Hacker News Reader

Comment by analognoise | Hacker News Reader

You know this is disingenuous, right? All of the things you described are water saving measures - the rationale for them is almost completely divorced from the climate change argument made by GP.

I mean there's definitely a conversation to be had about the effectiveness of domestic water saving measures in comparison to industrial ones, but I'm not sure it's entirely relevant here.

The point is the same: none of the things we've been told to do to conserve actually make a difference. They're just a relief valve so we can feel in control, so we can be blamed for individual failings when massive polluters, water users, plastic makers, etc can continue to create waste.

>when massive polluters, water users, plastic makers, etc can continue to create waste.

You realize most of these "massive polluters" are polluting on behalf of you? PG&E isn't emitting a gazillion tons of CO2 for fun, they're doing so to produce energy for you.

This is the same kind of "individual responsibility" nonsense that allows manufacturers of plastic bags to continue to produce billions of them while we pretend us recycling has any effect.

It's propaganda, specifically made to allow the true polluters to continue unabated while we impotently discuss ways to individually handle a collective problem.

And recycling that just gets diverted to landfill since China stopped taking it.

That’s not really much of a problem.

Plastic is better off in the landfill anyway. Shipping it to China takes a decent amount of carbon, creates a decent amount of ocean pollution. Burying it locally is usually better managed and sequesters carbon.

But it’s still good that people are in the habit of recycle because metals like aluminum are still very advantageous to recycle from an energy perspective.

Why don't you just buy an electric car? /s

Reply on news.ycombinator.com