• GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I hear a lot of what you’re saying, and I agree to a large degree. What I don’t think is so valid is what do we do with the 9 billion tons of plastic waste we already have? Reducing our need for oil with our current (bad) behavior is a start. Taking care of the mess we’ve made is also a huge win, even if it’s converted into other, longer-lasting products, and assuming it doesn’t require too much energy. Having a world where the bottom line isn’t such a big factor would also help, and I’m not sure that will change quickly enough to help us out of this mess.

    Totally a puff piece, though, and I’m not optimistic is will be energy-efficient enough to work.

    • theluddite@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s why I say that antisolutions are context-dependent. This is being presented as the solution to plastic, not as a clean-up plan after we have banned plastic, or even while we ban plastic. The former is an antisolution, while the latter could be a responsible project. Antisolutions are dangerous because they deflate the political will necessary to actually solve the problem, not because the technology is problematic in and of itself.