etc. all at once.
        1% of emission here and there quickly adds up when you tally it all.

        • madcaesar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          You’re basically investing your energy into picking weeds in your garden while your house burns down.

          Activism and change take effort and it needs to be used wisely.

          • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            3 months ago

            And you’re basically fueling inaction. Everyone has a very good reason as to why we shouldn’t take action towards them and then start pointing fingers at their neighbours.

            Taking down polluting billionaires, with their mega yachts and their private jets would also topple a good chunk of polluting industries as well. They’re literally at their heads, if you take out the big dude at the top, the rest would definitely follow.

            • suction@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Just go shoot some rich people, you don’t need to make up reasons to do so. Like I said above. You’re angry and want to rationalize your anger when no-one ever asked you to.

          • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            3 months ago

            Those flying private jets are the role models for many in society. They lead by example, and their example says there is no problem with emissions and convenience is much more important. That’s why this is important. You can do activism as much as you want but if the role models are doing the opposite that activism takes a lot more effort for the same result.

            • suction@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              If we ban private jets, the rich will scream and cry and the dummies who see them as role models will learn absolutely nothing from it, they made up their minds anyway that being rich is the goal and anyone who criticizes or limits that lifestyle is a jealous “hater”. It’s like with Trump supporters, the shittier Trump gets, the more they love him - the more the rich flaunt their lifestyle, the more the dummies look up to them.

              It’s not that easy. I hate to say it, but mankind probably needs to go through a total wipeout in order to get rid of the American way of life and all the evil that comes with it, like greed and money as the god above all gods.

              • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                3 months ago

                total wipeout in order to get rid of the American way of life

                Historically looking at other large powers, America and their way of life is set to destroy itself soon enough. Inequality grows and rot away the basis for the economy until the thing slowly collapses in on itself. And that’ll be the end of the American way if life.

                Unless those at the top actually change and be the role model they are supposed to be. If they do not, it’ll crash.

        • suction@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          That’s the privilege of a handful of people with massive repercussions for all of us

          not really though, as many people in this thread have pointed out. People want to rage against the rich, I get it, but it’s not helpful to abuse climate change as a reason to do so when their money itself is more enough reason.

          • Syl ⏚@jlai.luOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            If they would use their money to solve it, they would have done it by now. Instead, they’re buying medias and broadcast right-wing propaganda. ecology without class struggle is gardening !

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s not like commoners have much control over those things. If the people in charge can’t make effective change, either by legislation, by businesses practices, or by example, why would anyone else. People look up to Swift and when they see her flying a private jet, they’re less inclined to do their part. And yes, that is a sentiment I’ve heard. I can put solar panels out, I can switch over to biofuels, I can eliminate vacations, casual travel, and combine as much errant driving as possible, but one private flight by one billionaire throws all that out the window.

        Fuck there are people I’ve stopped talking to because they’re too old to figure out discord and I’m too young not to see the climate induced apocalypse.

    • sep@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      Comparing fright and person transport seams a bittle apple to oranges. Emission per passenger-kilometer is the only sane way to compare person transport.
      Fright should probably be separated into essenstials and luxury, but we all have our yearly footprint.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Ok then, passenger air travel is still releasing a whole lot more emissions than private jets, people stopping to travel all over during their vacations would have a much bigger impact.

        • sep@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          There are a lot more people on a regular plane then on a private jet. So emissions per person-kilometer is not higher.

          While obviously the total objective number of co2 equivalents will be higher for mass transit then for luxury jets for the super rich. That does not mean they get a free pass because there are fewer of them.

          Putting a price on polution, where the poluter have to pay the real global cost, and not outsource that cost to society would be a great thing. But getting all countries in the world to agree to a common scheme seems impossible.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            I never said they get a free pass, I said they barely represent anything when looking at air travel as a whole, don’t put words in my mouth.

            Also, four people in a Chevy Suburban with a big V8 pollute less to travel the same distance compared to doing it in a passenger plane.

            There’s a whole lot of hypocrisy from people who travel the world and complain about pollution… Or simply, people who moved cross country to continue their education when a similar college/university exists much closer to where their family is, meaning they wouldn’t have to take the plane many times every year to travel back home.

            Complain about private jets, put the same people in passenger planes instead and the impact will be fuck dick.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Or… You don’t understand the distinction between stuff you get delivered to your door that comes to your country by plane instead of boat so you can get it ASAP and groceries?

            Lol indeed.

            • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Kecessa

              Or… You don’t understand the distinction between stuff you get delivered to your door that comes to your country by plane instead of boat so you can get it ASAP and groceries?

              Lol indeed.

              Goalposts: Moved.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                My first message is clearly about air traffic and shit people get delivered

                https://sh.itjust.works/comment/10627068

                You’re the one who changed the conversation to only talk about the last leg of the journey that’s done by truck. Sure it’s more efficient to get your new pan delivered to your door compared to driving to the store to purchase it, but it’s not more efficient if it had to travel by plane to get to your door from China ASAP instead of traveling by boat.

                Edit: At least that shut you up :)

  • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    3 months ago

    I feel like in the current climate of attitudes towards the super wealthy, they’re taking steps to insulate themselves from “the commoners” like us.

    Yes I know it’s been that way forever; gated communities, etc… heck, even castles if you go back far enough.

    But this new private jet thing seems like now even moderately wealthy people, those who would have likely in the past just flown first class, are trying to insulate themselves from a growing mob.

    • Dojan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, well microplastics, but primarily because straws are relatively small and often ended up in nature, causing direct damage to animals both on land and in water.

      • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        I work with bicycles all day, and the warehouse I currently work in (it changes periodically) is honestly the biggest waster of plastic I’ve ever seen. Bigger waste than individually wrapped plastic straws.

        When pallets come in, they are wrapped in plastic shrink wrap to keep them from shifting.

        Then they’re processed on one side to be stored in the shelves, cutting the plastic off.

        When they get picked, they’re wrapped in plastic as the pallet gets taller, which just gets cut off before being sorted for their destinations.

        And once again, they get wrapped in plastic.

        So about 5lbs or more of plastic wrap per pallet, 4 or more times.

        And if they get stored for more than a few minutes anywhere without handling they have to be wrapped again.

        Thousands of pallets go through this one warehouse daily. They have a compactor going 24/7 to manage all the plastic waste separate from their cardboard box crusher.

        I used to feel bad about tiny pieces of plastic on items I get. Not so much anymore.

    • fidodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, it’s not about climate change and it really annoys me when people lump them together without remotely using their brains. Not all environmentalism is about fighting climate change. The rationale behind banning plastic straws is the same for banning plastic bags and those plastic 6 pack holders. They get all over the place, are hard to contain in landfills, kill wildlife, spread microplastics, don’t decompose, etc, etc. It’s not about emissions, which I’m sure it helps with too, but is nowhere near the primary reason to ban them. Saying it doesn’t fight climate change is the dumbest argument because nobody was using that as a reason in the first place.

    • Syl ⏚@jlai.luOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      could be yes, I mean plastic is bad, but it’s not enough compared to what’s happening.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Started with litter. Same with plastic bags. The first countries that banned plastic bags were developing nations that didn’t have strong… um. “litter awareness”. Cultures that previous either used reusable natural fiber bags or something that biodegraded. The influx of plastic bags in those communities lead to tree branches being filled with plastic waste.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      The big one is just that it fucking sucks to see plastic all over the ground, it utterly baffles me that people can oppose getting rid of trash in the streets!

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    In other news, Silicone Valley Billionaires are building a quaint village in the desert - and look - a dome!

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Well at least they’re doing something about the problem

      I’d prefer they make it better instead of worse, but hey, you get what you get.

  • Hugohase@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    How I hate this fucking strawman is indescribable. If we ban private jets you are still not gonna stop polluting the planet for no reason.

    • desconectado@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      If you ban any single activity you’re not going to stop polluting the planet… Because there’s no single contributor, so your options are to do nothing or stop everything all together? None of them are feasible.

      I don’t even think you have to ban private jets, just tax them very heavily (because they are plain luxury).

      • Hugohase@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        You misunderstood, this is an argument used by people to rationalize not changing their own behavior. If we would ban private jets they would rationalize with other “reasons”.

        • desconectado@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t know the first person that thinks banning jets is a silver bullet to solve climate change, or excuse their own behaviour by blaming people flying on jets.

          You are getting angry about people that don’t exist, or are not even a significant portion.

    • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Don’t ban them. Tax the shit out of every facet of them. I want them to pay twice as much as it’s worth to remove the carbon footprint, and then you can fly all you want!

  • FatCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I wonder how many of the people upvoting are themselves upper middle class, living super priviledged lives compared to the vast majority of humans on the planet.

    “I am living within reasons, look at him”, has always been the favourite strategy for shifting middle class guilt.

    • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      There you go, attack your allies. Not even upper class, just upper middle class. We’re so wealthy I can afford to take my family to the local artisanal Pizza place! Our RAV4 is the hybrid edition! Can’t afford private school, but our public schools are nice!

      It’s us versus them my man. I’m a lot closer to poor than I am to a private jet.

  • mhague@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    “I’m being crushed alive by 500 lbs but what really gets me is that Steve added 50 lbs. I mean, everyone else added 5 lbs! It’s not like I don’t want the 450 lbs off of me. It’s just really unfair to lift the 450 and not address the 50.”