this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2026
1024 points (95.1% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

40410 readers
4325 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] weirdcarrotmonster@sh.itjust.works 104 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

There is actually a bit of sense in there. Paper cups weren't simply paper - its tetrapak-like material with plastic coating inside. They are notoriously hard to recycle. Plain plastic cups on the other hand are made from single material, most likely PET. Moreover, they are transparent, without colouring additives.

There are two reasons why colour in plastic makes it harder to recycle. First, pigment is a completely different substance, which behaves differently from plastic itself. It makes it harder to "re-melt" into stable material. If you ever 3d printed anything with matte/gloss filament, you'll know that it is more finicky than plain one. Second, uncoloured plastic can be coloured into anything, while other needs to be either sorted by colour or mixed with strong dye (black, gray, dark brown, etc) to have consistent colour.

PET itself is pretty easy to turn into something new, actually. A workshop near me had a live demo of the whole process - chipping it into small pieces, feeding to the heated tube, and then injection molded into trinkets. Industrial grade processing usually have "turned into pellets" step in between, but it's basically the same.

Plastic-covered paper, on the other hand, should be somehow separated first, and then handled with two different approaches - one for paper, another one for plastic film. Doable, but much harder. Paper straw can probably decompose by itself, without any special conditions.

UPD: Be wary that recycling is not a panacea. There's multiple videos about how recycling plastic isn't actually a thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68zjxTTl5Ik for example.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 12 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

this would be a legitimate argument if any of the plastic was actually recycled ... last time i checked it all goes into the incinerator to make electricity out of it.

the recycling of plastic is difficult, not because melting and re-shaping the plastic itself is difficult (it is not, it's trivially easy); the problem is that you basically never get correctly-sorted garbage. when you get "plastic waste", it has at least 20% things in it that are not plastic, including food waste, aluminum, paper, etc. some even throw toxic batteries in it, chemicals (soap), pharmaceuticals ... then there's the risk of infections on the plastic (viruses, bacteria, fungi). there's absolutely no chance that you're just gonna take plastic waste and mold it into a new shape that's food safe. best you can do is to mix it with concrete and use it as a construction material in road construction.


edit: the video you linked is really watchable.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I've worked with plastic recycling in West Africa at one factory, and just sorting plastic waste by hand is a decent job for a few dozen marginalized women because it demand real human level work.

The reason why is pigment and color. They could recycle yellow into yellow or tan, red into red, green into green. But blue and black were the deal breakers. Black being probably already recycled plastic that uses black pigment to mix colors.

Everything after the sorting is trivial. Shredding, re-peletizing, molding, all easily done.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] turtlesareneat@piefed.ca 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Even if you perfectly sort the plastic out, it can only be recycled about 1.5 times before the structure changes so much it's not suitable for the original use. Plastic recycling is a scam.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

yeah btw this is because it's not purely-sorted input. mixing is up with other plastics is what leads to the molecules to not properly align and that's what makes it brittle.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 22 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

paper straws are quite literally a strawman project against environmental pollution. they do not actually solve environmental pollution while pretending they do ..

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 5 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

its actually propaganda, a campaign by the oil/gas industry to avoid reducing thier own emissions or pollutions, thats why many countries arnt very keen on reducing it. they funded things like "how to reduce your carbon footprint, use less gas, or electricity" plus all those climate protesters you heard about defacing historic places, are funded by them.

i was watching some animal videos one day, and the presenter was promoting this "carbon footprint" company, and the commenters called it out that these companies are funded by the oil-gas industry, luckily the youtube channel listened and stopped promoting them.

[–] manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml 22 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Paper cups still have a plastic lining, and it's related to PFAS chemicals iirc

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 3 points 15 hours ago

As do metal soda cans to keep them from corroding

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] abbiistabbii@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 9 hours ago

Ironically, I think my drink from BK yesterday was paper cup and paper straw so.

[–] NastyNative@mander.xyz 42 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Many people don't understand why plastic straws are considered more harmful than plastic cups. The key issue is that straws are far more likely to escape waste management systems due to their small size, allowing them to pass through filtration screens and enter waterways. As a result, they reach the ocean at a higher rate and pose a greater threat to marine life, including sea turtles. Larger items like plastic cups are generally easier to capture and contain before they become environmental hazards.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 6 points 16 hours ago

Then they reach the ocean where they account for 0.2% (-ish?) of the plastic out there, 50% of the plastic in the ocean is fishing equipment (nets, etc.) for which we did… absolutely nothing.

And no, I'm not advocating in favor of plastic straws. I wish the rules worldwide would have been to make cups and straws mandatory complementary fees. Everyone would bring their own re-usable cups. Then onto disposable cutlery, etc. We managed to ban plastic bags at supermarkets, sure we could get a habit of carrying cups.

Because at the end, the better solution is not to recycle wastes, it's to stop producing them.

[–] Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip 7 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Sorry, people don't give a shit about nuance and technicalities anymore. It's all vibes, baby. ChatGPT says I'm right.

[–] OS2Warp@lemmy.zip 247 points 1 day ago (6 children)
[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 184 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 54 points 1 day ago (4 children)

So I've wanted to do this for a minute..

But how many paper straws would you have to use to offset one of these explosions? How long would it take to offset one of these explosions through straw use?

Writing this now I was surprised by the results...

Source for plastic v paper straw data

So apparently plastic straws are actually more carbon neutral than paper straws, but for the purposes of this analysis I'm going to carry it through to find out how long it takes to create equivalent emissions.

Paper straws:

Call it 1430 grams of emissions per straw (which is wild btw)

Plastic straws:

Call it 610 per plastic straw. Still wild for something which weighs less than a gram.

This is also from the thesis

So yeah.. not great.

Gonna be using 825 tons of carbon dioxide emitted from Hank Green's video.

I think Hank is working in US standard units here.. which is also weird and annoying but whatever... We're getting to units of rocket explosion per straw so it's fine..

And I'm going to be using 500 million straws per day, which is cited in the thesis from a 2017 study and repeated elsewhere in other studies on this.

It's not great but what even are we doing here..

I don't know how we get a plastic straw versus compostable straw use rate (what proportion of straws are still plastic versus how many are now paper or some other alternatives)

But we get 820 additional grams of emissions for each straw swapped.

500 tons to grams is:

838238016

Divided by the difference in co2e foot print per straw...

838238016 / 820 is about 1022240, in other words, about a million.

So for about every million straws swapped from plastic to paper, one giant fiery rocket explosion of CO2 emissions occurs.

The US consumes straws at a convenient rate of 500 million a day, so if ALL of those straws were converted to paper, we're setting off about 500 of those explosions per day.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 15 points 18 hours ago (6 children)

I was always given to understand that the straw thing was because plastic straws get out and fuck up wildlife, but that message seems to get buried in handwringing over climate change so often that I suspect bad actors are at play spreading all these memes.

load more comments (6 replies)

Does that include the co2 generated by the incineration of each straw at the end of their life? Assuming you're in a region that can incinerate trash instead of landfilling it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 53 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (23 children)

This image looks like right wing corpo propaganda to me. Not only does it divert the attention away from the handful of megacorporations emitting 80% of all green house gases, it is attacking a moderate leftist – who admittedly causes a relatively large amount of greenhouse gases.

But Taylor Swift is not making most of those flights on a personal basis. It’s to provide a service to fans. So in that sense we can regard the emissions as those of Taylor Swift the company. And in that sense they are much lower than many other companies who we often give a free pass.

So, yes hold the big emitters responsible, but let’s start with the 57 on the list and work our way down to Taylor Swift.

[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bingo.

It invites hatred from a sizeable (though perhaps potentially less politically-aware) fan base that might otherwise be receptive.

Using someone as popular as Swift as a target for less-pop-culture-interested folks who are politically informed is clearly kicking the hornets’ nest to stir up in-fighting among the working class.

Next time use Bezos or one of the other folks who showed up in that “Dialog” secret society since they also use private jets in the same way someone like Swift does, but in addition are far worse in every other way and who also lobby with their billions towards worsening the world in every way imaginable.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 141 points 1 day ago (29 children)

There's so much plastic lining that paper otherwise everything would get too soggy anyway. Yay for glass and metal. Reusable beats disposable, no matter what it's made of

[–] peetabix@sh.itjust.works 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

Theres a plastic lining in aluminium cans too. So glass is the way.

[–] alanjaow@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It's quite thin for aluminum, and the downside with glass is the high energy cost of melting it. I'd like if we went back to washing and reusing bottles, but I suppose that's a big shift in processing capabilities.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
[–] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 76 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Still waiting on straws made of dry pasta. Biodegradable, strong, edible if you really want

[–] unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 day ago

Sidenote: all 4 include plastic.

[–] cattywampas@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (7 children)

The real trick all along was always reducing your consumption of disposable products.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I mean waxed paper cups aren't super, they are likely better than plastic, but the wax is likely a fossils fuel byproduct

[–] turdas@suppo.fi 26 points 1 day ago (10 children)

I believe they increasingly use PLA which is a bioplastic. But yeah it used to be, and in many cases likely still is, polyethylene which is an oil product.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] plutopos@lemmy.zip 4 points 21 hours ago

I like the meme but I would like it more if it didn't have a wojak in it

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›