Should we ban glitter?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-12-2017, 07:01 PM
RE: Should we ban glitter?
(05-12-2017 06:58 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I hate glitter. But ban? No. I don't want to ban things just because I hate them

The reason some people want to ban glitter isn't because they hate glitter, it's because of how dangerous microplastics are to the environment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2017, 07:33 PM
RE: Should we ban glitter?
(05-12-2017 07:01 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  
(05-12-2017 06:58 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I hate glitter. But ban? No. I don't want to ban things just because I hate them

The reason some people want to ban glitter isn't because they hate glitter, it's because of how dangerous microplastics are to the environment.

Maybe it is? I dunno, but is banning glitter going to make a worthwhile impact? The overwhelming majority of microplastics, I would think, is caused by much more widely used plastic products. I'd wager glitter, as a product, accounts for such a small amount of potentially harmful microplastics that talking about a ban would seem as silly as talking about banning vending machines to curtail accidental deaths. Unfortunately, I would also say it's practically impossible to know what the impact would be, how much microplastics are harming us/other life, what contributing factors are of microplastics as a percentage, etc. To talk numbers we would we to makes some fairly important and large assumptions. Not to mention the problem of banning. Banning where? How will it be enforced? If it's not made in America, or England, or Germany, or Canada because the west want's to do well, assuming there is a market for it, some poor country somewhere will make it. Only with less-quality control, fewer regulations, so on. The glitter would have to be shipped further. It would harm the countries most vulnerable to poor economic realities, and we may increase the carbon footprint of glitter production due to shipping and regulation enforcement efforts. Additionally, companies may use glitter alternates that are more dangerous but less-regulated for their products. The best thing you can do is make an appealing argument as to why people should voluntarily avoid products that contain glitter. Similar arguments are applicable to other proposed bans for obvious reasons.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-12-2017, 08:27 PM
RE: Should we ban glitter?
Yes we should ban glitter. I signed a damned birthday card with glitter on it for someone at work on Monday. Two showers and two changes of cloths later I'm still seeing the occasional sparkle on Wednesday night.

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2017, 08:29 AM
RE: Should we ban glitter?
(05-12-2017 08:27 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  Yes we should ban glitter. I signed a damned birthday card with glitter on it for someone at work on Monday. Two showers and two changes of cloths later I'm still seeing the occasional sparkle on Wednesday night.

That's just your personality showing! Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2017, 08:33 AM
RE: Should we ban glitter?
(05-12-2017 07:33 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(05-12-2017 07:01 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  The reason some people want to ban glitter isn't because they hate glitter, it's because of how dangerous microplastics are to the environment.

Maybe it is? I dunno, but is banning glitter going to make a worthwhile impact? The overwhelming majority of microplastics, I would think, is caused by much more widely used plastic products. I'd wager glitter, as a product, accounts for such a small amount of potentially harmful microplastics that talking about a ban would seem as silly as talking about banning vending machines to curtail accidental deaths. Unfortunately, I would also say it's practically impossible to know what the impact would be, how much microplastics are harming us/other life, what contributing factors are of microplastics as a percentage, etc. To talk numbers we would we to makes some fairly important and large assumptions. Not to mention the problem of banning. Banning where? How will it be enforced? If it's not made in America, or England, or Germany, or Canada because the west want's to do well, assuming there is a market for it, some poor country somewhere will make it. Only with less-quality control, fewer regulations, so on. The glitter would have to be shipped further. It would harm the countries most vulnerable to poor economic realities, and we may increase the carbon footprint of glitter production due to shipping and regulation enforcement efforts. Additionally, companies may use glitter alternates that are more dangerous but less-regulated for their products. The best thing you can do is make an appealing argument as to why people should voluntarily avoid products that contain glitter. Similar arguments are applicable to other proposed bans for obvious reasons.

I personally think regulating glitter could really help with the problems provided in the OP. That doesn't mean banning it, but it does mean controlling it a bit more than it just being freely everywhere.

It may seem harmless on the surface, but so did radium at one point. Warnings should not be ignored, but at the very least studied more. But that does not mean "do nothing" when real problems arise.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2017, 02:39 PM
RE: Should we ban glitter?
I get annoyed at the constant shifting of blame from the real corporate perpetrators onto consumers who are generally far more victims of the situation than the culprits. A major aluminum plant can use as much electricity in an hour as the town I live in uses in a year, but they're allowed to ramp up production while we are told to change our light bulbs. It just grates. Facepalm

Banning glitter in an attempt to control microplastics pollution is like changing one incandescent lightbulb in your home to CFL in an attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Yeah, it will have some effect, but it won't even begin to scratch the surface of the real problem.

A study in Norway, for example, estimated the country's output of microplastic pollutants from primary sources at about 8,000 metric tons per year. Of that, at least 63% came from abrasion from tires and roadmarking. Another 13% came from microplastics manufacturing processes themselves. Another 13% from wear during laundering of fabrics containing microplastics.

Only about 0.5% came from direct home-consumer product use, mostly in the form of cosmetic products containing microplastic beads.
I'd estimate that, at most, maybe 10% of that 0.5% home emissions -- 0.05% of the total -- might possibly be tied to glitter, and even that estimate may be high.

So go ahead and deprive preschool kids of their glitter to save that 0.05%, I guess.
But I wouldn't get too excited over the 0.033% of a sea turtle per year the kids' sacrifice might (or might not) save.

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dr H's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: