Based on jdietrich's input, it is then a waste processing problem and not a plastic problem. Tackling the symptom in this case seems net more harmful.
Humans don't dispose of things properly. That's a fact. Creating more plastic waste will create more plastic pollution.
It's far easier to not create the waste in the first place. And there are ways to reduce CO2 that don't involve creating exponentially more plastic waste.
Again, producers don't plastic wrap cucumbers to save CO2. The entire premise is ridiculous.
Charge producers for the waste their products create. That will incentivize less waste. Charge them for the CO2 they emit. That will incentivize a reduction in CO2. You can accomplish both with market signals.
Not at all. Cucumbers have a relatively short shelf-life due to a high water content and a permeable skin, so wrapping them makes economic and environmental sense. Apples and citrus fruits don't need plastic packaging, but their shelf life is considerably enhanced by the application of a protective wax coating. Some products like loose salad leaves need modified atmosphere packaging to achieve a satisfactory shelf life, while delicate soft fruits require a protective packaging system that could involve a variety of wood- or plastic-based products. I'm indifferent to points of principle, I care about choosing the most sustainable tool for any given task.
The critical environmental issue in our fruit and vegetable supply is the needlessly high use of air freight to maintain supplies of out-of-season produce. A single package of asparagus or green beans might produce emissions of >10kg CO2e, simply because of their transport mode. If you want to reduce the sustainability of your produce consumption, that one issue overwhelms pretty much everything else.
>It's far easier to not create the waste in the first place. And there are ways to reduce CO2 that don't involve creating exponentially more plastic waste.
You're trading one kind of waste for another. Plastic packaging is wasteful in one sense because it is disposable, but it reduces a potentially far greater waste by protecting products during transportation and storage. Plastic isn't always the most sustainable packaging material, but it often is. That decision needs to be made based on hard facts, not the presumption that plastic is evil.
>Charge producers for the waste their products create. That will incentivize less waste. Charge them for the CO2 they emit. That will incentivize a reduction in CO2.
I'm fully in favour of both, as long as those charges represent the actual economic impacts of mitigating those issues.
How many people in India are buying their vegetables in plastic wrap from the big box grocery store?
According to unicef, 50% of the population in India defecate in the open. It wasn't until 2014 that a municipal in Delhi passed a law penalizing people for public littering and defecation. There are no national laws.
It will require a cultural revolution to combat littering in India. In the mean time banning the most harmful forms of litter will help to combat the growing problem.
Littering is in every country not just India. Certain countries deal with it in a better way.
Banning something doesn't evaporate it's demand. Like, people litter because there are not dustbins (at least not often enough) on the street in India.
Open defecation is unrelated to this issue. Main reason open defecation happens is because there is no continuous supply of water (by the Govt) or proper sewage system (responsibility of the govt).
We need to stop blaming ourselves and think what is the root cause of the problem - Government.
PS: I've thought my stance through about this, please think through this and see whether or not Govt is to blame for this. Govt is not you and I. All govts these days are Govts of the people by the bureaucracy for the bureaucracy.
Most deal with it by passing laws a municipal levels of government making it illegal in conjunction with providing refuse bins. Only one municipality in India has done this.
> Open defecation is unrelated to this issue.
It's actually very much related, you state that people litter due to lack of refuse bins and openly defecate because of the lack of toilets. The reason I mention it is that while India does not have national laws around littering, they do have them for open defecation. Since the Swachh Bharat mission was launched in 2014 there have been significant reductions in the % of the population that openly defecate yet even in homes with access to toilets they aren't seeing 100% usage. In homes with government provided toilets they've seen upwards of 40% of people still choosing to openly defecate and of those a large percentage say they prefer the openness of defecating outdoors. It is most definitely a behavioral and cultural issue.
Littering out of convenience is cultural/behavioral and not due to any failing of the government. If it were purely down to a lack of refuse receptacles then how do you explain the state of most venues after an event? I've never been to a movie theater, music venue, or athletics stadium that did not have copious refuse bins to collect trash and yet people still litter. To further drive home the fact that is indeed culture look no further than the Japanese who have cleanliness so culturally ingrained that they stick around after World Cup matches to help clean the stadium.
Are you implying we should create less humans in a first place?
> It's far easier to not create the waste in the first place. And there are ways to reduce CO2 that don't involve creating exponentially more plastic waste.
If it is easy, then why aren't you a billionaire already?
More seriously, the solution is probably a combination of awareness about over consumption (reducing the production of waste), and investments into better waste management for the concerned countries.