• YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Everything is a compromise. We could bring back paper in a larger scale, but then more land would have to be dedicated to working forests which are sustainable but aren’t ecologically friendly. We could bring back glass in a larger scale, but that would make shipments much heavier thus increasing the emissions required to ship it.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      We handled the paper needed for all the paperwork that has gone away and we did not even use non tree alternatives at that time. Plus the grocery usages work well with recycled paper. Most of what glass is used for is filled locally. You don’t ship cans of pop or beer from china. Since most glass was liquids the container is not a majority of the weight.

      • YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Just an FYI, shipping means “the process of transporting packages and mail from one location to another” not literally transporting goods internationally on a ship.

        • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Yeah I was pointing out just the minimal effect. Shipping locally has the capability of being able to be done with clean energy and then there is the whole most of the weight is from the liquid thing. Not implying international shipping is the only prospect but more how its not really tradeoffs as all the tradeoffs are better options.