Coastal city residents would like to do more to reduce their single-use plastic waste and they are trying to recycle more, even trying to recycle items that simply can't be recycled, often called "wish-cycling".
But they feel unable to do so due to the current infrastructure challenges and accessibility barriers they face, a new report has found.
The study has also found that whilst young people are concerned about the use of plastic, their consumer behaviour often contradicts their beliefs.
[...] 90 per cent of people agreed it was important to recycle and 83 per cent felt that littering was a serious problem that needed addressing in Portsmouth. Results indicate that if there were more recycling options available, 79 per cent would recycle more.
However, there were obvious barriers to recycling, and people felt there was a lack of information and opportunity for recycling, with 65 per cent of people admitting they often did not know how or where to recycle plastic items.
[...] Another important finding was the impact of age on the results. The 31–50 years age group were found to be more regularly shopping in Portsmouth zero-waste shops than their counterparts, while the oldest age group (over 50 years) reported being less aware and less willing to shop in these retailers. Younger respondents (less than 30 years) were more concerned about plastic waste entering the ocean than their older counterparts (over 50 years).
Broadly speaking the younger residents were more concerned about the issue of single use plastic waste, however this was not backed up by their plastic purchase and use habits. Conversely, the older generation, who claimed not to be as concerned, often purchased fewer plastic items, particularly plastic bags. 85 per cent of respondents aged 51 years and above purchased zero plastic bags in an average week, compared to 39 per cent of the youngest age group (less than 30 years).
[...] Lead researcher, Stephanie Northen from Revolution Plastics at the University of Portsmouth, says: "Our findings show that although consumers have a role to play in plastic use and recycling, their behaviour is heavily influenced by factors which are largely out of their control, such as price and availability.
"Ultimately it is not consumers who should be responsible for systemic change. This responsibility lies with those who are in charge of plastic policy."
The report can be found here.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday March 09, @04:09PM (2 children)
>the oldest age group (over 50 years) reported being less aware and less willing to shop in these retailers.
What do they care? They'll be dead before anything they do makes a significant impact in their lives.
See also: the age of many of our legislators and judges.
"Oh, but they'll do it for the children!"
First: check the statistics on childless people in this country, the numbers continue to climb.
Second: you can't go around arguing "selfish actor" economic theory on one side and "They'll do it for the children!" ecological-social behavior on the other. Neither model is perfect, but "selfish actor" is closer to the average reality.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Thursday March 09, @05:48PM (1 child)
Why can't you argue that? For people with children, they're closely paired.
They also have more experience with the pointless shitshow [theguardian.com] that is plastics recycling.
[...]
Some places were dumping their recycling into landfills for years without telling anyone.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 10, @03:22AM
Just sort the trash properly and dump them in large landfills.
Future creatures might consider them rich deposits to be mined.
Then it'll be "recycling" just like current coal mining is recycling wood... 😉
That said there's only about 1 billion years left on this planet before the oceans boil etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_Earth [wikipedia.org]
So there might not actually be that much time left for a successor species to become "properly space faring". Either way it's not my problem.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09, @04:46PM (7 children)
Here in my corner of the USA, we have curbside recycling (mixed--all goes in one bin). They are only taking plastics in categories "1" and "2" (PETE and HDPE) at this time.
I've read that 5 (PP, polyproplene?) recycles very cleanly, but the process can't tolerate much if any other type of plastic or contaminant. This is used for yoghurt and a number of other things we consume in some quantity. For awhile there was "5" recycling at a local Whole Foods (across town), so we kept the PP separate and took a load when we had another trip in that direction. Then the bin disappeared and the Whole Foods guy I talked with said it was due to people "wish-cycling" other types into that bin--and the recycling company gave up (assuming it was too expensive to do another sort.)
Is a mass-publicity/marketing campaign needed to get people to do the right thing? Would that even work?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by acid andy on Thursday March 09, @06:04PM (4 children)
I don't think the public can ever be relied upon to consistently clean and sort their items to the degree required (from what I've seen many are incapable or unwilling to understand exactly what to do and I expect others can't be bothered), which implies it's necessary to fund better sorting and preparation of the items after collection. Don't forget the public are expected to do it for free.
Cost alone shouldn't be the limiting factor on ecological measures because they're always going to appear too expensive to those used to the easy profits of neglecting the environment. Our ecosystems and climate are collapsing. Doing something meaningful about that is not optional.
Master of the science of the art of the science of art.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09, @07:43PM (3 children)
In Saskatchewan, a deposit is paid on all recyclable items at the time of purchase, which you get back by taking your stuff to a recycling depot. This method seems extremely effective. I have never understood why this isn't done everywhere.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 09, @08:42PM (2 children)
<no-sarcasm>
When I was a kid this was done with glass soda pop bottles.
Why could this not be done with more things? Television sets. Car tires. I foresee a problem with returning old computers for a recycling deposit.
What if the cost of things included the cost to dispose of it, with some incentive to return it to get something back. This would definitely encourage proper recycling just to get some extra money. This worked and still works for aluminum cans (but they are inherently profitable to recycle because it costs more to manufacture aluminum than to melt it down and recycle). What if other goods artificially included that incentive?
</no-sarcasm>
As for the plastic problem, just use green plastic. The color will blend better with the ocean so that people don't notice it as easily. If you don't see it, then it's not a problem.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09, @10:23PM (1 child)
I think there are a few pockets of places in the US where they still do deposits on cans/bottles, but not like it used to be. However, they do work this way for automotive batteries. You'll pay a disposal/recycling fee when you buy the battery, which they will refund when you bring in the one you're replacing. It is a strong incentive that people respond strongly to, so they really should apply it to many more items these days.
(Score: 3, Informative) by dwilson on Saturday March 11, @02:46AM
That's called a 'core charge', and it applies to just about every non-consumable automotive part you can buy.
At least, it does in Canada. Fuel injectors, transfer cases, disc brake calipers, water pumps, whole transmissions.. you name it. If it's repairable, you get dinged a core charge when you buy a new one, and get it refunded when you bring the old one back.
- D
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bussdriver on Thursday March 09, @10:03PM
REGULATION! So direct all ideas outside the USA, which is unable to solve anything.
BAN green colored plastic containers (PP) like Japan. Ban all variations that create trouble!
Regulate uniform usage of plastic types and the additives allowed to be used in those plastics. Create far more number codes which include variations. Simply BAN uses such as plastic straws and plastic bags. Mandate 1 kind of plastic for 1 kind of thing. Why do I have liquid bottles in anything other than PP??
SHAPE indicators; such as #1 containers must be square; #5 must be cylinders.
Some containers need to return to being glass. Deposits should be done.
EASY to spot recycle code to help people and machines sort items. UNIFORM and not small and hard to see. Everything MUST be labeled.
Finally, recycling is not a business; simply fund it even if it runs at a loss! like roads etc. Tax polluters to pay for it! The metal or glass containers do not get taxed and look more attractive than a taxed plastic. AT LEAST if nobody wants cheap material it can be stockpiled somewhere pre-sorted until it is. I've seen the non-plastic straws at costco and they seem fine to me -- where they can be used ; they should be. 1 use food containers need restrictions.
Oh, and stop with this mixed BS; everybody went mixed because china was taking it just to pay the fuel for the return trips. Now nobody wants the paper because it's contaminated. At least the AI and human sorters have less work to do pre-sorted. Paper should be isolated.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday March 10, @06:27PM
The closest to effective recycling for PP I have seen is homebrew contraptions that turn soda bottles into filament to be used in a 3D printer. But I don't expect to see those or the skill to use them in a significant number of households any time soon.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 09, @05:15PM (1 child)
Kids talk the talk but can't walk the walk.
It's easy to give lip service to conservation and recycling. It's a whole 'nother story to actually do something.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09, @10:29PM
Buy food ethically, unless it is too hard [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Saturday March 11, @03:50PM
Virtue signaling has weird side effects, in my city you get one small trash can per week free pickup and they want money for more cans or a larger "full sized" can. You can get as many giant size recycling bins as you want "to save the planet" because a tweet announcing that will get upvoted, admittedly mostly by paid-for bots. Now insert numerous complaints from the recycling center about how they can't figure out why the recycling stream is something like 75% trash. Huh. I wonder why?
Eventually we're going back to single pickup, 'recycling' only, and the recycling center will emit enormous amounts of trash. But as long as we 'save the planet' it'll all be OK.