you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

right? turns out that having the cap attached to the bottle means.. the cap is always right there and easy to close again....
like, fuckin

we figured this shit out more than 100 years ago

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (3 children)

    Isn't that worse though because now it involves metal, which is much more energy intensive to recycle

    Reasonably speaking the actual solution would be flip tops like you get on sports drinks. But presumably those are more complicated to manufacture which is why it's not done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago

    Ideally these bottles are recycled by just reusing them for a new product, not melted down. I've used these bottles several times over for beer. There's no need to replace them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago

    well 1) i'm not saying it's better, just that the concept of an attached lid is not even remotely new and thus complaining about it is incredibly dumb, and 2) you wouldn't recycle a bottle like that, you'd clean it up and just reuse it as-is, only having to replace the cork itself as the rubber gets too old.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago

    Even if we're for some reason melting down metal parts every time (which we don't), metal is energy intensive to recycle, but it's recyclable infinitely. Plastic is easier to melt, but only a small percentage of it is recyclable at all, and even that is only once. So all the plastic either gets burnt, or thrown out and ends up somewhere where it shouldn't, like an ocean. Both cases are way worse.

  • source
  • parent