Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenzig
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
And all you have to do is fork over 3x the money. You see the irony in this right? If a product is known to be harmful to the environment by its production methods, then the production methods or the product should be removed outright. This eliminates the middle man completely. I have no idea how every single product I buy is produced, but the companies that produce them do. Saying that the industry that produces said product shouldn't have to care about the environmental safety of the production methods until it affect their bottom line is just more guilt tripping and blame laying on the buyer of the products who are more than likely ignorant of the impact of said product rather than blaming the producer of said product who is very well aware of the impact. This isnt a solution to anything. It only serves to perpetuate the problem since the buyer will always be pushed toward the less expensive product simply by advertising alone.
|
That's an issue with lobbyists though and is besides the point.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Glenzig
Aerosol products are still being produced BTW. So simply proving that something is harmful will never in itself remove the production of said product.
|
Look into how modern (anything produced since the mid 1990's) aerosol is produced. They banned ozone depleting substances then and the earth has since repaired virtually all of the measurable damage.