I think there would be push back from companies, who would argue in a lot of cases that the shape and size of the containers they use is part of their brand.
That might well be so, but I was thinking of commodity items like low-cost jam or pasta sauces. A 370ml jar costs anywhere from NT$10 to NT$30, which is a big slice of profits. Re-used jars would surely be cheaper than that. There would still be a lot of scope for labelling creativity.
People selling premium products should be at liberty to do so, with the understanding that the government will levy an additional tax, which will be used to fund re-manufacturing facilities at trash centres.
Most probably, and they will argue that putting any kind of restrictions on their packaging will make them less competitive internationally, etc. etc. Now, the shape does not matter so much I would think. It’s more the material used, especially when it comes to a combination of different materials.
I would just hope that the government could establish a system that makes it really easy for everyone to tell what goes where and make it easier for organizations such as Tzu Chi to deal with the garbage mountains.
Finley are you arguing for ‘more regulation’ and ‘government interference and inspections’.
I’m rubbing my eyes here. 
1 Like
There’s a reason why companies are loath to promote re-use, it lowers their potential to charge more (not always…but just think of disposable razors and toothbrushes and bottles of water).
The government may also lose out in revenue as their VAT receipts dropped.
The recyclers would have less stuff to recycle.
The packaging and advertising companies would
Have less income and struggle to create differentiation.
The mark up on drinks would be very obvious if they just charged for things like ‘tea’ and ‘water’ from generic boxes.
Same for for packages of chocolate and snacks thar are half air and packaging!
Then go to the idea of buying a car or bike or renting a car or bike. While sharing those products and services is far more efficient, large industries and revenue streams will be severely affected (one of the reAsons governments enforce environmental regulations ironically is to force people to buy new vehicles and then they get substantial tax revenue from this …and their buddies the car dealers and autocheckers).
There are some incumbent business interests against the change. Not only that, deflation could cause many nations to go bust because they defend on inflation to be able to grow GDP against ever growing national debts. That’s the way the monetary system works!
A massive part of developed economies depends on consumption of stuff we don’t necessarily need.
We do need strong regulation in this area to enforce similar standards and therefore cut down on massive waste and pollution.
One thing we need is awareness of the damage palm oil is doing to a) the environment and b)people’s health
All true of course. However, although companies moan and whinge about pretty much anything that forces them to re-tool (or do anything other than what they did yesterday) that’s the nature of business. The market changes. Rules change. Business adapts, and the reality is they’re very very good at turning “problems” into advantages. Remember when the US government waged war against fat? Food companies made a killing by substituting relatively expensive fats with starch and sugar, while advertising their products as ‘healthy’.
In this case, it shouldn’t be hard to get a large slice of the ‘concerned consumer’ market by signing up to a (more-or-less optional) scheme for glass jar re-use.
Well … as with meat, it’s complicated. There’s nothing inherently wrong with palm oil. The scientific evidence so far is that saturated fats (like palm oil or animal fats) are better for cooking because they are more heat-stable and have a better balance of EFAs. “Healthy” unsaturated oils are partially converted into various toxins and carcinogens at normal cooking temperatures. Commercial establishments hate them because they leave a gummy polymer film over everything.
I’ve been looking into growing palm oil myself. Oil palm can be a valuable and ecologically-sound component of a tropical farm. The problem comes when people decide to grow nothing but oilpalm, on soils which are supposed to be (say) rainforests. In practice oilpalm simply will not grow on clearcut forest (in fact nothing will) so plantation owners sow a lot of leguminous groundcover. That doesn’t mitigate the fact that a vast amount of valuable native species were destroyed in the process of creating the plantation, but oil palm plantations are much less destructive than (say) cattle-grazing on the same land.
Build a nuke and drop it over China, those assholes burn more coal than the rest of the world combined.
There’s an old guy on an old 3 wheeler bicycle who comes down my lane every day, calling out Pie Dien Now! Pie Dien She! (English, not Pinyin).
He is the go-to-guy for recycling electronics. I’ve dumped loads of broken down appliances on him.
1 Like
And how is dropping a nuclear bomb not polluting?
That’s awesome. Maybe I can do that when I’m ancient.
I suppose I could take the counter-point that it’s not China’s fault but Western companies that want the cheap manufacturing and to get around environmental laws at home, go to China where they can pollute. China allows it because they don’t care about the lives of their citizens.
So who’s more at fault here, the one who demands or the one who supplies?
2 Likes
Exactly.
If those countries didn’t import the steel and batteries and computers and plastic crap then their claim of environmental wholesomeness could be taken more seriously.
1 Like
I think one should not underestimate the ability of the Chinese government to recognize problems and to change policies accordingly. They are very active in fighting pollution now and developing alternative-energy technology. They are going to leave countries like the US in the dust if those countries don’t watch out.
So when do we see blue skies over Beijing? Taiwan has bad pollution, but at least there are a lot of days here that I can tell the sky is blue.
Do you know of any environmental campaigns and or events happening here in taiwan?
Simply said
No matter who you are
No matter where you live
In this present society
You choose your world with your wallet
You buy trash, you get trash
You buy clean, you get clean
So… it’s up to everyone to understand
What means trash…
What means clean…
1 Like
The Guardian tells the story of a Frenchman in HK who started out as a pollution skeptic but changed his mind after his (HK born) daughter was hospitalized for breathing problems. He transformed his apartment into a clean air zone and felt like he was living in a spaceship. 
He also started measuring the air quality at his daughter’s school and everywhere else he went, until he became “the guy no-one invites to dinner”. 
In the end, they moved to France. 
Meanwhile in Taiwan:
Three appeals were presented during the rallies: that a Cabinet-level task force be organized to combat air pollution and climate change; an interministerial committee set deadlines for plans to improve the air quality in central and southern Taiwan; and the Air Pollution Control Act be overhauled.
Taiwan Alliance for the Protection of Water Resources spokeswoman Chen Chiao-hua (陳椒華) said the Executive Yuan and the Environmental Protection Administration should be relocated to Kaohsiung so that the authorities could learn first-hand how bad the air pollution in southern Taiwan is.
3 Likes
What do rural Taiwanese think about this?
Why not use this in Taiwan first?
1 Like
Because like a lot of other products/ideas Taiwan produces, better send it overseas to make money because we…like other people better than our own.