this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
194 points (100.0% liked)

Environment

3923 readers
29 users here now

Environmental and ecological discussion, particularly of things like weather and other natural phenomena (especially if they're not breaking news).

See also our Nature and Gardening community for discussion centered around things like hiking, animals in their natural habitat, and gardening (urban or rural).


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] agegamon@beehaw.org 22 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Crushed recycled glass (aka cullet) actually decreases the amount of energy required to create new glass products, as well as demonstrably lowering their CO2 impact. While it's easy to assume that there's a lot of waste because there's a lot of heat involved, keep in mind that virgin material requires far more processing and even more heat and energy to result in a final product.

Unlike plastics, the problems with achieving a profitable (remember, capitalism) glass recycling stream are much more cultural and intrinsic to the subject nation. Here's some further info on why the US, where I live, is dragging so far behind in this area: https://cen.acs.org/materials/inorganic-chemistry/glass-recycling-US-broken/97/i6

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

There have been several detailed analyses comparing the carbon footprints and overall environmental impacts of glass and plastic (specifically PET) bottles. For instance, a study published in Sustainability used Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology to assess the environmental sustainability of two packaging alternatives for extra virgin olive oil: glass bottles and PET bottles made from 100% recycled PET granulate. The study found that the recycled PET system was more environmentally sustainable than the glass system across all impact categories considered, particularly in terms of global warming potential, particulate formation, terrestrial acidification, and fossil fuel scarcity. The impacts of the R-PET were lower than 40% compared to those of the glass system, with the glass system responsible for significantly higher CO2 equivalents due to the high weight of the glass bottle affecting both production and distribution phases​​. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3665

Another study presented in Recycling conducted a comparative LCA of two alternative packaging systems for drinking water: reusable glass bottles and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. The results indicated that PET bottles were the most sustainable option for natural water across many impact categories. For sparkling water, the environmental impacts of the two packaging systems were similar, and the most environmentally sound solution varied depending on the specific impact category considered. This study highlighted the importance of considering the number of reuses of a single glass bottle and the distribution distance, as these factors could significantly influence which packaging option is more sustainable​​.
https://www.mdpi.com/2313-4321/6/3/50

Furthermore, research compiled in ResearchGate also compared the LCA of PET and glass bottles, underscoring that plastics generally have a lower carbon footprint and lesser environmental impact compared to glass packaging material, when considering the entire lifecycle from raw material transportation to disposal​​.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314100348_Comparison_of_Life_Cycle_Assessment_of_PET_Bottle_and_Glass_Bottle

I have to credit ChatGPT4 for this answer.

[–] agegamon@beehaw.org 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I didn't know chatGPT could spit out sources, that's neat. I'll have to give it a shot some time. Did you specifically ask for that or did it do that on its own?

The PET vs Glass study is fascinating, especially since the result favors PET by a significant margin. That's a massive disconnect from the findings of the OP study. It basically makes PET out to be a fantastic option, but assuming it can be so clean, it's even more infuriating that so little plastic gets recycled. I also wonder what the breakdown of PET recycling is, vs plastics in general? Is it just a tiny portion of plastic waste overall, or does it fail to reach the recycling stream? Something about that situation stinks, and not just of uncleaned bottles.

Considering that we have to reduce virgin material use in every sector, the more recyclable option should be the clear winner. Its frustrating to see this level of waste.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago

Usually you have to ask for the sources. It does not give the sources unless it's searches internet.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)