"Coca-Cola also makes a lot of plastic packaging: about 3.5 million metric tons of it per year, almost entirely out of fossil fuels.…
"For six years running, Coca-Cola has been named the “top global plastic polluter,” based on beach cleanups coordinated by the nonprofit Break Free From Plastic."
It seems to me the solution to this is a no-brainer, that is to put a tax on plastics that are either not recycled or are not properly or adequately recycled. We tax other things because they cause harm, for example the excise tax on alcohol/spirits and cigarettes.
A further tax could be levied on companies that do not have what's deemed to be adequate recycling facilities available. A company would need to be certified as having an adequate recycling ability and be seen applying it or be taxed at a higher rate. This would seem preferable to levying fines on a company which would involve governments in a lot of administrative/legal work and drag out 'fixes' as legal cases drag on for years. Companies would soon comply as they would be at an economic disadvantage compared to those who did.
Further to taxes, add realistic return deposit schemes on plastic bottles, and where such schemes exist increase deposits until they are effective. Same goes for taxes, just increase them until they're effective/companies comply to the letter.
If people/governments are truly concerned with limiting plastic pollution and are intent on fixing the problem then it could be easily done in short order.
I used to live in a country where most of the drinks were sold in reusable bottles. When you bought them, you had to pay some extra "deposit", but if you brought back the bottle to the place of purchase (pretty much any store that sold them, not only where you bought them from), then you got back the deposit (this was in the 90's and early 00's, before they stopped).
Pretty much all Coca Cola stuff were sold in such bottles, at least the bigger ones, like 1.5L+ (but not only Coca Cola, Pepsi and other products too. Notably beer bottles were also like that).
Fast forward to 2025, and they have stopped using these reusable bottles completely, and funnily they are even removing their promise about using them globally.
Sometimes it's a great time to be alive. Sometimes I feel that I'm the only sane person. (Or the only crazy one - depending on how you look at it)
Finland had harder plastic bottles that got reused. Then EU came and now they are replaced with bottles that are "recycled"... Maybe it is better for food safety. Still not sure which is better option.
As a person addicted to Coca-Cola Zero (US translation: diet coke), this is just sad.
I would love to have home restaurant-like dispenser, or a Soda Stream syrup but for obvious profit reasons they don't offer that.
This would reduce my plastic bottle consumption by 100% or about 30-60 large bottles per month (not even counting the shipping footprint of what is essentially is 99% water). Sure, there are generic syrups or even Pepsi Max syrups, but it's just not the same for me.
That's what happens when profits are put on top of cost for Earth as a whole.
Sure I probably could switch to something else but why should I make this effort?
You blame profits but at the same time you’re unwilling to relinquish a small bit of pleasure by buying generic diet cola SodaStream concentrate. I find this hard to square without considering your concerns merely performative.
Mandatory deposits on all packaging for drinks is an effective solution to pollution. No special technology needed. Does not matter if it is reusable or not - just make the required deposit high enough and people will collect the containers for the money.
I lived in Sweden for a few months, where they had a system like that (the deposit translated to around 10 cents), and it seemed to work well.
The other thing I’ll add is the benefit of making it very visible: In the US, state programs are on the fine print, but in Sweden, every bottle or can had the “pant” symbol and deposit amount prominently on it, so everyone was quickly aware of it.
> Coca-Cola also makes a lot of plastic packaging: about 3.5 million metric tons of it per year, almost entirely out of fossil fuels.
> Coca-Cola now plans to make 30 to 35 percent of its plastic packaging out of recycled materials by 2035, instead of 50 percent by 2030. And instead of making 100 percent of its packaging recyclable by 2025 and collecting one bottle or can for each one sold, Coca-Cola now says it will “help ensure the collection” of just 70 to 75 percent of the number of bottles and cans it produces, also by 2035.
Notice how they included cans in new goals. Over 60% of aluminum used in beverage cans comes from recycling just because it's a profitable business practice. They can claim ridicules percentages of recycling just by lumping cans and bottles together, even though most of it comes from material that was never a problem.
In order to keep there main business methods viable, Coke et all ,are going to depend on some sort of world wide infrastructure, that captures and processes all of the waste plastic.
It is going to require a whole new technoindustrial way of dealing with all garbage.
Recycling as it is bieng attempted, ie: downloading the need for mechanical seperation of plastics, onto consumers, is not, nor will ever work. WAY WAY too much dog shit bieng bagged and tossed into whichever bin is handy.Not counting
all of the random metal and glass, etc, etc ,etc.
The whole thing will need to be mechanised and monitored, and "profits" will....shift
The main issue is stigma, which is to say, reputation, which is to say politics and power.
The catch is that the west could soon and suddenly
be faced with MILLIONS of TONS per MONTH, of garbage, piling up everywhere, and the whole thing
devolving into wars, to degrade undevoped countrys to the point, where they will "accept" the wests export of our contradictions.
Coke is the ultimate example of marketing success, and cant do anything else, and I am quite
sure that coke, would rather go bankrupt, than become a waste management company. So its best to ignore them, and the other producers of plastic
packaging, and just deal with all garbage at scale.
"Coca-Cola also makes a lot of plastic packaging: about 3.5 million metric tons of it per year, almost entirely out of fossil fuels.…
"For six years running, Coca-Cola has been named the “top global plastic polluter,” based on beach cleanups coordinated by the nonprofit Break Free From Plastic."
It seems to me the solution to this is a no-brainer, that is to put a tax on plastics that are either not recycled or are not properly or adequately recycled. We tax other things because they cause harm, for example the excise tax on alcohol/spirits and cigarettes.
A further tax could be levied on companies that do not have what's deemed to be adequate recycling facilities available. A company would need to be certified as having an adequate recycling ability and be seen applying it or be taxed at a higher rate. This would seem preferable to levying fines on a company which would involve governments in a lot of administrative/legal work and drag out 'fixes' as legal cases drag on for years. Companies would soon comply as they would be at an economic disadvantage compared to those who did.
Further to taxes, add realistic return deposit schemes on plastic bottles, and where such schemes exist increase deposits until they are effective. Same goes for taxes, just increase them until they're effective/companies comply to the letter.
If people/governments are truly concerned with limiting plastic pollution and are intent on fixing the problem then it could be easily done in short order.
I used to live in a country where most of the drinks were sold in reusable bottles. When you bought them, you had to pay some extra "deposit", but if you brought back the bottle to the place of purchase (pretty much any store that sold them, not only where you bought them from), then you got back the deposit (this was in the 90's and early 00's, before they stopped).
Pretty much all Coca Cola stuff were sold in such bottles, at least the bigger ones, like 1.5L+ (but not only Coca Cola, Pepsi and other products too. Notably beer bottles were also like that).
Fast forward to 2025, and they have stopped using these reusable bottles completely, and funnily they are even removing their promise about using them globally.
Sometimes it's a great time to be alive. Sometimes I feel that I'm the only sane person. (Or the only crazy one - depending on how you look at it)
Latin America still has this. Go to Mexico and every house has a few empty 1.2L bottles that you can take to the corner shop to swap for a filled one.
It’s like 35 pesos ($1.70) for a beer refill which is half of the story of how I drank two of those bottles a day with my friends for years…
Finland had harder plastic bottles that got reused. Then EU came and now they are replaced with bottles that are "recycled"... Maybe it is better for food safety. Still not sure which is better option.
By your nickname I assume youre from exyugoslavia. I immediately knew what youre talking about
As a person addicted to Coca-Cola Zero (US translation: diet coke), this is just sad.
I would love to have home restaurant-like dispenser, or a Soda Stream syrup but for obvious profit reasons they don't offer that.
This would reduce my plastic bottle consumption by 100% or about 30-60 large bottles per month (not even counting the shipping footprint of what is essentially is 99% water). Sure, there are generic syrups or even Pepsi Max syrups, but it's just not the same for me.
That's what happens when profits are put on top of cost for Earth as a whole.
Sure I probably could switch to something else but why should I make this effort?
You blame profits but at the same time you’re unwilling to relinquish a small bit of pleasure by buying generic diet cola SodaStream concentrate. I find this hard to square without considering your concerns merely performative.
Being this judgemental is sad. But as you said it reflects on your ability to square his decisions with the situation.
> Coca-Cola Zero (US translation: diet coke)
Diet Coke and Zero are distinct products, both of which are sold in the US
Mandatory deposits on all packaging for drinks is an effective solution to pollution. No special technology needed. Does not matter if it is reusable or not - just make the required deposit high enough and people will collect the containers for the money.
I lived in Sweden for a few months, where they had a system like that (the deposit translated to around 10 cents), and it seemed to work well. The other thing I’ll add is the benefit of making it very visible: In the US, state programs are on the fine print, but in Sweden, every bottle or can had the “pant” symbol and deposit amount prominently on it, so everyone was quickly aware of it.
> Coca-Cola also makes a lot of plastic packaging: about 3.5 million metric tons of it per year, almost entirely out of fossil fuels.
> Coca-Cola now plans to make 30 to 35 percent of its plastic packaging out of recycled materials by 2035, instead of 50 percent by 2030. And instead of making 100 percent of its packaging recyclable by 2025 and collecting one bottle or can for each one sold, Coca-Cola now says it will “help ensure the collection” of just 70 to 75 percent of the number of bottles and cans it produces, also by 2035.
Notice how they included cans in new goals. Over 60% of aluminum used in beverage cans comes from recycling just because it's a profitable business practice. They can claim ridicules percentages of recycling just by lumping cans and bottles together, even though most of it comes from material that was never a problem.
In order to keep there main business methods viable, Coke et all ,are going to depend on some sort of world wide infrastructure, that captures and processes all of the waste plastic. It is going to require a whole new technoindustrial way of dealing with all garbage. Recycling as it is bieng attempted, ie: downloading the need for mechanical seperation of plastics, onto consumers, is not, nor will ever work. WAY WAY too much dog shit bieng bagged and tossed into whichever bin is handy.Not counting all of the random metal and glass, etc, etc ,etc. The whole thing will need to be mechanised and monitored, and "profits" will....shift
The main issue is stigma, which is to say, reputation, which is to say politics and power. The catch is that the west could soon and suddenly be faced with MILLIONS of TONS per MONTH, of garbage, piling up everywhere, and the whole thing devolving into wars, to degrade undevoped countrys to the point, where they will "accept" the wests export of our contradictions. Coke is the ultimate example of marketing success, and cant do anything else, and I am quite sure that coke, would rather go bankrupt, than become a waste management company. So its best to ignore them, and the other producers of plastic packaging, and just deal with all garbage at scale.