Banning plastic straws and other acts of environmental suicide

"In 2010, according to an estimate by (Jenna Jambeck, Engineering Professor University of Georgia) half the world's mismanaged plastic waste was generated by just five Asian countries: China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Sri Lanka."

Researchers at the Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research in Germany concluded that:

"The 10 top-ranked rivers transport 88–95% of the global load (of Mismanaged Plastic Waste) into the sea."

Eight of those ten rivers are in Asia (Yangtze, Yellow, Hai He, Pearl, Amur, Mekong, Indus, Ganges Delta) and the other two are in Africa (Niger and Nile).

So if we ask the question "What good is banning plastic straws in Australia going to do?" the expression three fifths of bugger all, comes to mind.

If Woolworths were serious about reducing plastics pollution in the oceans, they would describe the detailed plans they have, working with their business partners in the polluting Asian countries, to ensure that plastic waste is better managed. And then they would describe "What good these plans are going to do."

If green groups were serious about reducing plastics pollution in the oceans, they would be advocating government sanctions on countries with poor waste management practices. One example, might be putting a tariff on Chinese and other polluting countries, plastic products sold in Australia. The bottle and can recycling systems in NSW and SA charge about $10 per kilogram, but we have good waste management systems in Australia. If we charged a $20/kg tariff for plastic products from polluting Asian countries we would be letting polluting Asian countries and Australian consumers know that we are serious about reducing plastic waste in the oceans. A 100gram plastic toy from China that now costs $1, would increase to $3.

If the polluting Asian countries cut their plastic waste into the ocean by 1%, that would be thousands of times more effective than a ban on plastic straws.

The meaningless gesture has become the heart and soul of the environmental movement, because the environmental movement has become the movement of feeling good about yourself, rather than trying to tackle the tough problems. The image many have of the Greens is that they have carbon footprints the size of sheep stations, but they brag about not using a plastic straw.

The most obvious tough problem is population stabilisation, which most environmental groups run away from, as fast as they can. Green groups don't like to be linked with reductions in immigration because proponents of high growth have framed opposition to immigration, as racist. All evidence points to green groups being strongly anti-racist, but apparently members of green groups still can't feel good about themselves, even if it is only their enemies calling them racists.

There are many environmentalists who would argue that there is no harm in the meaningless gesture. As long as environmental protection is improving, even in some small way, the world is better off. This argument disrespects the intelligence of the average citizen and the average citizen is absolutely critical in solving major environmental problems.

If you really want to solve a problem caused by the whole world community, you need to get the community behind you. You can't get the community behind you if you insult their intelligence.