[HN Gopher] A woman who rifles through New York's garbage, expos...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A woman who rifles through New York's garbage, exposing the city's
       excesses
        
       Author : laurex
       Score  : 86 points
       Date   : 2021-08-07 16:00 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | AirMax98 wrote:
       | Pretty unrelated, but reading this story reminded me of this one
       | time I was traveling to Maine for a ski trip with a hippy
       | girlfriend and some of her college friends. Her friends were
       | pretty off beat people that were very into dumpster diving and
       | really wanted to go dumpster diving at an industrial juice
       | production facility along the way. Anyways, fast-forward to me in
       | an actual dumpster pulling out crates of expired-ish juice. One
       | of my girlfriend's friends was like, "wait, don't take this one
       | -- it has aspartame in it." I just remember thinking like, I'm
       | waist deep in a literal filthy dumpster right now, I am not sure
       | I get to have any right to be choosy about what is/isn't healthy!
       | 
       | The juice was pretty good though.
        
         | dehrmann wrote:
         | I'd be really careful dumpster diving for processed food at a
         | production facility. There's a chance they found a problem with
         | it, and that's why they're dumping it.
        
       | fractallyte wrote:
       | The link showing _live animals_ tossed into garbage was
       | absolutely shocking (https://www.instagram.com/p/CJzMqsXlYPb/)
       | 
       | It's reprehensible actions like these - total disrespect for
       | _life_ - that makes action against much vaster things, such as
       | climate change, seem like Pyrrhic victories. _People_ need to
       | fixed just as much as climate and ecosystems.
        
       | don-code wrote:
       | The article talks about, but seems to conflate, what I see as two
       | different problems. One problem is that retail outlets destroy
       | and throw out unsold inventory; the other is that individuals
       | throw out unwanted, post-used goods. The latter of these problems
       | seems like it could be much more manageable, but if we lump it
       | together with the former, we risk minimizing some solutions.
       | 
       | I've gotten the lion's share of my furniture either from
       | individuals or from Craigslist. Right now, I'm sitting in my
       | kitchen eating lunch, on chairs that I did buy new, and looking
       | around: my "decor" are plants, empty espresso roast cans, mason
       | jars salvaged from sauces, and empty craft beer cans from various
       | local breweries (we're lucky to have three or four per town, and
       | they all have super-creative labels). This is after just getting
       | home in a used luxury car, earlier today having woken up to a 70s
       | Realistic clock radio, typing this post on an off-lease (but rock
       | solid) ThinkPad, and so on.
       | 
       | The picture I'm trying to paint there will differ depending on
       | your own attitudes towards the "waste" stream. Most people around
       | me have commented positively on it - the furniture is "nice",
       | from old-money brownstones in downtown; the beer can collection
       | is a great conversation starter. But of course, there are still
       | some (and luckily, seemingly, a minority) who can only see it as
       | trash, a sign that I've "opted out" of basic economics, or at
       | worst, that I just don't care enough about my appearance.
        
         | sologoub wrote:
         | Retail waste of unsold inventory could also be managed with
         | proper incentives/tax benefits.
         | 
         | We take great pains to make sure we donate whatever we don't
         | need that isn't really trash. What shocked me is that a lot of
         | time the typical places like Salvation Army and Goodwill won't
         | even take stuff because they get too much! We had a perfectly
         | good fridge to give away (everything working, clean,
         | cosmetically near perfect - just didn't fit in the new place we
         | moved to) and literally no one would take it. Finally was able
         | to give it to a friend of a friend.
         | 
         | EDIT: Also remembered that we tried to give away a commercial-
         | grade dishwasher to Habitat for Humanity who build/rehab
         | housing for low income folks. They politely explained that they
         | couldn't take it because it didn't meet efficiency
         | requirements. While I'm all for being efficient with power, it
         | feels like a waste of resources in this case that could have
         | gone towards more housing (it's an issue of laws in CA).
        
           | dehrmann wrote:
           | > Retail waste of unsold inventory could also be managed with
           | proper incentives/tax benefits.
           | 
           | I'm not convinced CVS throws away enough hair brushes and
           | toothpaste (examples from the article) that they'd care about
           | the incentives.
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | Reuse = replace when it comes to energy waste.
        
           | Spooky23 wrote:
           | Appliance energy rules are incredibly dumb. We yield marginal
           | downward demand curve for electricity, in exchange for shit
           | appliances that have a 4-5 year expected life.
           | 
           | I've probably bought more appliances in 15 years of home
           | ownership than my parents did in 50.
        
             | Dylan16807 wrote:
             | I don't blame the shoddy construction on the energy rules.
             | Should I?
        
           | bobthepanda wrote:
           | > While I'm all for being efficient with power, it feels like
           | a waste of resources in this case that could have gone
           | towards more housing (it's an issue of laws in CA).
           | 
           | Keep in mind that homes for Habitat for Humanity go to low
           | income people. Energy efficiency standards for appliances
           | have made them drastically more efficient over the years, and
           | it's probably not great to saddle low income people with
           | higher energy bills.
           | 
           | In fact, a big problem with continued improvements in this
           | area is that low income people are the most likely to be
           | living with less efficient appliances, homes with inefficient
           | heating, cooling and insulation, etc. and they also do not
           | have the money to actually upgrade any of that and lower
           | their bills.
        
       | joshuaheard wrote:
       | Every time i take out the trash, I can't believe that our three-
       | person household generates a whole trash can full of trash every
       | week.
        
         | theklub wrote:
         | I've reached the age where a trash can isn't enough anymore. I
         | need to actively donate and go to the dump often to keep from
         | becoming overrun with items in my house.
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | When you bag your trash and bring it out to the curb for pick-up
       | and eternal storage in a landfill somewhere you normally think
       | it's just that: eternal. But there's no reason to think that the
       | landfills of today will be inviolate in the future. They're
       | absolutely jam packed full of useful rare metals and materials. I
       | think eventually garbage mining will be a common practice.
       | 
       | In Vernor Vinge's "Rainbow's End" they have this book scanning
       | machine that just shreds the books then scans all the sheds super
       | fast as they fly by and reassembled computationally the documents
       | (like how DNA is read). Sometimes I worry about a future where
       | this is possible with garbage and garbage mining is happening.
       | Not only would a garbage mining company be able to sell the
       | materials but the vast amounts of detailed very personal
       | information stored discretely in each person or family's bag
       | would also be invaluable. There would be economic motives to
       | automate information retrevial from landfill garbage mining.
       | 
       | Depending on how far in the future this happens it could either
       | be a privacy nightmare or a cultural treasure.
        
         | acwan93 wrote:
         | It's like that Futurama episode where Fry had to teach the
         | future how to generate trash in order to build a garbage ball
         | to save the planet. In the future, _everything_ was recycled,
         | including Bender. They thought Fry was the weird one of having
         | the concept of "throwing things away."
        
         | andrewmcwatters wrote:
         | Oxyrhynchus could happen all over even today, with things we've
         | lost as recent as the early 1900s I'm sure.
         | 
         | It's incredible to try and search for, say engineering
         | practices we've lost, that happened only one or two generations
         | ago. I'm sure there are buried textbooks that would uncover
         | such practices that someone in academia thought, "Well it's
         | probably time to throw this out."
         | 
         | There are buildings today constructed with materials processes
         | that are exceptionally difficult to find information on.
        
         | underseacables wrote:
         | Reminds me of how the USPS scans the front and back of every
         | piece of mail; I think they may do this with packages. If
         | machine reading is anywhere near current levels it would be
         | trivial to create a map of you, and every person, organization,
         | etc that you get mail from.
        
       | xyst wrote:
       | I look at the waste we have produced as a society and I
       | immediately think back to a monologue in Westworld by one of the
       | antagonists:
       | 
       | "I think humanity is a thin layer of bacteria on a ball of mud
       | hurtling through the void. I think if there was a God, he
       | would've given up on us long ago. He gave us a paradise and we
       | used everything up. We dug up every ounce of energy and burned
       | it. We consume and excrete, use and destroy. Then we sit here on
       | a neat little pile of ashes, having squeezed anything of value
       | out of this planet, and we ask ourselves, "Why are we here?" You
       | want to know what I think your purpose is? It's obvious. You're
       | here along with the rest of us to speed the entropic death of
       | this planet. To service the chaos. We're maggots eating a corpse"
       | 
       | I don't want to think of humanity as parasites on Earth, but we
       | truly need to do better.
        
       | savrajsingh wrote:
       | There was an NYC trash collector that curated a small museum of
       | all the stuff he found in the trash -- it's amazing, small
       | documentary about it: https://viewing.nyc/a-garbage-story-short-
       | film-about-a-new-y...
       | 
       | wait there's multiple: https://gothamist.com/arts-
       | entertainment/photos-visiting-the...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | kaminar wrote:
       | Another social justice loser complaining and judging others. How
       | are we not all sick of this yet?
        
       | purephase wrote:
       | I've never understood why some of these corporations just trash
       | so much of these materials that are just fine. Is it just that no
       | one will buy them if they're re-packaged? I've seen a lot of re-
       | packaged goods on shelves, it doesn't appear to be an issue for
       | some retailers.
       | 
       | The idea of taking in returns from customers and just throwing
       | the product out seems absolutely insane to me.
       | 
       | And the food waste is just depressing. When there's so many
       | hungry people in the world. I understand that distribution is a
       | concern here, but this has to be a workable problem somewhere in
       | here to reduce this waste.
        
         | dehrmann wrote:
         | You can be sure they do that if it's cost effective and doesn't
         | dilute the brand. That's where a lot of dollar store inventory
         | comes from; it just has to be in big enough volumes.
         | 
         | > And the food waste is just depressing. When there's so many
         | hungry people in the world
         | 
         | You hit on it, yourself. It's not like food I don't throw away
         | is going to feed a starving orphan in a developing country.
         | Those orphans aren't starving because the world doesn't produce
         | enough food.
        
         | luckylion wrote:
         | You can get it from the corporations, they'll even pay you to
         | take it away. They just don't want to be liable when somebody
         | get sick or dies after they've gifted them some product that
         | regulations rule has to be disposed of. If you're willing to
         | take that risk and you can convince the government to license
         | you, you can feed a lot of people.
        
           | crooked-v wrote:
           | I've also seen a rise in services that sell end-of-day-but-
           | still-good leftovers from restaurants and cafes (bagels, taco
           | meat, rice balls, etc) as cheap 'mystery bag' bundles direct
           | to consumer.
        
             | akudha wrote:
             | I was once in Dunkin Donuts quite late (10 pm, I think).
             | They gave any perishable food item left, for free. I got
             | some doughnuts. I guess they could just give away the
             | leftover food at the end of the day. Though the logistics
             | of it wouldn't be easy
        
       | gswdh wrote:
       | I've often thought it would be a good idea to charge people a tax
       | when they buy something to pay for the disposal in the future. If
       | they re sell it or somehow dispose of it in a responsible manner,
       | the tax is passed on or reimbursed. I'm not sure how this would
       | be implemented though. I think it would be awesome to make people
       | think about how they are going to deal with the item once they've
       | used it. I think just burying something is just not acceptable
       | and will be looked back upon as abhorrent and wasteful.
        
       | pxc wrote:
       | > the city's excesses
       | 
       | and yet none of these problems are unique to New York or about
       | New York. These are transparently excesses of _capitalism_, not
       | this city or that
       | 
       | > Because Sacks's videos pull back the veneer of corporate
       | pledges to commit to sustainability, they are often shared by
       | followers who say capitalism is the root problem. But Sacks says
       | she finds that argument "polarizing" and that it "immediately
       | alienates" those who equate critiques of capitalism as
       | endorsement of socialism or communism.
       | 
       | amazing. The name of the system we live under is unspeakable
        
         | vnchr wrote:
         | Care to share about other social systems you have lived under
         | and what the trash was like?
        
           | ProjectArcturis wrote:
           | To the extent a different social system provides less
           | material abundance, to the extent it becomes worth lots of
           | people's time to sift through the trash or re-sell a 20-year-
           | old toaster, I'd expect those other systems would have a ton
           | less trash per capita.
        
             | vnchr wrote:
             | The trash solution is more poor people? Can't argue with
             | that basis. Just seems like it has some drawbacks.
        
       | code_duck wrote:
       | I enjoy walking in alleys and see a lot of perfectly good items
       | thrown away, of course. As I am nearly a sentimental hoarder,
       | citing to myself practical, environmental and thrift reasons, it
       | boggles my mind what some people toss out. In residential trash
       | I've seen near-mint suitcases, umbrellas, notebooks, school
       | books, art supplies, boots, shirts, jackets, large toys, entire
       | potted plants, hats, work uniforms, and much more. Commercial
       | trash can be even more impressively wasteful with things like 60
       | pounds of ground beef behind a certain bar every other week.
       | 
       | As far as food, I have known people who regularly go to drive-
       | they'd, get 6 tacos, eat one or two and throw the other 4 away.
       | I've accompanied some friends to dinner who routinely order large
       | meals, eat a fraction and leave it at the table. This casual
       | waste at the consumer level is even worse when you consider the
       | proportion of food that didn't even make it to a plate.
       | 
       | What I perceive is a common lack of appreciation of the total
       | cost, in every sense, of creating any food item or consumer
       | product. Any sort of production involves suffering for someone,
       | whether it's the lowest paid workers, local people and animals
       | suffering the effects of pollution, or even the problem of roads
       | and air congested by trucks carrying products that will
       | eventually be 2/3s wasted.
       | 
       | It boggles my mind that with more organization and efficiency in
       | distribution and usage, we could grow less food, but feed more
       | people and eat more, yet most people don't see any need to even
       | try to change the system.
        
       | thewebcount wrote:
       | Regarding this point:
       | 
       | > Sacks repeatedly comes back to the idea that retailers could
       | give away unsold or lightly used, returned (but still good) items
       | to their low-wage employees, instead of tossing them, or jumping
       | through bureaucratic hurdles to donate them. This could be an
       | "added perk", she says, or an additional form of compensation, to
       | bolster employees' wages.
       | 
       | This perversely incentivizes the employees. I had an acquaintance
       | who worked in retail in college. This was a large Midwestern
       | store that sold everything from groceries to car parts to home
       | stereos and TVs. They had a policy that if something was damaged
       | it couldn't be sold and the employees could take it for a
       | significant discount. It wasn't long before lots of items started
       | having just enough damage to not be sold, but always on a part of
       | the item where it wouldn't be noticed when installed in your
       | home. He was eventually fired for intentionally damaging stock.
        
       | kleer001 wrote:
       | > "It's so gross that this is what they like to do, as a
       | corporation, rather than help people."
       | 
       | It's not the corporation, it's laws, it's sanitation and
       | accountability, it's logistics. It's far more complex than she's
       | either researched or would like to admit.
        
         | qzw wrote:
         | The article specifically states that she's starting an
         | initiative to advocate for legislative changes. I don't think
         | you're giving her enough credit (or didn't get that far in the
         | article).
        
         | OminousWeapons wrote:
         | I worked retail for a year as a kid and dealt with this issue.
         | Another reason stuff is destroyed is to prevent insider issues.
         | You will naturally have merchandise that gets damaged in day to
         | day operations or becomes no longer viable to sell and needs to
         | be taken off the books. This presents an obvious avenue for
         | theft by insiders (employee says functional item X is actually
         | broken or they intentionally partially damage it, they record
         | it as broken so it isn't being tracked anymore in inventory,
         | and they walk out the door with it or throw it in the trash out
         | back for their buddy to pick up). Requiring destruction of all
         | decommissioned assets is the only reliable way to stop this
         | from happening.
        
         | purephase wrote:
         | She used to be a consultant for a zero-waste company. I imagine
         | she's very aware of these complexities.
         | 
         | It doesn't make it any less embarrassing for these
         | organizations though. We should be expecting them to do better
         | than this.
        
           | luckylion wrote:
           | How is it "embarrassing" to comply with the law?
        
             | lostlogin wrote:
             | I've seen companies destroy their stock rather than let it
             | be sold at a lower value or given away. It's protect their
             | 'brand'. It's not all about the law.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | happytoexplain wrote:
         | You're right that it's complex, and maybe she doesn't
         | appreciate it all (I don't know either way), but why is the
         | corporation conspicuously omitted from this list? Their
         | accountability is surely included in "accountability" in
         | general.
        
         | code_duck wrote:
         | For consumers, most of the time it's convenience and
         | practicality. People throw away things they could donate or
         | sell because it's faster or they don't know how to easily
         | connect with someone who might want it. Often they don't feel
         | they would personally would benefit from someone else using the
         | item.
        
         | orange_joe wrote:
         | It's worth mentioning that a lot of smaller restaurants and
         | grocery stores are signing up for an app called "too good to
         | go", where people can sign up to buy highly discounted food at
         | the end of the day (in NYC and a few other cities). These
         | companies could chose to offer a portion of their leftovers on
         | this app, or offer a similar program.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-07 23:02 UTC)