Is Anyone Else Sickened by The Lack of Government Action on Waste and Recycling?

Andrew0415 on 28/02/2025 - 09:01
Last edited 28/02/2025 - 09:01

My wife and I are in the process of cleaning out my father-in-law's deceased estate. We're doing our best to recycle wherever possible and ensure things don't just end up dumped in landfill but it's been extremely difficult to find appropriate and accessible recycling services.

Just last week we were prepared to deliver a ute full of chemicals for safe disposal when we were told at the last minute the facility had burnt down and chemical collection probably won't be online again for another six months. For a city the size of Sydney, this is an absolute farce.

Simple and accessible e-waste recycling too should be run by local governments year-round, not one weekend every blue moon. And don't get me started on the utter sham that is plastics "recycling".

Sure, there are private operators scattered here and there but, frankly, I don't trust a lot of them to do the right thing and it shouldn't be this onerous to responsibly recycle and dispose of our rubbish and waste.

With the quality and longevity of consumer goods and clothing in rapid decline it feels like this problem is only getting worse by the year. I don't have kids and don't intend to have any but it genuinely sickens me the way we are trashing this planet for future generations in the interest of consumption and short-term convenience. Does anyone else feel this way or am I missing the bigger picture here?

Home & Garden

Comments

  • Ozbar Gain on 28/02/2025 - 09:04
    +27

    This is an outrage

    • Scrooge McDuck on 01/03/2025 - 02:46
      +11

      My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined.

    • bargaino on 01/03/2025 - 03:13
      +2

      That's a bloody outrage, it is!

    • Dr Phil on 01/03/2025 - 18:44
      -3

      Its all to hard

      Just do it the quick and easy way OP

      Your not going to be saving the world..seriously

  • Russell Dupsumtucka on 28/02/2025 - 09:07
    +36

    Welcome to Australia, the biggest country town in the world.

    • montorola on 28/02/2025 - 09:22

      HoW yA gOiN'?

    • MrThing on 28/02/2025 - 09:37
      +1

      hey cobber

    • Mad Max on 28/02/2025 - 17:20
      +1

      Too busy saving the planet with new solar panels, wind farms and electric cars.
      Recycling and reducing unnecessary consumption is not part of the agenda.

      • OzzyOzbourne on 01/03/2025 - 00:26
        +7

        It all depends on how much money a business can make and how much they "lobby" the government as to whether it gets on the agenda.
        There mustn't be much money in recycling so it's never on the agenda.
        Add to that… No retired government minister wants to be CEO of a recycling company, now gas and coal on the other hand….

  • Porker on 28/02/2025 - 09:12
    +24

    My take is that it's hard for any Government at any level to address EVERY issue that anyone could ever have. A ute full of chemicals is probably a rarity rather than the norm.

    I would image it's a case that they'd need to pick and choose what service that they can provide for various reasons: serves the masses, cost effective, etc. There are Councils that allow free depositing of; e-waste, styrofoam, green waste, etc.

      • ozbjunkie on 01/03/2025 - 08:25
        +1

        You're a waste mate

        Waste of a comment there

        • Crow K on 01/03/2025 - 17:59
          +2

          How else would we keep ourselves informed of important things like (checks link) a two year old Daily Telegraph article about drag queens reading stories at libraries?

          What would be be the purpose of living if we couldn't keep track of the sorts of things Rupert Murdoch wanted us to, back in 2023?

      • tenpercent on 01/03/2025 - 09:18
        -6

        4 neggers think this is an efficient use of rate payers money and it

        serves the masses

    • mskeggs on 28/02/2025 - 10:30
      +29

      Having dealt with this exact situation last year, the local waste centre would take "domestic quantities" of paints and thinners and a few other things, which was up to 20 liters for free any time.
      Twice a year they take larger quantities of other chemicals.
      To do this, they had a team of 4 contractors managing the toxic chemicals so they would not be a fire hazard, would not leak and were handled safely by people with PPE.

      The idea that your local waste facility should have a team on standby to handle OP's immediate needs seems a little wasteful of resources.

      For ewaste, the same facility takes it at anytime.
      Maybe a letter to council asking the best approach, rather than opening with an outraged "I'm sickened by the lack of action" would get better results.

      This sounds like a boomer Facebook post that will be followed up in a few weeks with another "I'm sickened at how high council rate are getting."

      • Grunntt on 01/03/2025 - 08:33
        +6

        This sounds like a boomer Facebook post

        Sounds more like a Gen Z to me - let's save the planet the way I want it to be done.

        • reactor-au on 01/03/2025 - 09:56
          +6

          Makes sense since Gen Z will have to deal with most of the mess down the road.
          The sheer amount of junk that is produced, purchased, and dumped every damn day is absurd. Just look at how many bins are overflowing on collection day.
          I wouldn't say any one generation is worse than another and as a millennial it's something that's shocked me since seeing a doco on it some 25 years ago.

          • Grunntt on 02/03/2025 - 13:39

            @reactor-au:

            Makes sense since Gen Z will have to deal with most of the mess down the road….
            …I wouldn't say any one generation is worse than another

            I have to agree with you on that - I was just noting mskeggs shallow attempt to blame everything on boomers. They've just become a target for feeble attempts at cheap shots without any thought to the truth of the matter.

            • reactor-au on 02/03/2025 - 14:01
              +3

              @Grunntt: I think it's because boomers had it better than any other generation - post the wars, the global economy was booming, things were cheap as chips (even houses), credit was practically free, everyone could easily afford everything they wanted/needed by working just about any job (without the need for 3 year degrees and student debt), people were comfortable to have large families, there was no need to make things cheap and disposable, climate change wasn't a thing and energy was cheap.

              I'm open to debate but I think it's difficult not to be jealous of the boomer era in that sense.

              • bobwokeup on 02/03/2025 - 14:20
                +1

                @reactor-au: Exactly life is harder now. They had it good, I miss being a kid in the 90s it wasn’t like it is now growing up.

    • outlander on 02/03/2025 - 12:54
      +1

      Every… any…

      The leaders in this country are all subpar and overpaid. They coast along, scraping by on the minimum whilst talking about how hard they work. Most of the initiatives they spearhead (like recycling) are just corporate operations that these human turds slap their branding over and take credit for.

      This whole country is a scam

  • djsweet on 28/02/2025 - 09:12
    +10

    Don't recyclers just pass the recycling to China based operators who just dump it in the sea or burn it once they've taken what they want?
    Probably just as well to chuck it in the bin.

    • Andrew0415 on 28/02/2025 - 09:28
      +5

      Yep, this is what I'm talking about regarding private operators. REDcycle getting exposed for stockpiling plastic was just the tip of the iceberg. I don't think nearly as much of our "recycling" gets recycled as people think.

      • gutwagon on 02/03/2025 - 17:42
        +1

        Where I work we have 3 rubbish skips, landfill, mixed recycling and cardboard/paper. Often all 3 go into the same truck ! Just a gimmick .

  • MS Paint on 28/02/2025 - 09:20
    +6

    Just put it all on marketplace for free and make it someone else's problem.

    • Andrew0415 on 28/02/2025 - 09:25
      +1

      We are putting a lot of stuff on marketplace but I don't think many people will be interested in a quarter-full can of thirty year old two stroke lawnmower oil.

      • coxjon on 28/02/2025 - 09:29
        +61

        Hi, is this still available?

      • MrThing on 28/02/2025 - 09:36
        +18

        Hi, do you deliver?

      • MS Paint on 28/02/2025 - 09:49
        +11

        Will you be uploading a picture of said oil?

      • SmiTTy on 28/02/2025 - 10:20
        +5

        Can you post?

      • montorola on 28/02/2025 - 10:33
        +3

        Bro will give ya <80% discount> with $20 my way

      • Miss B on 28/02/2025 - 21:29
        +10

        Can you hold until next year? My mother is dying so I'm really busy selling wafers.

      • Preet on 01/03/2025 - 18:15
        +2

        I don't have the cash, what's your PayID?

      • Alley Cat on 02/03/2025 - 12:44
        +2

        Can you turn it into a candle or oil lantern?

      • arcticmonkey on 02/03/2025 - 21:21
        +1

        Would you deliver?

  • MrThing on 28/02/2025 - 09:35
    +2

    ahem no climate change is the biggest risk to humanity…..

    yeah nah, over population, waste and rubbish and despot dictators will kill us all first

    • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 13:07
      -4

      over population<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
      The one and only driver of the end game and all the facets of what that looks like

  • EFC94 on 28/02/2025 - 09:52
    +5

    I'm certainly no expert on the topic but I don't think there is much money to be made from recycling, thus nobody really wants much to do with it.

    I do however entirely agree with your sentiment.

    • magic8ballgag on 01/03/2025 - 08:46

      Isn't that a sad but also not surprising?

  • Boioioioi on 28/02/2025 - 10:10

    Yeah its really frustrating

  • overthinking on 28/02/2025 - 10:12
    +2

    Your feelings are valid. There are just much bigger issues right now.

    Remember when Coles and Woolworths banned plastic bags? Public outrage.

    Now we have a cost of living and housing crisis Lul

    • tenpercent on 28/02/2025 - 10:17
      +12

      And they replaced them with thicker plastic bags that use even more petrochemicals because that's betterer?
      Then they replaced those thicker plastic bags with the rubbish paper ones that are barely reusable especially if they overpack them or anything cold or moist goes in it and that are made using Australian forrests that get chopped down to make wood pulp or wood chips that first gets shipped all the way to China, turned into bags over there and then shipped all the way back to us because that's gooderer for the environment?
      And here I am still reusing some of my 'single use' original plastic bags.

      • EFC94 on 28/02/2025 - 11:20
        +6

        The idea is that you should buy some of the $1 green reusable bags and take them with you, then you're not buying new bags everytime you go shopping.

        • tenpercent on 28/02/2025 - 13:52
          -6

          By "green" do you mean those monstrocities that have metal lining plus or minus bubble wrap inside them?
          Those are wayyyy bettererer for the environment, right? They just use 50 times as much plastic as the old thicker re-usable plastic bags that replaced the older 'single-use' plastic bags that everyone re-used anyway because we were all rebels. Oh and lining them with metal? Yeah that's going to be great for electricity usage and greenhouse emissions and destruction of land from mining.
          Yeah they're soooOoooooOoooo "green".

          PS. Yes I get the point of the sh*thouse paper bags is to nudge you to spend more on the least environmentally friendly grocery bag option ever to hit Australian supermarkets.

        • bobbified on 28/02/2025 - 15:04
          +1

          Im not sure if that idea is working though and the supermarkets probably don't care because they're making shitloads of money off these bags!

        • ForkSnorter on 28/02/2025 - 16:21
          +1

          Even better idea is to spend a bit more to get a stronger cotton or hemp bag that will last a few years and not contribute any microplastics to the environment during its use and after it falls apart/gets discarded.

      • LFO on 01/03/2025 - 14:10

        And they replaced them with thicker plastic bags

        And now we have to pay for them

  • tenpercent on 28/02/2025 - 10:13
    +2

    When did it burn down? Didn't hear about it. Probably breathed in all the toxic fumes though.

  • GettingThePlus190s on 28/02/2025 - 10:27
    +1

    Yes

  • 7ekn00 on 28/02/2025 - 10:46
    +2

    Threaten your local member of parliament on X, then drive your ute full of chemicals around their office …

    The federal police will gladly take it off you and process it for free ;)

    • SlickMick on 01/03/2025 - 10:32

      I agree that this should solve the problem, but I suspect there will be costs involved

  • TALL1one on 28/02/2025 - 11:14
    +1

    Simple and accessible e-waste recycling too should be run by local governments year-round - OK so your happy to pay 300%-400% more tax per year for this to happen!! Because it costs money to do anything and everything and we are already under pressure from the high cost-of-living

    • Andrew0415 on 28/02/2025 - 12:55

      300-400% more in rates is an absolutely ridiculous estimate but YES I am more than willing to pay more in taxes to get a competent and comprehensive national recycling program in place and not (profanity) over future generations by poisoning the planet with chemicals and microplastics. Call me crazy.

      • gromit on 01/03/2025 - 19:16

        300-400% might not be that far off for chemical recycling. If you want them to do more than dry it out and dump it then it is bloody expensive.

      • Protractor on 02/03/2025 - 10:50
        +1

        It's a snake eating it's tail. Taxing ppl won't slow the rot, as long as we breed for the sake of feeding the capatilaist machine. Because it's a simple as that. Fodder.
        You can't have a destructive social model now and still expect a livable planet, let alone a viable tolerable future for 'next generations'. This one can't even moderate, let alone adapt.
        Our common sense is heading south at light speed and that RNA is being locked into the next wave of us.

        Recycling fail is just a symptom. As a species we are in hyper denial mode.

  • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 11:47
    +1

    Too many humans

    • tenpercent on 28/02/2025 - 13:47
      -2

      This should save you some time typing next time

      Or maybe this

  • ReaperX22 on 28/02/2025 - 11:47

    As I go through things/things break and what not, I tend to slowly pile e-waste stuff.. And yes waiting for the qtrly local e-waste dropoff is a nightmare. Meanwhile I've got a whole dedicated section in a corner in the garage for e-waste piles taking space. Recently I've discovered an old UPS battery is basically dead, so far no leaking/cracks etc but it'd really rather get rid of it sooner than later.. Next local e-waste dropoff is May.

    We had to move a couple weeks back and I had a small pile of cables and computer parts and just had to bin it because I had no easy method to just drop em off somewhere and we were struggling with the move as it was finding places for everything (was a rather quick turnaround of a move). Officeworks used to have dropoff chutes but even they stopped that at some point…

    Very frustrating!

    • thisusernameistaken on 01/03/2025 - 12:51

      Officeworks used to have dropoff chutes but even they stopped that at some point…

      Interesting, my local still accepts them

      • ReaperX22 on 01/03/2025 - 14:09

        Yeah the ones we normally go to stopped doing it.. Maybe it's very select.

  • rxjb on 28/02/2025 - 11:56
    +3

    Officeworks is pretty good for taking e-waste. Can drop off old stationary too.

  • Gdsamp on 28/02/2025 - 12:03

    Australian Sawmilling Incident

    • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 13:10

      Good story>Shows you how environmentally toxic the logging industry is at the process point.
      Sustainable my shiny metal arse

      • Gdsamp on 28/02/2025 - 13:24
        +1

        no the issue was Another company (the Former Tenant) had previously leased (and then licensed) the land from TASCO and operated a materials recycling business on it that generated significant stockpiles of construction and demolition waste.

        • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 15:01

          So you say no onsight timber treating at all?

          • Gdsamp on 28/02/2025 - 15:32

            @Protractor: the real danger is to insolvency practitioners…..

            • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 15:50

              @Gdsamp: One hefty precedent. Miners have been using insolvency to avoid rehab for years. There should be a jail term attached to deliberately obfuscating responsibilities like environmental commitment contracts. They should also apply yo local govts

              • tenpercent on 28/02/2025 - 19:54

                @Protractor: These days miners put up big environmental bonds up front to mitigate the risk of the public having to pick up the tab for post-mining rehabilitation work.

                • Protractor on 02/03/2025 - 10:56

                  @tenpercent: And bankrupt is bankrupt.Or 'oops all the seedlings died' (It's a common M.O) The lions share of rehab is a pathetic attempt to create an image.If rehab fails they can still move on and start another project even if they leave a dead wasteland behind.There is no cop on the beat to ensure the rehab is fit for purpose. It can't be.The loss of the complex soil biota is the building block and it took millions of year to establish and balance.
                  WA is the key mining state and they just cut the balls out of their EPA. It's DOA as far as it's relevance is concerned. QLD isn't far behind, and NT is "anything goes" as of the last election.They don't even protect ancient groundwater any more. The last mega allocation was gifted to the Yanks to grow shit you can't eat.

  • freefall101 on 28/02/2025 - 12:56
    +4

    Just last week we were prepared to deliver a ute full of chemicals for safe disposal when we were told at the last minute the facility had burnt down and chemical collection probably won't be online again for another six months.For a city the size of Sydney, this is an absolute farce.

    I don't understand what your problem is here, should they have given you notice that the facility had burned down? They should be able to build a complicated chemical collection point specific to your needs quicker? Sydney should multiple drop off points for people trying to recycle a ute full of chemicals available at all times?

    We're doing our best to recycle wherever possible and ensure things don't just end up dumped in landfill but it's been extremely difficult to find appropriate and accessible recycling services.

    You're also going to find you can't dump a ute full of chemicals at the landfill. Why should the taxpayer pay to clean up the mess your father-in-law made? Hire a chemical disposal company and get it done properly, there are plenty of them around.

    • Andrew0415 on 28/02/2025 - 12:59
      -8

      Ridiculous response. Yes a city of over 5 million people and 12,000 square kilometres should have more than one chemical disposal facility. And I had no plans to dump the chemicals in landfill, you nong.

      • freefall101 on 28/02/2025 - 22:11
        +5

        There is way more than one chemical disposal facility, it just costs money.

        And why mention you're doing your best to recycle like you're doing a good deed then? I'm just pointing out you're legally required to.

  • Porker on 28/02/2025 - 14:19
    +1

    Yes a city of over 5 million people and 12,000 square kilometres should have more than one chemical disposal facility

    Is this accurate? Have you tried googling as there would be a number of private companies that also dispose of these things.

  • Benoffie on 28/02/2025 - 14:58
    +2

    These are decisions made by your government. It's not the same for everyone.

    And whilst I certainly think Adelaide's fortnightly recycling collection is a joke, our availability of facilities is excellent, especially those in the north run under NAWMA (excuse the latest pay dispute).

    Governments have to see recycling and their by products as economic drivers. I suspect many dont. However here, that's not the case.

    https://www.indaily.com.au/environment/2024/07/16/feds-back-…

    https://www.onkaparinganow.com/News-listing/smrf-now-open

    https://www.recyclersofsa.com.au/directory

    • SlickMick on 01/03/2025 - 10:43
      -1

      I was just in Adelaide, and one local council seems to think they've nailed the landfill problem: a tiny bin for general waste collected weekly and a normal wheely bin for recycling collected fortnightly. I guess the idea is if there is no where to put it, it must not exist.

      It wasn't sufficient for a family of 2, I can't imagine how a family of 8 gets by. (Apparently you can buy a 2nd bin and/ or a bigger one??)

      I heard that everyone roams the streets at night using the skip bins at construction sites. Once the development is over, I guess they'll start dumping in the parks.

      • Benoffie on 01/03/2025 - 11:48
        +3

        Lol no.

        We're 3 and have only filled the small bin on rare occasions, usually Xmas time. More specifically, we fill 1 to 1.5 medium bags per week. And honestly, I'm not trying hard.

        Parents currently have 4 at home, never fill it.

        In laws have 6, never fill.

        Neighbours next door with newborn and nappies - never over flows.

        The answer is simple - laziness

        You have to actively recycle. You have to break down the cardboard, use the greens bin and compost, if really troubled for space send out your 10c deposits separately.

        But people dont. I see the overflowing ones and it's always the same - everything just in the bin. Well, it's been decades now since we moved to smaller options. Burnside introduced the old split bin in the 90s.

        If you haven't sorted your waste in 30 years, you deserve to pay more

        • Trops on 02/03/2025 - 08:11
          +1

          This is it! We are a family of 6 (with kids ranging from 2-11) and hardly fill half of our red bin every week. Active recycling is the key! And yes with the odd occasions of going out of your way to drop different materials (officework, bunnings, tetracycle, 10c deposits)

      • greatlamp on 01/03/2025 - 21:37
        +1

        I guess the idea is if there is no where to put it, it must not exist.

        It works for carparking, why wouldn't it work for garbage?

        Notice how people sell their cars and embrace public transport when council allows apartment blocks to be built with only 1 carpark per 2 bedroom apartment and only a handful of visitor spots.

        This is local council logic

      • saltypete on 02/03/2025 - 09:29
        +1

        Family of 3 in Adelaide with the small red bin. Almost never above 1/4 full. Recycle bin usually full - I break and flatten all cardboard and this gets us by.
        If you fill your small red bin every week you are either running a business or youre just not trying.

  • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 15:07

    OP is right, this needs better oversight and options for consumers other than the local govt trough charging us more every year only to discover our diligent sorting just ends in either landfill somewhere else, or convenient fires give opportunistic ,govt(tax payer) subsidised businesses a nice fire insurance payout to start again, r move off with cash in pocket and no accountability for the harm caused. Recycling places always seem to burn when they run out space, much like rural pubs self combust when the profits dry up.As well as abolishing local govt, we'd be way better off if waste fell under federal rules and oversight but managed by the states on the ground.
    TLDR: Why TF should rate payers pay top dollar for local govt services that don't deliver to us, the environment or future generations?

    • freefall101 on 28/02/2025 - 22:55

      Chemical recycling is done by the state government, which is why there isn't 30 chemical recycling plants run at huge cost to local taxpayers.

      OP sounds like they want expensive local government recycling, instead of consolidated state government recycling.

  • ForkSnorter on 28/02/2025 - 16:33
    +2

    I was worried about this kind of thing back in 1995 before the population grew another 3 billion, and when the global material footprint was less than half of what it is now.

    In the early 1990s, a bunch of books came out by really concerned scientists, economists and futurists claiming that we have to turn things around now and start doing things differently or we're in big trouble. Practically nothing happened.

    It doesn't matter how many new renewable energy technologies, efficiency initiatives, environmental policies, recycling systems and other systems we come up with, everything just seems to keep getting worse.

    • tenpercent on 28/02/2025 - 19:58
      -3

      This you?

      • Protractor on 28/02/2025 - 23:41

        Laugh and mock all you want. It's the primary existential risk,and you'd have to be a complete science avoider to deny it.Everything shit we are faicng id population driven. It's physics

        • tenpercent on 01/03/2025 - 10:36

          For example?

        • Daabido on 02/03/2025 - 10:50

          I agree. What did China and India say when you called them? Did you take the opportunity to talk with them about pollution too?

          • Protractor on 02/03/2025 - 11:04
            -1

            @Daabido: Good idea, shift the blame. Don't act.Deny,roll over and hit the hay again.BTW China has done more pro rata on this front compared to the uSA, even before Trump.
            Just based on the production of renewable infrastructure, at home and exported etc , their footprints stack up more than many western countries records. Pollution,waste,water exploitation,deafforestation,fish losses,extinctions and fkn an endless list is directly connected to the number of us sucking the planet dry.It's maths.It's numbers.It's physics.It's logic.

            If you (generic) buy into the demographer BS that we need more humans or else myth, you are effectively and comprehensively lobotomised by an economic model that believes in infinite growth with finite inputs.It's beyond delusional.

            • tenpercent on 02/03/2025 - 12:33
              -1

              @Protractor: If you buy into CO2 is not plant food and is bad for the environment myth, then you might be surprised to learn that Australia's CO2 emissions accounts for approximately one single drop of piss in the whole ocean. Whereas approximately 40% of that ocean is from China and India. The United States has wound back their emissions every year for two decades straight and is now below what they were emitting back in 1988. Meanwhile China has surpassed the United States every year for two decades and is on a rapidly vertical trajectory.

              And if you buy into the 1970s end of the world cults that "there are too many hoomans" then you might want to consider that over a third of the world's "hoomans" are Chinese and Indian, while the USA accounts for a little over 4% and Australia is again a tiny piss in the ocean at 0.03%.

              PS. What's the name of your doomsday suicide-murder(?) cult? Do you have a special cordial or just meth?

      • ForkSnorter on 01/03/2025 - 10:22

        Feel free to move to Nigeria (nearly 10 times the population of Australia), India (50 times the population of Australia), Manila (100 times the population density of Sydney) if you think rapid population growth and high population density is associated with high quality of life and beautiful, healthy environments.

        • tenpercent on 01/03/2025 - 10:36
          +2

          Singapore is a bit of a sh*t hole, eh? /s
          Ranked number 2 in the Life Quality Index vs Australia's rank at 16. Not suggesting that more population or density = better quality of life, I'm suggesting the opposite linkage that you imply isn't a necessity.

          So feel free to move to Burundi (population 14 million) or Zimbabwe (population 17 million).

          • ForkSnorter on 01/03/2025 - 14:22

            @tenpercent: Good luck finding a 4-bedroom house on 600sqm in Singapore.

            • tenpercent on 01/03/2025 - 16:50
              +1

              @ForkSnorter: Anyway the "too many hoomans" meme is only half right / half wrong. It's the distribution of the hoomans and the rate of change that matters. And fwiw, there's too many coming to Australia too quickly right now (relative to the number of dwellings). So good luck finding an affordable 4-bedroom house on 600sqm in Australia.

              • ForkSnorter on 02/03/2025 - 08:20
                +1

                @tenpercent: It's not just about quality of life. In our short lifetimes and limited experiences it is really difficult to grasp just what has happened over the last 50-100 years. We have lost approximately 80% of our wilderness areas in such a short amount of time, and the remaining wilderness is mostly concentrated in just 5 countries, mostly because these areas are so inaccessible to human activity (either mountainous, extremely cold, desert, or flooding rainforest areas): in Russia, Alaska, Canada, Brazil and Australia. On top of that, the entire planet is now flooded in microplastics and nanoplastics, in the water, the air, and the soil, and we are ingesting these microplastics and nanoplastics into our bodies at an ever-increasing rate. Recent studies found the level of microplastics in the human body is now 40% higher than it was 12 years ago. I won't even get started on some of the other issues.

                • tenpercent on 02/03/2025 - 09:11
                  -1

                  @ForkSnorter: That's not because of population, and certainly not because of population levels in Australia. It's because of specific choices by greedy people, and its usually a few greedy people (eg. political despots, e.g. corporations and banks who want to rape and pillage poor nations and can afford to pay off political despots, although it happens in wealthier countries too its usually more obvious in poorer nations although just look at what is happening in America right now - dril drill drill and ignore the environment, very explicit and there's actually no reason they couldn't drill AND protect the environment, its just cheaper not to do that second thing - greed).
                  Australia's population has grown dramatically in the last 50 to 100 years and yet we have halted and started turning around the loss of wilderness and that's only because of culture - because enough ordinary people demanded it.
                  The flood of microplastics also is not because of population levels. It too is because of choices by greedy corporations and their executives to use the cheapest possible ingredients and methods of production to achieve growth growth growth in their profits (it is not enough to provide a safe reliable product that generates profits every year, you must also have those profits growing even if your number of units sold is not growing, and that means cutting corners and subsituting quality for inferiority).
                  It's also because of greenwashing which is just a polite way of saying corporations bullsh*tting and lying about the environmental impact of their products (e.g. paper straws which are thousands of times worse than 100% plastic straws because they are spray coated with a layer of micro and nano plastics which don't need any time to break down to microplastics and there's no chance of ever safely recycling it, meanwhile people assume its just natural wax like the old days only its not because plastic is cheaper than natural wax and it's all about profits).
                  It's the same greedy reason we have planned obsolescence which wastes resources and generates landfill, where a cheap basic tshirt which would have lasted several years only two decades ago now barely lasts 1 year, where whitegoods which used to last multiple decades now last only for a relatively short warranty period because those greedy corporations have teams of engineers working out specifically how to shorten the lifespan of those products and ensure they fail just after that warranty period. That didn't exist so much 50 years ago because of culture, scruples, morals, ethics. These are all cultural issues and power issues. Not issues with the number of ordinary people on the planet.
                  If anything, the number of ordinary people on the planet is partially a byproduct of this greed: more people in poor nations = more cheap labour = more profit growth.

                  • ForkSnorter on 02/03/2025 - 09:12

                    @tenpercent: Yeah, if you read my original message, I wasn't just talking about population growth. You have focused only on the population part of my comment.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join