I still feel bad about that.
I still feel bad about that.
It would have cost thousands had we not sorted most of what ostensibly _was_ garbage into Goodwill acceptable piles.
Source: my uncle has five goddamn refrigerators in our garage.
So he wrote a sign: "Don't touch! Will be picked up tomorrow"
Thing was gone the same night.
This just encourages people to dump it all at Goodwill and let them deal with it, or drive out along some country road and dump it in a ravine.
The problem with a lot of these things are that the costs of disposal aren't counted in the purchase; the company doesn't have to worry about it, the consumer doesn't have to worry about it (until they want to get rid of their fridge or whatnot), and for smaller stuff like Pringles tubes no one seems to pay for it.
This actually applies to most environmental costs.
At some point, someone's got to actually pay for all this. There are a few ways to do this; and an explicit "disposal surcharge" is one way. This could (should!) be higher for hard to dispose products/packages, like packaging that have the the infamous vaporized aluminium applied, and less for easier to dispose packaging. In short, it should reflect the actual costs of disposal and other environmental costs. Just as the costs of raw products, labour, etc. are factored in to a product's price, so should these kind of things.
Aside from the "disposable products" issue, a lot of packaging exists purely for reasons of marketing, to make the product "stand out" more. Makes sense economically right now as no one is paying for those costs, at least not directly. This would change the incentives and what made sense economically beforehand will now make a lot less sense.
I'm not dead-set on a tax as such, maybe there's a better way. The point is that the price of a product should account for all costs of manufacture, not just the costs of the manufacturer pays directly.
But yeah, practically it's not necessarily easy. Still, we need to do something IMHO, and this is the best I've been able to come up with thus far which still respects free markets and consumer choices, but also doesn't just shrug off the many very real environmental costs (or leaves it for the government to clean up, maybe). Overall, it seems like a fairly nice balance to me.
The alternative is people dumping their stuff somewhere which will have to be cleaned up anyway, so this is cheaper.
1: I did repair it some years prior (broken cross piece), but this time the electronics failed, and with a toddler getting a working washing machine fast is kind of a priority.
I have several acres of forested land. Anytime we clear out underbrush it's chock full of dumped garbage and drink containers. Ugh.
It was a little office/dorm fridge and an old dehumidifier, both of which had a Freon charge attached. The person running the scale rang up the recycle value of the junk so that I got ~$5 instead of paying $30.
Of course at that time they were able to recover and sell the Freon, not sure that's the case anymore.