“The news shows that it’s difficult for consumers to make virtuous or even healthy choices when many of the options on the market are a “pick your poison.” It makes any eco-conscious person want to throw their hands up in despair.”
Interesting conclusion given the headline of the article… So 90% of the paper straw brands tested had PFAS. Okay, obviously not good. But that means some companies already make them without PFAS, so 1: What compaies do and that will help consumers select a good alternative. I imagine a ‘PFAS free’ label would be just as successful as the ‘BPA free’ movement. 2: it’s possible to make them without, so all that is needed to PFAS regulation, which many nations are already working on, and then the paper alternative is viable again.
It’s stories like these that say “the good you are trying to do is really bad” that make it hard. Environmental problems don’t have silver bullets. They require trade offs and problem solving and informed decisions.
It also takes multiple iterations and trial and error to get things right. I feel like that’s also why a lot of the less technical/scientifically informed individuals mistrust/lose trust in the scientific community because they expect the first answer to be the best/right one.
“The news shows that it’s difficult for consumers to make virtuous or even healthy choices when many of the options on the market are a “pick your poison.” It makes any eco-conscious person want to throw their hands up in despair.”
Interesting conclusion given the headline of the article… So 90% of the paper straw brands tested had PFAS. Okay, obviously not good. But that means some companies already make them without PFAS, so 1: What compaies do and that will help consumers select a good alternative. I imagine a ‘PFAS free’ label would be just as successful as the ‘BPA free’ movement. 2: it’s possible to make them without, so all that is needed to PFAS regulation, which many nations are already working on, and then the paper alternative is viable again.
It’s stories like these that say “the good you are trying to do is really bad” that make it hard. Environmental problems don’t have silver bullets. They require trade offs and problem solving and informed decisions.
It also takes multiple iterations and trial and error to get things right. I feel like that’s also why a lot of the less technical/scientifically informed individuals mistrust/lose trust in the scientific community because they expect the first answer to be the best/right one.