367
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
367 points (95.1% liked)
Not The Onion
12210 readers
494 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Oh I agree. I think getting people into using reusable bottles it would be better, however cities need to adapt to this approach for it to work. My local city centres all have standing cylinders, with a space for a water bottle, that dispense filtered water for free. They're set up all along busy shopping areas, and as long as they're maintained they can be very good at reducing the frequency of even needing to recycle a product. Recycling is fantastic for reusing materials and thus cutting down on destruction for resources etc., however the elephant in the room needs to be addressed: recycling plants, in order for the machines to process materials in such ways, inevitably creates some considerable pollutants in the air.
Just my opinion that recycling, as essential as it is in many ways, should not be used as a fallback for climate change; it makes more sense to me to systematically push reusable containers and make this the norm, of materials that can be easily recycled in the event that they break.