I wouldn't say that we disagree. I'm not against regulation. I apologize if I was not clearer about that.

I do think it's a blunt tool, but I also think blunt tools are necessary. I didn't mean to undermine that, I wanted to communicate that a cultural and behavioral shift is an additional tool we need.

Besides the "assholes and idiots," there's also well-meaning but ignorant folks out there. Understandably, too- we're dealing with complex supply chains. It's easy to think switching to paper is better- and it is, on the waste front- but it isn't on the carbon front, not without reusing them a few times. I regret not being clearer and to the point in my original reply.

Growing up, I was focused on the waste problem but it wasn't until I heard an estimate about how many people would die globally in the next few decades if temps rose 2° C instead of 1.5. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find the source again, but I remember it was orders of magnitude more than the holocaust. And those are going to be people in vulnerable parts of the world, not the biggest polluters. It really woke me up to the stakes of greenhouse gases. Of course micro plastics are a concern, as well, but I'd have felt much better about the posted news if it were targeting the plastic around food which is so abundant now and harder to reduce, reuse, or recycle.

Anyways, thank you for your pushback. It's helped me realize that I need to be clearer and distinguish my stance from sounding too much like Plastic PR talking points.