Skip to main content

Sabine Hossenfelder: We're Lying to Ourselves about Plastic


I admire those scientists -- I mean actual credentialed working scientists -- who deign to spend a lot of time explaining science to layfolks like me.

They are a differentiated bunch. Examples that come to mind are: Neil deGrasse Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, Michael Polanyi, and -- my personal favorite -- Sabine Hossenfelder.  This must be roughly the tenth time she has inspired a post in this humble blog. 

Let me introduce her credentials. Hossenfelder has a Ph.D. from Goethe University Frankfurt, for which she wrote a thesis on "Black Hole Relics in Large Extra Dimensions."  That will give a flavor of such of her work as is aimed at peers. 

She is also a fellow blogger.

In a recent post on one of those blogs she argues that humans have been lying to ourselves about plastic. She thinks that the stuff is building up and may well prove disastrous for us.  To this point she cites the OECD, which says that the use of plastics doubled globally in the period 2000 to 2019. 

But, she also says, the plastics industry has promoted a happy-face "recycling myth" for decades, and we have all bought into it. The happy myth is that recycling creates value so that without much effort we can all enjoy a harmony of interest. 

The truth is that recycling, when we are "doing it well," she says, "is expensive and makes no financial sense." 

Relatedly, back in the 1970s the plastics industry was promoting waste-to-energy power plants. The idea was that plastic can be burnt, and energy generated in the process. In fact, as Sabine says, that CAN be done, but it is a "messy, dirty, and smelly business." People didn't like it.  That experiment soon came to an end due to public pressure and the recycling myth is a largely make-believe effort to do without waste-to-energy. 

This is what we are lying to ourselves about, both consumers and producers. There is a lot of plastic on our planet, a lot more is coming, most of it will neither be recycled properly NOR incinerated. So ... we have yet to create a solution. Hossenfelder concludes that in time we will see only a simple choice: burn plastic or learn to eat it. Incineration will regain its lost appeal. 

It all makes for a very sobering video.

https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2024/03/we-need-to-stop-lying-about-plastic-to.html    


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
24 comments
Read more

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
10 comments
Read more

The Growing Block Theory of Time

My own disposition, in regard to the philosophy of time, is toward the "growing block" theory. This is the view that past events remain realities, that present-moment events are also realities, but that future events are not yet real. The image is of the universe as a block with an edge on (say) the right-hand side. The block is expanding because that edge is moving ever further right, and that edge is what we call the present, or, simply, "now." Everything to the left of that edge is both static (the past is complete) and, still and forever, real. Think of the phrase "the moving finger writes." The chief alternatives to the growing-block theory are "presentism" (only the now-edge itself is real) and "eternalism" (past, present, and future are all real." I believe that time is a growing block because (1) that's what it feels like, (2) we should stick with the introspective phenomenon unless we have good reason to abandon ...
8 comments
Read more