this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
121 points (90.1% liked)
Asklemmy
44207 readers
1299 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Overall, there is just not a lot of plastic in glitter. It's incredible thin. It's like aluminium foil, while we use a lot of meters of foil as households, the kg used is quite little given the surface. And glitter is the same. Getting everyone to buy one less plastic chair is more than they'll use up in glitter over their entire life, basically.
Ah so it's just tiny tiny little harmless microplastics. That shouldn't be of any concern... ๐
Not compared to the amount of microplastic larger products with degrade into.
Glitter isn't microplastics.
Like, I'm not saying glitter is not a problematic and rather needless product, but on the list of problematic and rather needless products to get people away from it's quite far down the list.
Surely nothing is less use than glitter?
So everything is more or equally as useless as glitter? According to you? I'm confused now.
๐
The concern is that glitter is smaller and harder to dispose of responsibly. It's likely to end up polluting the ground or the water, as opposed to something like a chair, which, having less surface area, and being disposed of as a whole piece after some decades, is not actually going to bleed that much.