Airport kicks off plastic water bottle ban

  
Via:  tig  •  one month ago  •  32 comments

Airport kicks off plastic water bottle ban
The airport would prefer that travelers not buy water at all but instead fill bottles at reusable hydration centers.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Every day, thousands of plastic water bottles are sold at San Francisco International Airport. So the airport is rolling out a ban on plastic water bottles to try and reduce waste.

John Blackstone explains.

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
TᵢG
1  seeder  TᵢG    one month ago

Using reusable bottles made of aluminum or other easily recycled material seems like a smart measure to cut down on plastic waste.

 
 
 
Enoch
1.1  Enoch  replied to  TᵢG @1    one month ago

Dear Friend TiG: Agreed.

Good call.

I want my offspring and grandhchildren to have a planet at least more pure, clean and wholesome than the one in which I grew up and lived. 

P&AB.

Enoch.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
1.2  Drakkonis  replied to  TᵢG @1    one month ago

I think it makes good sense, too. But what would have more of an effect is right in our own homes. There are many articles about how to reduces many types of waste in one's own home. Recycling is getting to be a big problem, as in it isn't happening effectively. The first thing to do is reduce how much we generate. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.2.1  seeder  TᵢG  replied to  Drakkonis @1.2    one month ago

I agree.   For example, rather than buy bottled water, we filter our water at home.   We also take measures such as using our own reusable bags at the grocery store.   And, of course, we are avid recyclers.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.2  sandy-2021492  replied to  TᵢG @1.2.1    one month ago

Same, except my water at home tastes good without filtration.  And I compost my kitchen scraps for my garden.

 
 
 
luther28
2  luther28    one month ago

"
Every day, thousands of plastic water bottles are sold at San Francisco International Airport. So the airport is rolling out a ban on plastic water bottles to try and reduce waste."

I myself cannot calculate why folks bring to or purchase bottled water at the airport, the TSA always makes me drink or dump it in any case prior to entering screening.

We did not really have bottled water to much of a degree in the 50's and 60's, somehow we managed to keep ourselves hydrated, I'm just so old I cannot remember how.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  luther28 @2    one month ago

But once you're through security, you can keep it.  TBH, I do buy water when I fly, because the air on planes tends to be so dry, and I get dehydration headaches.  But I'd go for a reusable option, if there is one.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1    one month ago

You can't keep the bottled water purchased at the airports either, just the containers.  So it makes sense to find other options until you board.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
2.1.2  SteevieGee  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1    one month ago

San Francisco Airport has places to dump your water bottles before security and then refill them with filtered water on the other side.

 
 
 
Enoch
2.1.3  Enoch  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1    one month ago

Dear Friend Sandy: It is important to stay hydrated.

Excellent point.

In whatever container you bring the water, make sure never to put ice cubes in it. 

Ice melts.

It will dilute the water.

P&AB.

Enoch. S2R (Two parts silliness to one part rational).

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.2  It Is ME  replied to  luther28 @2    one month ago
We did not really have bottled water to much of a degree in the 50's and 60's, somehow we managed to keep ourselves hydrated

They used to give EVERY FLIER a meal and a few drinks for free back then too !

Now it's just one drink, and no friggin meals at all.

Nutz anyone (And that isn't even allowed anymore).

 
 
 
Tacos!
3  Tacos!    one month ago

I foresee TSA being triggered by the people bringing their mysterious cylindrical containers through security, empty or not. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
4  Nerm_L    one month ago

Well, anything that convinces people to avoid flying is a good thing.  Addressing climate change will require restricting air travel sooner or later.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
4.1  Drakkonis  replied to  Nerm_L @4    one month ago

I don't see that happening until we get going on sensible infrastructure in this country. Think about what it would mean if we had infrastructure that made owning personal vehicles unnecessary? 

  1. Much less use of fossil fuels. That alone would be enough.
  2. No more spending thousands of dollars on purchasing vehicles.
  3. No more budgeting for fuel
  4. No more maintenance cost.
  5. No more insurance cost.
  6. More space for living as you wouldn't have a vehicle taking up the garage.
  7. Much less accidents.
  8. Roads would last longer.

I think this is coming anyway. When they perfect self driving vehicles, people will ditch their own and just call for an electric cab that takes them where they want to go. They will no longer have to deal with the downside of personal ownership. Or, light rail utilized to a greater extent than it is. High speed rail to replace air travel when able. Things like that. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
4.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Drakkonis @4.1    one month ago
I don't see that happening until we get going on sensible infrastructure in this country. Think about what it would mean if we had infrastructure that made owning personal vehicles unnecessary? 

IMO those are reasonable arguments.  Keep in mind that the biggest obstacle is our expectations for time savings.  Our current infrastructure is quite adequate for moving people and freight but the volume of traffic has exceeded our expectations for speed.

If we can lower our expectations for speed then rail would be adequate, we wouldn't need high speed rail.  A trolley or bus system is very efficient for transporting people but that efficiency is obtained by sacrificing speed.  Even individual vehicles could be made much more efficient by sacrificing speed.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.2  sandy-2021492  replied to  Nerm_L @4.1.1    one month ago

Y'all must be city slickers.

I can't see people in rural areas ditching personally-owned vehicles in the foreseeable future.  We don't have trolleys, buses, cabs, or even Ubers (reliably).

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.3  MUVA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.2    one month ago

Can't you just run everywhere what happen to horses?jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Nerm_L
4.1.4  Nerm_L  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.2    one month ago
I can't see people in rural areas ditching personally-owned vehicles in the foreseeable future.  We don't have trolleys, buses, cabs, or even Ubers (reliably).

Individual vehicles are gas guzzlers because of the desire for acceleration and higher road speed.  At one time farmers relied on tractors with as much horsepower as today's lawn mowers.  A Ford Model T truck had better gas mileage than today's F-150.

We've traded fuel efficiency for time.  

 
 
 
Drakkonis
4.1.5  Drakkonis  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.2    one month ago
I can't see people in rural areas ditching personally-owned vehicles in the foreseeable future.

Well, of course there would be exceptions. But I think the goal would be to eliminate as many as we reasonably could. Being a fan of science fiction, I've read a lot of scenarios concerning this and there's a lot of workable ideas out there. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.6  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @4.1.3    one month ago
Can't you just run everywhere

Not without dying.

what happen to horses?

They're expensive, it takes fossil fuels to bring them food, and they fart.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
4.1.7  Drakkonis  replied to  Nerm_L @4.1.1    one month ago
Keep in mind that the biggest obstacle is our expectations for time savings.

I know. It would require some changes for sure, but we would adapt, I'm sure. The biggest problem would be to get individuals to accept a little inconvenience. I think, though, that once a generation was born that knew nothing else, it would be no big deal. And the benefit to the environment would be huge. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.8  sandy-2021492  replied to  Nerm_L @4.1.4    one month ago

Somebody has to grow the food you eat, and small towns are going to exist to support those folks.  Farmer John and wife would like to leave the farm now and then, and don't have all day to spend on a trip to the grocery store.  They need to get back in time to feed and milk.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.9  MUVA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.8    one month ago

My parents called it going to town they moved to Arkansa after my father retired they raised bulls for beef production. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
4.1.10  Nerm_L  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.8    one month ago
Somebody has to grow the food you eat, and small towns are going to exist to support those folks.  Farmer John and wife would like to leave the farm now and then, and don't have all day to spend on a trip to the grocery store.  They need to get back in time to feed and milk.

Traveling 10 miles at 60 mph would take 10 minutes.  A speed of 45 mph would take 13 minutes.  

So, the difference is a matter of minutes and not hours.  A 100 mile trip @ 45 mph would take 130 minutes compared to 100 minutes @ 60 mph.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.11  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @4.1.9    one month ago

I still call it that.

I wouldn't trade living in the country, but it has its disadvantages.  There's no such thing as a quick trip to the grocery store.  It's at least 45 minutes, and that's if I speed and only have to get one thing at the front of the store, so, never.

I just can't see public transit working in rural areas.  There aren't enough of us living here to make trains or trolleys worthwhile, cab companies would go bankrupt, and buses wouldn't be able to offer hours and routes that work.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.12  MUVA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.11    one month ago

You may get a kick out of this my mom moved from NY city the Bronx to be exact to Va beach in 1949 and just when the city hit about 90,000 they moved to Greenwood Arkansa in 1983 it had about 2000 people.My mom says you all down yonder now  with NY accent kinda. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.13  sandy-2021492  replied to  Nerm_L @4.1.10    one month ago

That's one round trip to one location in town. If you live in the country, and many live more than 10 miles outside of town, then you make those trips count.  You go to a doctor's appointment, pick up some feed, go to the grocery store and bank, and maybe get a bite to eat somewhere in there.  You go ahead and drive slow.  Farmer John's cows are getting engorged, so he needs to get back home.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.14  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @4.1.12    one month ago
My mom says you all down yonder now  with NY accent kinda. 

jrSmiley_4_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Nerm_L
4.1.15  Nerm_L  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.13    one month ago
That's one round trip to one location in town. If you live in the country, and many live more than 10 miles outside of town, then you make those trips count.  You go to a doctor's appointment, pick up some feed, go to the grocery store and bank, and maybe get a bite to eat somewhere in there.  You go ahead and drive slow.  Farmer John's cows are getting engorged, so he needs to get back home.

Well, ain't that special.

Where I live is surrounded by corn fields.  One of the neighbors is a 1500 head dairy.  The two biggest businesses in town are corn silos.  Nearest grocery is 22 miles away.  it's 110 miles to the nearest airport.  And the nearest railroad is less than 1 mile away.  45 mph behind a John Deere ain't unusual around here.

There aren't any hobby farmers where I live.  Now what are you going to tell me about country living?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.16  sandy-2021492  replied to  Nerm_L @4.1.15    one month ago

Then you understand, or should understand, why nobody wants to drive 45 if they can go faster.  I'm willing to bet that you don't limit yourself to 45 mph, either, unless you're behind a tractor or the speed limit is 45.

We have hobby farmers and farmers who make their living farming.  And we also have people who make a living farming and working a job in town (perhaps not the town closest to them, either), because they need insurance.  And I can guarantee you those folks, who are essentially working 2 full-time jobs, will tell you that they don't have time to be puttering around going 45 when they could be going 55 (or 70 on the interstate) when they're going from one job to another. 

We don't have an active railroad - the train quit running years ago, and any new road work at railroad crossings paves over the rails.  The only buses are school buses, transport vans for local nursing homes, and the area's Agency on Aging vans.  There is one cab company, and I think they only run one cab, covering several towns.

People have things to do other than sit behind a steering wheel, Nerm_L.

 
 
 
charger 383
4.1.17  charger 383  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.16    one month ago

everything Sandy said is true. And our Interstate is so overcrowed you are lucky if you can run the speed limit for 2 straight miles.  We need our 4 wheel drive trucks and SUVs,  about half the roads are unpaved and many people have long driveways.  

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.18  sandy-2021492  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.17    one month ago

I personally don't need a truck, but many people here do have a legitimate need for a truck that will both go faster and haul/tow more than a model T would manage.  And farmers can't get by with a tractor that has the power of a lawn mower, either.  Some folks seem to believe that time is an infinite resource, and that tasks taking more time is merely an inconvenience.  When you're talking about growing seasons, or days between rain to make hay, it's definitely not infinite.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

JBB
Ender
igknorantzrulz
CB
dave-2693993


42 visitors