Hacker News Reader

> With an eye toward AGW, how can paper packaging and burning refuse be seen as a responsible choice?

Plastic takes oil and therefore carbon out of the depths of the Earth, until it eventually gets burnt, biodegrades or otherwise degrades and turns into CO2 contributing to global warming.

Trees instead take CO2 from the atmosphere, turn it into solid cellulose that we make paper from, until the paper biodegrades or gets burnt and returns to the atmosphere from which it came in the first place. If a new tree is planted for each tree that gets cut for paper, as is done in most developed countries, paper can be carbon neutral (it all depends on the source of the energy used for processing it).

Plastic is a nearly free byproduct of refining oil for fuel.

City services are expensive, why spend more money picking up trash, cleaning waterways, unclogging sewers, etc when you can do less of that? Particularly in developing countries which have scarce resources.

My city (Washington, DC) opted for a 5 cent tax on plastic bags. This caused use of them to drop 80% and been considered a huge success.

Because demand for plastic bags or similar substances doesn't evaporate. You're using a different substance instead of plastic, if you ban it. Using paper implies cutting down more trees, and paper doesn't have all the awesome properties that plastic has: high tensile strength per weight, impermeable to air/moisture, lightweight, etc.

Plastic bags are still available, they just cost a nickel now. I can't say I've noticed any more paper bags around, can't think of a store I shop at regularly where they are even available. I believe people are using reusable bags instead.

> The fact that it is biodegradable

...is something you just made up.

Most plastics aren't, and some of the ones that are marketed as biodegradable need to be put in a high-temperature bioreactor or something equally ridiculous in order to break down in a useful timeframe.

> I also don't understand why plastic in a landfill is all that bad.

Some portion of everything placed in a landfill will get in the water, but this is particularly true of lightweight and slow-to-degrade plastics.

> Plastics use significantly less energy in production and transportation ... With an eye toward AGW, how can paper packaging and burning refuse be seen as a responsible choice?

Incinerating garbage is an energy source in places like Norway.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jun/14/norway-w...

> The fact that it is biodegradable is a positive here - it won't break down into toxic substances.

The problem is that most of these biodegradables take a few years to fully break down, which is slower than the amount we keep on adding garbage in the landfills. So it's a net positive inflow into the landfills.

Its less cheap (in energy and environmental impact) if people have to run around and empty receptacles multiple times a day to keep up with the water bottles.

Remember, everything we do has multiple consequences.

A landfill is open and birds etc will take items out of it.