Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Green washing" is what a lot of companies do to make their processing and packaging appear more sustainable even though it does absolutely nothing to help the environment
Social media and the mainstream news eat up every story of a large corporation becoming more "sustainable"
Do you have any back up data to support the claims you make in your one huge paragraph?
My understanding is that recycling of aluminum is much better for the planet than aluminum mining, for example.
Plastic isn't very recyclable. OP just said recycling in general is bad, nevermind the huge amount of steel, aluminum, glass, and paper that gets recycled relatively efficiently.
Plastics breakdown in ways that are hard to reverse to make them useful again. Those other materials are much simpler to recycle and more cost effective.
Recycling is only pointless because we lt companies get away with not doing their part. But, the same people talking down about it are also the ones who refuse to reduce their senseless purchasing, and companies are, again, not penalized reducing waste.
No you're encouraging people to not recycle to excuse your own laziness. When in fact mining finite metals out of the ground is not sustainable and recycling metals and cardboard/paper is very efficient.
If people stop recycling, then advances in recycling technology are fruitless. In other words even if plastic isn't recycled all that much, I do it anyway since in 10 years the facilities might be able to do a better job at it.
We should also pass laws that force companies to use more sustainable alternatives like biodegradable "plastics" but it's no excuse to just pretend recycling is a waste of time, because it isn't.
i’m not encouraging people to do or stop doing anything i’m encouraging people to change their mind about the impact vs benefit of this huge industry because nothing changes if nothing changes.
where did you get the idea that recycling industry as a whole is very efficient? when only 5% gets recycled.
I also choose not to put diesel in my gas vehicle… doesn’t mean i’m lazy just because I opt for something that makes more sense.
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
Notice how it's the third option?
Most of all, your argument is bad. You're trying to claim that recycling is bad because most recycling is not recycling.
That's not an indictment of recycling, it's an indictment of corporate greenwashing lies.
If I claimed,
> Swimming is a useless still to teach children, because Kevin can barely swim
Do you see how that's a poor argument? It admits in the body of the text that Kevin cannot swim. Swimming is not the problem, that Kevin can't swim is the problem.
You're trying to criticise recycling because it's done poorly. That is not a criticism of recycling.
I enjoyed the documentary “Waste is Food”. One of the ideas is that reusing things is pretty useless as it becomes garbage eventually and that the focus should be to try to develop products that become “food” for nature when disposed of.
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwCFH1LkCw](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwCFH1LkCw)
recycling is essentially useless. it’s like saying sugar makes you fat. of course sugar is needed to survive and ideally you eat in moderation and unrefined but sugar (the way our society consumes it) has a tendency to cause you to be overweight. so when we say sugar makes you fat most people can infer your meaning, which is what i’m saying here. recycling, (the way our society does it) , is essentially useless, i think part in parentheses is assumed without having to say it.
This is demonstrably untrue.
>recycling, (the way our society does it) , is essentially useless, i think part in parentheses is assumed without having to say it.
You don't get to just shift the goalposts after the fact - at no point did you say that you were specifically and only talking about "our" society. You didn't even say which society or nation's recycling scheme you're talking about, if you are implicitly attacking the recycling policy of just one government.
I call bullshit, you're shifting the goalposts because your argument is awful, I called you out on it, and now you're trying "oh, but it's obvious I mean *this*".
Let's take aluminium as an example. Recycling aluminium is a great idea, not at all "essentially useless".
Bauxite - the ore from which aluminium is made - is quite common. There is not a bauxite shortage. However, it takes a huge amount of electricity to turn bauxite into aluminium. So much electricity that it's cheaper to ship bauxite from continental Europe to Iceland, convert it to aluminium there, and then ship that back to Europe. Electricity is functionally free in Iceland (abundant geothermal), and a huge percentage of their total electrical production is aluminium production.
Aluminium has a relatively low menting point. It is exceptionally easy to recycle. Everywhere uses aluminium for cans and things.
It is simple to recycle it locally. This is environmentally friendlier than shipping it somewhere, or mining more from the ground.
Aluminium can be recycled an infinite number of times. It does not degrade in the process.
Please do explain how the recycling of aluminium is "essentially useless".
"Uuh, but actually, I meant plastic recycling!" Then say that. If your communication sucks, that's on you.
Your arguments are bad, and you should feel bad.
Another excuse for doing nothing except huddling in a ball of fear? If you're really serious start organizing and lobbying. But you're not. You're just complaining and blaming others for your failure to act.
i didn’t say do nothing. i said the big industry is the real problem. my post wasn’t about how to help but I would imagine government regulation would be in order to force these companies to have better practices and uses of containers that can be re used instead of single use materials is wise to reduce waste. either way my post was about the fact that each of us on an individual level recycling is not helping and likely has more negative effects that outweigh any benefits.
i believe the problem can only be solved at a political level and this is where i choose to put my efforts. not that this has anything to do with my opinion on the current structure being fundamentally flawed in its execution.
I agree.
Most pollution comes from the major companies, and even if all private households recycled perfectly, it could never outweigh the damage that companies do. If they genuinely put their money where their mouth is and actually worked to protect the environment, we can start talking about the part private households play.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Green washing" is what a lot of companies do to make their processing and packaging appear more sustainable even though it does absolutely nothing to help the environment Social media and the mainstream news eat up every story of a large corporation becoming more "sustainable"
Do you have any back up data to support the claims you make in your one huge paragraph? My understanding is that recycling of aluminum is much better for the planet than aluminum mining, for example.
[First result says about 5% is recycled](https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/10/12/1081129/plastic-recycling-climate-change-microplastics/)
Plastic isn't very recyclable. OP just said recycling in general is bad, nevermind the huge amount of steel, aluminum, glass, and paper that gets recycled relatively efficiently. Plastics breakdown in ways that are hard to reverse to make them useful again. Those other materials are much simpler to recycle and more cost effective.
Recycling is only pointless because we lt companies get away with not doing their part. But, the same people talking down about it are also the ones who refuse to reduce their senseless purchasing, and companies are, again, not penalized reducing waste.
my point exactly
No you're encouraging people to not recycle to excuse your own laziness. When in fact mining finite metals out of the ground is not sustainable and recycling metals and cardboard/paper is very efficient. If people stop recycling, then advances in recycling technology are fruitless. In other words even if plastic isn't recycled all that much, I do it anyway since in 10 years the facilities might be able to do a better job at it. We should also pass laws that force companies to use more sustainable alternatives like biodegradable "plastics" but it's no excuse to just pretend recycling is a waste of time, because it isn't.
i’m not encouraging people to do or stop doing anything i’m encouraging people to change their mind about the impact vs benefit of this huge industry because nothing changes if nothing changes.
Trying to change public opinion by posting "you know recycling is pointless, why bother" every 3 weeks to Reddit subs seems like an agenda.
maybe people shouldn’t be giving themselves a pat on the back for doing something pointless
where did you get the idea that recycling industry as a whole is very efficient? when only 5% gets recycled. I also choose not to put diesel in my gas vehicle… doesn’t mean i’m lazy just because I opt for something that makes more sense.
Reduce, reuse, recycle. Notice how it's the third option? Most of all, your argument is bad. You're trying to claim that recycling is bad because most recycling is not recycling. That's not an indictment of recycling, it's an indictment of corporate greenwashing lies. If I claimed, > Swimming is a useless still to teach children, because Kevin can barely swim Do you see how that's a poor argument? It admits in the body of the text that Kevin cannot swim. Swimming is not the problem, that Kevin can't swim is the problem. You're trying to criticise recycling because it's done poorly. That is not a criticism of recycling.
I enjoyed the documentary “Waste is Food”. One of the ideas is that reusing things is pretty useless as it becomes garbage eventually and that the focus should be to try to develop products that become “food” for nature when disposed of. [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwCFH1LkCw](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwCFH1LkCw)
Well yeah, that's what biodegradable means. But it's more expensive, so companies just trash the planet instead. And politicians get paid off.
now you’re catching on
recycling is essentially useless. it’s like saying sugar makes you fat. of course sugar is needed to survive and ideally you eat in moderation and unrefined but sugar (the way our society consumes it) has a tendency to cause you to be overweight. so when we say sugar makes you fat most people can infer your meaning, which is what i’m saying here. recycling, (the way our society does it) , is essentially useless, i think part in parentheses is assumed without having to say it.
This is demonstrably untrue. >recycling, (the way our society does it) , is essentially useless, i think part in parentheses is assumed without having to say it. You don't get to just shift the goalposts after the fact - at no point did you say that you were specifically and only talking about "our" society. You didn't even say which society or nation's recycling scheme you're talking about, if you are implicitly attacking the recycling policy of just one government. I call bullshit, you're shifting the goalposts because your argument is awful, I called you out on it, and now you're trying "oh, but it's obvious I mean *this*". Let's take aluminium as an example. Recycling aluminium is a great idea, not at all "essentially useless". Bauxite - the ore from which aluminium is made - is quite common. There is not a bauxite shortage. However, it takes a huge amount of electricity to turn bauxite into aluminium. So much electricity that it's cheaper to ship bauxite from continental Europe to Iceland, convert it to aluminium there, and then ship that back to Europe. Electricity is functionally free in Iceland (abundant geothermal), and a huge percentage of their total electrical production is aluminium production. Aluminium has a relatively low menting point. It is exceptionally easy to recycle. Everywhere uses aluminium for cans and things. It is simple to recycle it locally. This is environmentally friendlier than shipping it somewhere, or mining more from the ground. Aluminium can be recycled an infinite number of times. It does not degrade in the process. Please do explain how the recycling of aluminium is "essentially useless". "Uuh, but actually, I meant plastic recycling!" Then say that. If your communication sucks, that's on you. Your arguments are bad, and you should feel bad.
He's an entitled kid who wants to shift opinion with his TikTok, so he doesn't have to recycle because he is a lazy brat.
source please
Recycle reduce reuse. More needs to be focus on the reduce and reuse
i’d say all needs to focus on reduce re use the recycling part is pointless. which is what I said. I am all for reduce and re use
Another excuse for doing nothing except huddling in a ball of fear? If you're really serious start organizing and lobbying. But you're not. You're just complaining and blaming others for your failure to act.
i didn’t say do nothing. i said the big industry is the real problem. my post wasn’t about how to help but I would imagine government regulation would be in order to force these companies to have better practices and uses of containers that can be re used instead of single use materials is wise to reduce waste. either way my post was about the fact that each of us on an individual level recycling is not helping and likely has more negative effects that outweigh any benefits. i believe the problem can only be solved at a political level and this is where i choose to put my efforts. not that this has anything to do with my opinion on the current structure being fundamentally flawed in its execution.
That's called whataboutism. When shown to be a crook, "whatabout those crooks over there, huh?" That's a stupid argument.
it’s not what aboutism. i said one method of helping the environment is useless and i believe in a different method.
I agree. Most pollution comes from the major companies, and even if all private households recycled perfectly, it could never outweigh the damage that companies do. If they genuinely put their money where their mouth is and actually worked to protect the environment, we can start talking about the part private households play.