• mipadaitu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s more that it’s heavier, so you have to transport a lot more weight for the same amount of product.

    Secondary to that, glass can’t be shaped as compactly as an aluminum can or plastic bottle, so it takes up more room for the same amount of product.

    There’s no perfect solution, which is why we have a lot of options.

    • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      There’s no perfect solution, which is why we have a lot of options.

      But in the category of “single use drinking containers”, all of the options besides glass carry with them more and worse externalities than what glass production and recycling carries. Which is why “having a lot of options” isn’t a positive in this case, it just means that a large part of the market is operating in a way that is more destructive to society than it needs to be.

      • MeThisGuy@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I dunno. it takes a lot more heat to melt and recycle some glass that plastic. that and the transport weight is a whole lot of extra environmental cost.
        and the whole separating by color thing in the recycling bins. best bet is to reuse the bottles for the same beverage by rinsing them back at the original bottling plant but that is a logistics nightmare