Studies find red, blue and green plastic decomposes into microplastic particles faster than plainer colours

Retailers are being urged to stop making everyday products such as drinks bottles, outdoor furniture and toys out of brightly coloured plastic after researchers found it degrades into microplastics faster than plainer colours.

Red, blue and green plastic became “very brittle and fragmented”, while black, white and silver samples were “largely unaffected” over a three-year period, according to the findings of the University of Leicester-led project.

The scale of environmental pollution caused by plastic waste means that microplastics, or tiny plastic particles, are everywhere. Indeed, they were recently found in human testicles, with scientists suggesting a possible link to declining sperm counts in men.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    91 month ago

    Firms: “Ha ha, fuck you. Capitalism always lets us do whatever we want. Now we’re off to swim in our Uncle Scrooge-style moneybins.”

    • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      31 month ago

      Actually communist/totalitarian countries tend to pollute more, because the people don’t have a say. It’s not about capitalism, it’s about regulation.

        • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          21 month ago

          Regarding polluting and cleaning up afterwards and using toxic compounds in products yes in general they have.

          • @optissima@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            31 month ago

            On what scale? It seems like the current climate change issues were triggered and amplified before communism was practiced by any state, but while capitalism was actively being used by colonialists throughout the 1800s. Do we count those 100+ years without regulations? If the punishments are minimal, not a single violation of any environmental regulation on a large scale has been appropriately pushed in the leading capitalist state, the US, ever, do those regulations really mean anything to those that are truly the greatest impacts to environment?

            • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              31 month ago

              On what scale?

              Apples to apples, for instance Soviet Union compared to Europe, there is no doubt Soviet union was decades behind the west regarding regulating on toxic compounds and pollution and cleaning up.
              Same with China, they build their industrial capacity on polluting without limits, compare that to Japan or South Korea. China even had the advantage pollution wise that they started later, so a lot of know how was available on how to pollute less for comparable industrial output.

              At least China has improved, but Soviet union never did.

        • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Yes they would, but in reality it’s anti libertarian like completely free market capitalism,. which is shown not to work, so how anybody takes it seriously IDK?
          Capitalism is ALWAYS regulated, but not always with consideration to consumers and environment. Social democrat societies like Scandinavia are generally considered among the best. But even more “free” capitalism oriented countries like USA have regulations.

          But you can’t have societies without regulation, the whole idea is moronic. The difference is whether it’s good as in beneficial regulation, and what it attempts to benefit, Profits or citizens and environment.