I’m absolutely loving Soylent 2.0. But I really dislike the packaging waste it generates. Yes, the bottles are recyclable, but plastic recycling is pretty inefficient. Aluminum is much better - aluminum recycling is more widely available, and it’s a much more efficient process. Also, aluminum cans pack a lot better, with less wasted space. Why not ship in aluminum cans?
If you’re going to continue with plastic, why not use plastic jugs?
@inquirerer, why dont you do a poll on what kind of packaging options people here would prefer? Pouches with liquid concentrate, aluminium cans, aluminium bottles, current plastic bottles, larger plastic bottles, 2 liter jugs?
Also if possible could you create the poll in such a way that people can choose multiple options, like what would be their first choice, second choice etc?
So you’re willing to rethink food so much that you are okay with consuming a bland meal replacement beverage, but suddenly you’re inflexible when it comes to the container it must be consumed from? Pour it in a glass if it’s a problem. Don’t suddenly become a slave to an arbitrary social convention for no reason.
My problem is with the way the aluminum affects the taste, which is altered as it goes through the opening of the can, so the problem isn’t solved by pouring it into a glass. The design of the can itself is pretty nice; easy to handle and store. But the taste
They would have to be resealable aluminum cans. Apparently those exist though.
Jugs are a no-go. The point of 2.0 is that it’s portable, already measured out for you so it’s easy to keep track of calories, and ready to drink without pouring it into a container. Jugs are none of those things. There’s no reason in principle Soylent couldn’t come in jugs also, but it wouldn’t be a replacement for the Soylent 2.0 packaging form factor.
Is aluminum really more environmentally friendly than plastic? Sure, plastic might fill up landfills instead of getting recycled like aluminum, but landfill space is practically unlimited and the land from landfills can eventually be reclaimed, e.g. turned into nice parks. I would like to look at the production side and see whether plastic or aluminum pollutes more.
This isn’t quite the same, but Slate ran an article that weighed the environmental impact of plastic wrap versus aluminum foil:
I don’t think optimizing packaging is a bad idea at all, but it’s important to put it in perspective. Worrying about Soylent’s packaging is a bit like worrying whether the statements for the monthly payments on your electric car are paperless. The environmental impact of plant-based food versus animal-based food is like solar power vs. coal — maybe not exactly, but it’s at that kind of scale.
Yes. There is a reason that you see homeless people picking up aluminum cans and not plastic bottles - it’s because aluminum recycling is efficient enough to be very profitable. Aluminum is better in almost every measurable way - it takes less energy to recycle, producing less greenhouse gas, and it can be recycled more times. Producing it raw is worse than plastics, but since it’s so recyclable, very little aluminum in each can is new.
The plastic bottles are resealable so that you can put them back in the fridge.
The number that keeps popping up on Google is that the average aluminum can contains 68% recycled aluminum. If producing aluminum is 4x worse for the environment than producing plastic, then even cans that used recycled material are worse than plastic bottles. Not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that more information is needed in order to reach a conclusion.