Thoughts? I am currently trying to avoid using plastic packed drinks as much as possible due to it’s limited and finite recycle count

  • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    We have a water company here that sells water in cans called Liquid Death, I don’t know if they are international or not.

    We also have beer companies that use aluminum bottles over cans, might just be Bud Light and Coors but I dont drink cheap pilsners.

    We don’t recycle enough and don’t have the capacity for processing if we did recycle enough. There is no real financial incentive for companies to spend more on aluminum bottles vs cans or plastic. Aluminum bottles have a plastic liner because drinking out of raw aluminum tastes bad and might contribute to Alzheimer’s(might not be true).

    I want us to go back to glass bottles but we stopped using them so much because we are terrible people and leave broken glass everywhere and plastic is better for shareholders. Seriously, we we were using glass the amount of broken glass shards in parks, streets, sidewalks, parking lots was a problem when I was a kid.

    • Coreidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      We don’t recycle enough

      Maybe if recycling wasn’t a massive joke it might be useful and people might embrace it.

      The reality is no matter how much effort you put into recycling it’s going to a landfill or incinerator.

      “Recycling” outside of glass bottles is essentially non existent.

      The answer is to stop producing plastic.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I was under the impression that only plastic Recycling was a sham and Recycling glass, cans and cardboard was good.

        • Coreidan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Ya but it isn’t the cans, glass bottles, and cardboard that’s causing permanent environmental damage. It’s plastic that we are manufacturing daily all for it to wind up in a landfill and the side of the road which finds its way into rivers, lakes , oceans and pretty much everywhere else.

          The lack of recycling glass isn’t what’s killing us. It’s plastic.

  • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Aluminum is fine if you’re going to pour your drink into a glass, but despite the plastic inner sleeve you’re still going to taste the metal edge if you sip from the can.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Huh guess I like aluminum. I think soda from cans is far better than plastic

    • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Imo glass bottle is king. Then can, then plastic bottle if I’m in the middle of the Mojave desert having walked for 3 days with absolutely no form of hydration and am literally on the cusp of death. It tastes like shit and is bad for environment; not recyclable. Fuck plastic bottles.

      • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        As a klutz, with stupid tile floors I can’t afford to replace, I have come to appreciate plastic cups. Only having to clean up the spilled liquid, not deal with trying to protect kids and cats and my feet and hands as I scramble to get every shard, is worth the flatness of flavor.

    • cobra89@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s true, but the amount of plastic in the cans is pretty negligible, especially compared to plastic bottles and the aluminum can is still by far the most recyclable beverage container.

      Also there are new linings that don’t use plastic but natural materials called oleoresinous linings but they’re not good for acidic things so they’re not very wildly used.

      • Artyom@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Always. We used steel before then because it wouldn’t react with the drink. We always knew aluminum cans would be cheaper, but couldn’t figure out how to protect the flavor and carbonation until Coors figured out how to line it with plastic. He shared the process for free with his competition because he knew a recycling program would scale really well.

        • cobra89@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          That’s not entirely true. In the early days they used wax to line the cans because steel still leaves a taste in the drink. It just didn’t work very well and also caused carbonation issues as the CO2 diffused into the wax.

    • NotAnArdvark@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      There must be more to it than this. As a Dr. Pepper connoisseur I can tell you that Dr. Pepper from a can tastes far superior than from a bottle.

      • prayer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s a different type of plastic because it doesn’t need to be structural. Plastic bottles use PET, cans use a variety but I’m commonly seeing BPA.

      • BlueFairyPainter@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Maybe it’s for the same reason Moscow Mules are served in copper mugs. The container conducts heat well and therefore feels very cold to the touch when you put your lips on it, which enhances the feeling of it being refreshing.

        • tektite@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Moscow Mules are served in copper mugs

          …which ideally are not copper on the inside to prevent copper from leaching into the acidic beverage you’re drinking.

      • cobra89@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s a different type of plastic, AFAIK it’s like a spray on polymer for the aluminum cans; But I think the biggest factor is probably UV degradation of the ingredients in the soda with the clear plastic bottles.

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          1/20th of the plastic burns though… And the aluminum is 100% recyclable. So not quite “just like”.

    • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s pretty disingenuous, considering the amounts of respective materials involved.

      By that rationale, your home is made of paint. It just uses wood and concrete for structure.

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    foul: -5 points, extra letter/syllable

    in the US, it’s spelled ‘aluminum’

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    It’s somewhat more expensive, and under current rules disposal is basically not the manufacturer’s problem, or even the consumer’s. Are they more common in the UK (I assume)?

  • Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Money. Plastic is so integrated into the supply chain that divesting from it would require retooling probably thousands of bottling plants, at significant expense, with no guarantee of ROI.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Increase the costs by adding taxes to the plastic that account. Sucks to use the stick instead of the carrot, but if it’s a real societal cost then the cost should be paid by those introducing it. They’d raise prices for these goods and consumers can decide if it’s still worth buying.

    • Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Then give a loan to a worker co-op that would like to take over and force THAT sale to happen. That way the everything is equally shared amongst the workers, diffusing the wealth and power into the working class.

      Not the vast majority going to some billionaires looking to undermine the very nation they were founded.

  • Corroded@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Do you mean in things like plastic water bottles or other beverage containers like plastic bottles containing soda?

      • Corroded@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Well when it comes to water I feel like it has a lot to do with corporate events and advertising. If you are in Florida for example and the water tastes like it’s been filtered with dead fish you might be more inclined to grab a bottle.

        As for soda I think it has a lot to do with the cost of using glass bottles. People don’t really get them refilled. They just recycle them.

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          But that’s how it ia supposed to work, you drop them off at the place where you buy new stuff. They get them refilled and restocked.

  • Octospider@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Do you remember when Sun Chips changed their chip bag material to a more environmentally friendly compostable material? People lost their minds. Why? Because the bag crinkled a lot. All of the boring late night talk shows made fun of Sun Chips bags. So, they switched it back to the old bags.

    Moral of the story is that people don’t care if something is better for the environment if it inconveniences them now. If everything was in cans people would cry because they can’t close them or whatever. In fact, many items that were previously sold in cans are now plastic. Also, money… Cheaper to wrap water in plastic.

    You can still buy Coca-cola in glass bottles if you look hard enough. But they are pricey.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I got laughed at on other platforms by older generations for even suggesting the notion of mild inconvenience to make future generations lives easier.

      They don’t want us or them to have a better life, not even if it costs them nothing - but ESPECIALLY not if they have to do literally anything differently.

    • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Do you remember when Sun Chips changed their chip bag material to a more environmentally friendly compostable material? People lost their minds. Why? Because the bag crinkled a lot.

      No… Because it crinkled at a high enough volume that you actually have to worry about hearing loss. People weren’t losing their mind for no reason.

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703960004575427150103293906

      It is louder than “the cockpit of my jet,” said J. Scot Heathman, an Air Force pilot, in a video probing the issue that he posted on his blog under the headline “Potato Chip Technology That Destroys Your Hearing.” Mr. Heathman tested the loudness using a RadioShack sound meter. He squeezed the bag and recorded a 95 decibel level.

      The Bag was louder than the ambient noise in a jet fighter cockpit in flight.

      • dingus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Wow, that’s actually super interesting. Now I wish I had a bag to see how loud it sounds in person!

    • Dandroid@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      At the time, I thought the Sun chips bag situation was hilarious. If I think back on it now, it’s really sad. Yes, the bag was significantly louder than the original bag. But I feel like we’re going to need to make some sacrifices as a society for the environment. And that seems like a really, really tiny sacrifice.

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703960004575427150103293906

            It is louder than “the cockpit of my jet,” said J. Scot Heathman, an Air Force pilot, in a video probing the issue that he posted on his blog under the headline “Potato Chip Technology That Destroys Your Hearing.” Mr. Heathman tested the loudness using a RadioShack sound meter. He squeezed the bag and recorded a 95 decibel level.

            95 decibels is loud enough that you have to be concerned about hearing loss.

            https://www.ncoa.org/adviser/hearing-aids/decibel-levels/

            Prolonged exposure to sounds louder than 85 decibels can damage your hearing.
            Sixty decibels is equal to the sound of normal conversation, 90 decibels is closer to a lawn mower or hair dryer, and 120 decibels is more like a siren on an emergency vehicle.

            So yes… It WAS that loud.

            • Dandroid@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              From what distance away? Because I had them, and I promise they weren’t as loud from normal use distance than a jet engine. Maybe if your ear/microphone is basically touching the bag, but your ear isn’t normally that close. Plus, exposure time is pretty significant factor for hearing loss. Rolling up a chip bag once every couple of days when you have chips isn’t going to cause hearing loss.

              • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Rolling up a chip bag once every couple of days when you have chips isn’t going to cause hearing loss.

                Go look up a video of these bags. Mere handling them is loud as shit. Not just when you roll them up when you’re done.

                NIOSH standards say that at 95db, you shouldn’t be exposed to more than ~45 minutes of it. Where-as an alternative “loud” bag was 77 db, which is longer than 50 hours of exposure (exceeds the rolling period and is thus “safe”).

                Noise exposure is additive during a rolling period. So just saying “once every few days” is bullshit. This isn’t something that happens or can be in a vacuum. It’s adding to the total exposure that you’re exposed to every day. On top of the rest of your day the 95db chip bag is a really stupid fucking way to damage your hearing. Because you chose to eat some chips while watching a movie one night.

                As someone with tinnitus… Fuck people who downplay hearing loss/damage. You should be doing everything possible to keep your exposure to anything above 80db to a minimum.

    • Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      We don’t have Sun Chips here so I’m not aware of this, but I’d be really curious to learn how much of that freakout was genuine and how much was engineered by entities with a vested interest in maintaining status quo.

        • maniii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Compared to barrels of crude oil, I am sure a SINGLE Block of Aluminium can be reused more than 1000X times with no environment damage.

          • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Oh I’m sure you are right, it’s the drink companies for whom the shipping expense outweighs the environmental damage, because capitalism.

            • Ptsf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              It’s also worth noting that transport does not have a zero cost on the environment. It’s why we did away with glass, it’s so heavy it actually becomes carbon intensive to transport. Especially when you account for greater spoilage percentages (due to the glass being mishandled and breaking more often than alternatives). The equation isn’t as simple as it would seem. The true solution is less likely single use drink containers of any kind and more likely some sort of reusable bottle you carry around with you and could fill up.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Capitalism could solve this no problem if we just taxed externalities. Don’t even have to hit every level of the supply chain, just a big tax on fossil carbon removed from the ground, and maybe another tax where it gets transformed into plastic (a sort of externality-added tax).

              The market then decided what’s still worth making and what’s not, based on the total cost including the new taxes, weighed against how much people are willing to pay for the stuff.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m curious how much the environmental costs of shipping products in aluminum containers v. lighter plastic containers changes the equation.

              I also tend to think that an even better solution would be to have the consumer be the one with the container, and shipping the product in bulk, to be dispensed as a bulk item at a retail location. E.g., the packaging for shipping is the tank that the truck is towing, rather than a trailer full of individual use bottles.

      • cobra89@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        They already do in the US, they sell beer like this. And I’m pretty sure I’ve seen water packaged like this too.

      • pingveno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not that it isn’t still junk food and horrible for you. HFCS might be a worse form of sugar, but in the end they’re still refined sugars. It’s worth noting that Mexico and the US have similar obesity rates. There are more factors than just beverages involved, but it is one.

  • oxjox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    My thought is that it’s incredible how enormous the packaged drink market is. Tap water + filter + insulated bottle. Profit.

    I understand that not everyone has the luxury of planning ahead but the drink market should be less than half of what it is today. Most people drink bottled drinks because of marketing and subliminal pressures and habits.

    There are alternatives to plastic. As stupidly expensive as it is, Liquid Death is water in a can. I’ve also seen water in paper cartons and larger bottles made of glass. Soda is available in cans as well. Teas and juices are available in glass. You may be choosing to drink a particular brand that’s only available in plastic.

    You have plenty of choices. You have the choice to drink a particular product out of plastic. You have the choice to not drink that. You may be faced with having to pay a little more or to drink something that’s not your favorite. In an ideal world, more people would spend a little more on their purchases to increase demand for the manufacturing of a product which could bring prices down while decreasing demand and manufacturing of popular packaging.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m an Uber driver and I buy so many bottled drinks. My plan is to just get like two or three liter bottles to keep in the car to hydrate me for the day off tap water from home.

      Mostly just to save myself money though. Gotta get a buffer built and I’m just barely making it now.

  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    One important thing to keep in mind that is that you cannot “just” make things from aluminium.

    One reason the beverage can gets away with using so little alu for so much content is that that it’s pressurized and hence held in shape by its very content. This is why flat drinks have to have the extra air inside it be overpressurized and hence will stil fizz briefly when opened. And the shape of a bottle is not good for being held up by uniform pressure.
    We can put non-pressurized things into it when either the content is light (cremes etc) or is in itself rather stable (powders). But even then we use a lot of metal for the container. To truly save, it needs to be something that pressurizes from the inside, which among other things can be inherently unsafe (spray cans come to mind, don’t puncture them).

    Obligatory Engineer Guy video about the can.

    • trolololol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s nice but aluminum is not the only option.

      There’s tin and glass that could be used for several things.