[HN Gopher] Ocean Plastic Emissions by Country ___________________________________________________________________ Ocean Plastic Emissions by Country Author : nomaxx117 Score : 98 points Date : 2021-08-14 20:35 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (ourworldindata.org) (TXT) w3m dump (ourworldindata.org) | openforce wrote: | I had read somewhere that a lot of waste(supposedly recyclable) | from the US ends up in these poorer asian countries. These | countries that actually don't have a lot invested in high | efficient recycling systems. | | But this article just shows the data where the water gets | polluted from mismanaged waste. But not where this plastic comes | from? I suppose it's not the full story then? | [deleted] | nomaxx117 wrote: | I've been reading up on this stuff for a while. Most of the | waste is actually single use plastics from products consumed in | the emitting countries, that are disposed of improperly. For | example, the Philippines has an issue with sachets. | | Sources: | | https://news.mongabay.com/2018/10/plastic-trash-from-the-sac... | | https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/health/article/2168819/philip... | megablast wrote: | The number one cause of micro-plastic pollution near waterways is | from car tires. Just another reason cars are such a detriment to | our society. | shadilay wrote: | Buses and bicycles do not have tires? | Ndymium wrote: | Per passenger, buses have far fewer tires. Bicycle tires wear | down slower than car tires, and are smaller so there is less | to wear anyway. | Robotbeat wrote: | Possibly you're correct about bikes, but I suspect buses | and cars have similar tire wear per passenger mile, with | only a slight advantage for buses. Also, rubber | biodegrades. Brake dust and rail dust are also concerns. | himinlomax wrote: | The wear and tear is a function of weight and speed. It's | also not linear. | akomtu wrote: | Cars are also the backbone of our society. | BurningFrog wrote: | This quantifies the nonsense of the San Francisco plastic straw | ban, which was motivated by stopping plastic ocean emissions. | | And I still can't get a non melting straw. | ioseph wrote: | BYO metal or bamboo straw? | spikels wrote: | I guess those plastic straw bans in the US and Europe won't be | solving plastic pollution in oceans. | Zenst wrote: | Alas much plastic gets bundled up as `recycling` and brought up | cheap and hands washed and pats on the back. Sadly that then | goes onto some landfill in Africa or Asia and tada...blame | shifted and politicians gets to say how well they are tackling | things by being seen to be doing things. | | Plastic recycling from Europe is being dumped in Asian waters - | https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200630103603.h... | nomaxx117 wrote: | As the article discusses, the main contributing factor is a lack | of effective waste disposal systems, almost entirely in low and | middle income countries. The US, for example contributes .25% of | global ocean plastic emissions (not the 4.5% from all of NA, most | of which is from Central America and the Caribbean). High income | countries can help low income countries develop these systems | through grants and subsidies. | bufferoverflow wrote: | There are also bad cultures that find it acceptable to just | throw any trash into a river. | mistrial9 wrote: | "blame transfer" ? How about "put your trash in a trash system, | not the river" instead of guilting out the readers here? In | other news, local government takes money meant for trash | disposal and uses it for other things. | dfee wrote: | The article's title is "Where does the plastic in our oceans come | from?", and HN lists it as "Ocean Plastic Emissions by Country". | Indeed, one section is titled "Which countries emit the most | plastic to the ocean?". | | Don't let any of that fool you. We never actually get a breakdown | of contribution by country in the extensive article. I'm not sure | why. | nomaxx117 wrote: | The map interactive does provide that information if you roll | over the countries. | burlesona wrote: | Because the article is considered a "summary" of the raw data | you can explore yourself, including the breakdown for each | country. | asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: | I don't think anyone is trying to fool you. The data is there | for you to look at if you're interested. | lallysingh wrote: | "Most of the world's largest emitting rivers are in Asia, with | some also in East Africa and the Caribbean. In the chart we see | the ten largest contributors. This is shown as each river's share | of the global total. You can explore the data on the top 50 | rivers using the +Add river button on the chart.6 | | Seven of the top ten rivers are in the Philippines. Two are in | India, and one in Malaysia. The Pasig River in the Philippines | alone accounts for 6.4% of global river plastics. This paints a | very different picture to earlier studies where it was Asia's | largest rivers - the Yangtze, Xi, and Huangpu rivers in China, | and Ganges in India - that were dominant." | manachar wrote: | Wonder if this is connected to China ceasing to accept | trash/recycling from the US. | | I really hate that recycling became essentially a for-profit | shell game of shipping it somewhere else to be a problem rather | than dealing with building the domestic infrastructure needed | to correctly handle it (including not overselling recycling so | we could get waste-to-energy plants as part of the mix). | nomaxx117 wrote: | It could have some small connection, but I would probably | guess (based of of general trends) that it has to do with | some regions or cities not yet having adequate waste disposal | systems. | nomaxx117 wrote: | The massive concentration in the Philippines is one of the most | interesting takeaways here. I ended up poking around for more | details on this, and it looks like the causes relate to, among | other things, a lack of proper waste disposal and an industry | reliance on plastic sachets for food packaging. | | Sources: | https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/health/article/2168819/philip... | | https://news.mongabay.com/2018/10/plastic-trash-from-the-sac... | | https://urban-links.org/insight/turning-the-tide-on-ocean-pl... | pyaamb wrote: | The Ocean Cleanup Project is doing good work and could probably | use some scaling up | | https://theoceancleanup.com/updates/in-search-of-the-rivers-... | shadilay wrote: | It is infinitely more efficient to just not dump plastic in the | ocean in the first place than it is pick it out of the ocean. | pyaamb wrote: | Indeed | screye wrote: | Wow, growing up in India I always knew that the Mithi Nadi | (ulhas) was incredibly polluted and trash filled. But, to see it | at rank 3 is really eye opening. | | There have been efforts over the last few decades to clean it up. | But, Mumbai slums are situated on the river, and dump everything | and anything into it. It would be nice to know if the Ulhas is | mostly polluted with plastic upstream or at the mouth near | Mumbai. | nomaxx117 wrote: | You might be able to get answers in the "Figures and Data" tab | of this page: | | https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/18/eaaz5803 | sschueller wrote: | North America is 4.5%. That is just shameful and inexcusable for | a non 3rd world country. The US needs to get their trash disposal | in check and I hope the infrastructure bill has something in it | to get away from open landfills to more modern methods such as | cleanly incinerating garbage. Banning plastic bags at the grocery | store and straws at the bar is also not going to solve this | issue. | lisper wrote: | It is far from obvious whether the best strategy is for the | U.S. to clean up its 4.5% contribution, or to use those same | resources to help the Philippines clean up their vastly larger | share. | pengaru wrote: | why are they mutually exclusive? | lisper wrote: | Because even the U.S. does not have infinite resources. | pengaru wrote: | Why does it require infinite resources? | [deleted] | wongarsu wrote: | The best strategy imho would be to split resources and do | both. Helping far-off countries without cleaning up your own | backyard would seem condescending and like an attempt to | shift all blame elsewhere. Starting an effort to clean up | ocean pollution originating from the US while simultaneously | helping Asian countries do the same appears much more genuine | and has a much better chance to work based on perception | alone. | anyfoo wrote: | That's actually a really good point. While I do think that | a larger share of effort and goodwill should be spent on | major pollution _first_ (and helping with cleanup and | implementation of proper waste management there), not doing | anything in your own backyard at the same time seems | hypocritical. | nomaxx117 wrote: | We do not have a 4.5% contribution, most of the NA | contribution (as shown in the linked data) comes from Central | America and the Caribbean. We contribute .25%. | mc32 wrote: | North America here refers to the whole N. American continent | including the isthmus of Central America and the archipelagos | of the Caribbean Seas. | | The US is responsible for one half of one percent which is | pretty good. | anyfoo wrote: | While I think I agree with the straws and plastic bags (it's | hard without actual data), I do wonder whether reducing plastic | packaging on a large scale would not have a significant effect | as well. | | Close to a decade ago I moved from Europe to the US. I did, and | continue to do, perceive how much more plastics my groceries | are packaged with. This is especially egregious for things that | you buy in bundles, where each individual item is wrapped in | plastics again. Also, cheese for example seems to be packaged | with plastics a lot more than, say, paper. | | In order to solve the problem, it's probably more important and | effective to address the larger sources first, though. | Prioritization. | syshum wrote: | >Also, cheese for example seems to be packaged with plastics | a lot more than, say, paper. | | Sorry you are not taking my individually wrapped cheese | single slices | kortilla wrote: | North America is not a country. | seriousquestion wrote: | North America <> US | | And when you are solving a problem, do you sort by % ascending | or descending? | Overton-Window wrote: | The US alone is 4.25% of world population: | https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population... | | Focusing on curbing emissions regionally is as futile as | instating a "no peeing" section of the pool. | [deleted] | nomaxx117 wrote: | So, there is some interesting data on this in the data. Most of | the North American waste comes from central America and the | Carribean. The US and Canada combined are responsible for .27% | of global plastic emission. Guatamala emits .73%, Panama emits | .53%, Haiti .71%, and the Dominican Republic .64%. | | Banning plastic bags won't do anything here. This is about | countries not having sufficient waste disposal systems. If you | want to have an impact on this, don't push for bans on plastic | bags and other single use plastics. Donate to NGOs that help | build new waste management systems in affected countries and | push for federal grants to such organizations (if in the US). | | As a side note, SUP bans actually have a number of unintended | negative consequences, and it is not clear that they are even a | net positive for the environment. Depending on who you ask, the | environmental impact of such bans ranges from significant to | marginal, and CO2 emissions from plastic bags is likely far | better than alternatives. | | Source for C02 claim: | https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/04/30/plastic-paper-c... | OrvalWintermute wrote: | I know the context is ocean pollution and my response is very | anecdotal, and local watershed. Since the County & State put | additional costs on plastic bags, the amount of them strewn | all over the local parks, and the key creek in our area has | dropped dramatically. | | I still do see plastic bottles mainly from water, and | aluminum cans both for soda and beer, but not much else. | nomaxx117 wrote: | These actions do reduce litter, but most ocean emission is | the result of a complete lack of waste disposal systems. | The quantities involved are always far larger in situations | where a very large portion of waste is simply dumped into a | river. | architect64 wrote: | At first I thought the same, but their North American dataset | includes countries in Central America and the Caribbean. The US | does a relatively good job within its borders, but could do | more to support waste management efforts in less wealthy | countries. | | https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ocean-plastic-waste-per-c... | burlesona wrote: | Your comment mistakenly conflates North America with the United | States. The US is only 0.25%. North America includes Mexico, | Central America, and the Caribbean. Of those, Guatemala appears | to be the "leader" at 0.73%, approx 3 times more waste than the | US despite having about 1/20 the population. | akomtu wrote: | NA could make a heavy duty zero maintenance plastic disposal | box. Powered by solar panels, ideally. Then give them for | free to countries that don't have recycling facilities. | lhorie wrote: | One thing to be aware of though is all these numbers are in | the 0.x% range per country, making it easy to draw "eh we're | not so bad" type of conclusions. | | But consider visualizing it like this: if the entire amount | of ocean pollution was represented by a 10x10x10 pile of | tires, 2.5 tires would be of American origin. So while not | completely embarrassing, it's not exactly great either. | | Considering there are some 200 countries in world, 0.x% | contribution is within the same order of magnitude to the | average contribution. | | So although some countries have more slack to pick up, I | think the alarmist tone about US isn't necessarily | unwarranted. | nsizx wrote: | And to think that the EU made it mandatory for plastic bags to | cost money, gravely inconveniencing every shopper... And my | country only amounts to 0.02% of plastic waste in the ocean. | thepasswordis wrote: | I don't know that I would consider not having a plastic bag a | "grave" inconvenience. | Majestic121 wrote: | Gravely inconveniencing, really? Adding 40 cents to your bill | if you forgot your shopping bag is a grave inconvenience? | nsizx wrote: | Actually yes, since some shops now only have paper bags which | are expensive and break just by looking at them. If you | forget to bring a bag from home you're in trouble, especially | if your groceries are heavy and you're far from home - the | bags are guaranteed to break. (This is Europe, so you're | walking back, obviously) | ginko wrote: | Paper bags are actually sturdier than plastic bags from my | experience. | redisman wrote: | I'm glad your life is so easy that this is riling you up | hh3k0 wrote: | Yeah, whoever thinks that adding 40 cents to your bill for | forgetting your shopping bag is a "grave inconvenience" was | raised a spoiled brat. Plain and simple. The bar for | something to be a "grave inconvenience" isn't high if you've | never known of real hardship, I guess. | hh3k0 wrote: | Yeah, let's just all sit back and carry on business as usual | while pointing fingers at whoever is the worst offender at the | moment. That sounds like a good idea. | nomaxx117 wrote: | Yeah, SUP bans don't do anything for the ocean. Investment in | waste management solutions in low and middle income countries | is far better for the environment, but most politicians are not | terribly well informed. | freyr wrote: | You can buy a bag for a few cents or bring a bag. | | You're living life on easy street if this is what you consider | "gravely inconveniencing." | nsizx wrote: | Everything has to be read in context. This is gravely | inconveniencing to the experience of shopping. Sorry I didn't | get to work in the salt mines! | catillac wrote: | Still, it's hard to imagine how one might ever consider | such a small inconvenience "gravely inconveniencing" even | in that very specific context. It's such a small thing. I | don't think one has to have worked in the salt mines to | think this. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-08-14 23:00 UTC)