Hacker News

points by seemaze 3 days ago | 0 comments

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but even the $10k slayer espresso machine has a plastic water resevoir. Granted the brewing assembly is mostly plastic free.

While I sympathize with the sentiment to eliminate plastic from the transport chain for anything ingestible, it's practically impossible in the modern world.

Simple is usually best; glass or ceramic pour over, stainless press, or even the traditional South American coffee sock[0]

[0]https://perfectdailygrind.com/2016/01/coffee-sock-old-school...

[–] benrutter 3 days ago

> While I sympathize with the sentiment to eliminate plastic from the transport chain for anything ingestible, it's practically impossible in the modern world.

I think the argument is pretty simple:

- Plastic is bad (environment, microplastics, etc) - We should minimize it

That doesn't necessitate a "all the way to zero or don't bother" logic, which what you're saying reads as.

Coffee pods machines have been an environmental nightmare, great to see a growing trend that addresses this.

[–] 233mhz 3 days ago

If you care enough about the environment to get rid of plastic you should get rid of coffee too, this argument makes no sense

[–] AdamN 3 days ago

Yeah this is the real issue. Ironically Nespresso pods are probably more environmentally friendly even if thrown in the trash and not recycled because the real environmental burden comes from the coffee itself and those pods are highly efficient in terms of how little coffee is consumed per shot.

I still drink coffee regularly so am not going to say people should stop doing what I continue to do but it's worth it for coffee drinkers to be thoughtful about the impact of their consumption.

[–] amanaplanacanal 3 days ago

Environmental burden of coffee: are you taking about transport costs to wherever you are, or something else?

[–] AdamN 2 days ago

The excess coffee used at home vs the precise amount in a Nespresso pod is the driver of that delta that I was referring to.

The overall issue is that coffee pod waste is de minimus compared to the environmental impact of the coffee industry at large.

[–] benrutter 3 days ago

Not OP, but coffee is really high on water use, and can be a big cause of deforestation in some cases. So they're probably getting at this.

[–] my-huge-pony 3 days ago

Apparently producing coffee beans for one large coffee uses 140kg of water. Ok, that sounds like a lot.

But also apparently producing one meal worth of chicken takes 700kg of water. Over 3000kg of water for beef. So I think, in comparison, coffee water use if negligible.

[–] benrutter 3 days ago

"This machine used 99% less plastic over its lifetime, but it still uses some plastic, so why bother?"

"You say reducing plastic is good for the environment, but then you drink coffee which is bad for the environment, so you shouldn't bother even reducing plastic"

"EVs still use energy that's been generated from gas, even if its a lot less, so you might as well just drive a diesel powered pick up truck"

[–] 233mhz 2 days ago

Coffee machines are a luxury, plastic or not it doesn't matter, it'll be so small in your overall footprint. The first and second order effects of coffee production will outweigh it by a factor of at least 1000.

It's like stopping using aspirin because "drugs are bad" while doing meth every day

[–] benrutter 2 days ago

Do you have anything supporting the idea that coffee is 1000 times worse than the plastic waste from coffee pods?

That feels like a pretty wild claim, but I'll happily admit if I'm wrong.

[–] panos_news 3 days ago

This one has a glass reservoir. Look at the product page images before you decide to bear any news

[–] seemaze 3 days ago

Well, it was paywalled, but that's beside the point. The point is that this marketeering contraption solves a problem that the marketeers created.

Coffee was enjoyed for hundreds of years before plastic was invented. The answer is not to get rid of the plastic, but get rid of the machine.

[–] plorg 3 days ago

And unless you're picking it up at your roaster in a container you bring yourself the beans have probably been rattling around in a polyethylene-lined bag.

[–] lanstin 2 days ago

Which is certainly possible if you have good food coops.

[–] saidnooneever 3 days ago

stainless steel might be less bad for environment if u chuck it in the bin but if you look at the entire process from getting ores to having the steel item i dont really think its a very big difference.

used to live nexto a huge steel refinery and many mental diseases and cancers in the area are up more than 50% not to mention lots of birth defects etc.

maybe its effects are more local idk. Not sure how glass and ceramic are made.

ofc not bad to try and eliminate plastics but having 1 plastic free device that is overly expensive is really just a status thing. it contributes nexto nothing to environmental goals which i think eliminating plastics belongs to.

u can just put the grounds in a cup and pour hot water on it afterall. tastes fine.

[–] coolestguy 3 days ago

It’s not about the environment for a lot of people, it’s about microplastics and their body

[–] userbinator 11 hours ago

There is zero credible evidence for the "microplastics" fearmongering.

Decades ago people were scared of radio waves and microwave ovens. Some still claim "electrosensitivity", and it's an entirely psychosomatic (placebo/nocebo) response.

[–] Teynah 3 days ago

The irony is that replacing a perfectly functional plastic coffee maker with a brand new $500 stainless steel one might be worse environmentally than just continuing to use what you have

[–] rTX5CMRXIfFG 2 days ago

Not really, you'd be better off health-wise with the stainless steel one. And, the plastic coffee maker was already bad for the environment the moment it was manufactured; whether it is actually used or not is irrelevant.

[–] schiffern 2 days ago

1. Petrochemical refineries are no picnic.

2. If each person's individual impact is small, and I agree, then the logic cuts both ways! When I buy stainless steel products, I "contribute next to nothing" against neighbors of that huge steel refinery.

[–] wackget 3 days ago

I was very skeptical but apparently the Caraway machine uses a glass reservoir and stainless steel pipes.

[–] ninininino 3 days ago

> it's practically impossible in the modern world

This sort of defeatism is why people don't try. Consumers can shift products through purchase behaviors. We're already seeing improvements in kitchen appliances and gear, cosmetics, some outdoor gear.

[–] iamnothere 3 days ago

Believe it or not, lawsuits and regulations are much more effective. Consumer behavior rarely moves the needle. It may make you feel better, but you can’t consume your way to a better world.

Conspicuous consumption has many forms, “ethical” consumerism is just the latest variation.

[–] zenapollo 3 days ago

Would love to see some research on this. My libertarian friends are a dog with a bone in their belief that our individual dollar-votes are the foremost and correct way we shape the economic landscape. I can’t imagine how anyone arrives there from research or history or experience, but I guess it keeps their Ayn Rand-ian ambition fired up.

That being said i wish they were right. I pay a premium for organic and farmers market. As well as plastic free everything. It feels good to support those businesses, but they are still mostly just getting by.

Beyond lawsuits and regulations - I’ve personally seen what Europe is doing to deploy financial programs for transitions to, for example, regenerative farming. It really works. With the extra funds/financing, farms are able to plan 2-5 year payback instead 10+. The incentive alignment makes a huge difference.

[–] iamnothere 3 days ago

Asbestos, lead, CFCs, DDT, there’s a ton of examples of where it worked. The question as usual is where regulation is appropriate and how far it should go. Banning lead pipes was obvious, and it worked once people understood the downsides and limited upside, but banning drugs has been a failure.

You have to look at the demand side of the equation, because creating black markets isn’t a good idea, and neither is creating widespread resistance and discontent. Governments aren’t all powerful (thank goodness), so regulation has to focus on the stuff that’s most harmful and has the highest chance of success.

[–] foxglacier 3 days ago

If they were very profitable instead of just getting by, more of them would appear until they were just getting by again. So that's not a sign of lack of impact of your spending.

[–] jrootabega 3 days ago

A small subset of coffee drinkers might produce a purchase trend that leads to a brief production of an overpriced coffee machine which still ends up being produced in the cheapest, dirtiest country they can get away with. The rest do not care and never will.

[–] Kirby64 2 days ago

> Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but even the $10k slayer espresso machine has a plastic water resevoir. Granted the brewing assembly is mostly plastic free.

There's some people that care about no plastic at all anywhere (which... is pretty unrealistic considering water pipes are plastic), but usually the primary concern is plastic in the heated water portions. Water tanks on espresso machines are not typically heated.

[–] herbst 2 days ago

My aroma plus has glass bottle as reservoir. Given it has other limitations. But it's a perfect replacement for any capsule machine

[–] matt-attack 2 days ago

Don’t forget you water pipes are likely Pex if your house was made in the last 20 years.

[–] ethbr1 2 days ago

PEX is plasticizer-free. It's cross-linked to provide the necessary properties.

Likewise, no plasticizers in standard sched 40.

[–] Melatonic 1 day ago

Exactly. Polyethylene has been around for ages and I'm always amazed it's not more used.

Guess people really like clear plastic for some reason. Which is the one thing it can't do

[–] citrin_ru 3 days ago

Italian Moka Pot is one more simple and cheap plastic free option.

[–] userbinator 3 days ago

While I sympathize with the sentiment to eliminate plastic from the transport chain for anything ingestible

I don't, and this is just stupid virtue-signaling for the easily gullible hypochondriacs.

Plastics came from hydrocarbons, which make up the bulk of all living matter.

[–] faidit 2 days ago

Isn't benzene a hydrocarbon?

[–] userbinator 11 hours ago

...yes, and compounds derived from it are naturally present in a lot of plants.

Short-chain hydrocarbons are quite reactive. But plastics are anything but short-chain, and "sentiment to eliminate plastic" just reads like the astoundingly tiring and misinformed idiotic "chemicals bad!!!1111" insanity of hypochrondriacs.

The fact that I'm only getting downvoted by the silent echo-chamber of mindless sheeple just shows how stupid they are. Hint: it's not the "microplastics" making you stupid.

[–] amanaplanacanal 3 days ago

And all hydrocarbons have the exact same health effects, amirite?

[–] userbinator 11 hours ago

All long-chain hydrocarbons are functionally inert. Look up what fatty acids are...