Amazon.com Widgets
  • Styrofoam is ridiculous!

    Our earth is dying because of the very much used Styrofoam. It is toxic. Animals often eat it because there was food in it.! The gases out emits on the dump are toxic and the stuff does not decompose. Our world can't sustain Styrofoam. Let's all go green for the future of the world.

  • Most arguments that oppose a ban don't acknowledge limitations (refer to first post on NO side)

    One list of arguments I saw-these can all be refuted by counterarguments&I hope that this will encourage people 2reevaluate their positions.

    It's actually more safe than cardboard

    *[from the points below, the only way in which it's safer is that it supposedly produces less pollution to make. 1) do you have credible statistics to prove this? 2) Styrofoam, since it decomposes in millions of years, has a far bigger negative impact on environment, ex.Leaching chemicals into ground&being eaten by marine life, then failing to be digested. It also leaches cancer-causing chemicals into hot food&drinks that are put into styrofoam containers.]*

    Reasons why styrofoam>cardboard
    1) cheaper to make than paper-based materials
    --> this is true, but at what cost? Can money stand alone as an important factor in an argument? Even so, I do acknowledge that this is a large factor in deciding to ban a material and plays a big role for the economy.

    2) doesnt decompose, but can be compressed 2fit more in landfills
    --> This can be interpreted as an argument in favour of being banned. If it can be compressed to fit more in landfills, that means a greater amount of chemicals being leached into the same ground area of landfill. What you're arguing here is that you can fit more of it in landfills than cardboard materials, which is a good characteristic, because it will save land space. This is a weak argument because it argues that we should keep styrofoam because we can fit a lot of it in landfills - how about other biodegradable materials that will degrade into healthy soil&after a few months not take up any landfill space at all?

    3) cardboard pollution>styrofoam pollution
    --> have you researched the amount of pollution it takes to make styrofoam and other oil-based plastic materials? Consider all the pollution and waste that is created from the removal of oil/bitumen from the earth, transportation of those materials and then creation in a factory. Fabrication of plastics is much worse than most other materials.

    4) 2expensive for businesses to change
    --> you're arguing that it would be too expensive and too much of a hassle for them to switch. This is a valid point, and is part of the reason why this ban hasn't occurred. Gov'ts must create legislation that makes it less of a burden!

    5) jobs created
    --> this is a one-sided argument. Sure, styrofoam industry creates many jobs, but in face of environmental impact, & an evolution towards sustainable industry that must be made, there are decisions like this that must be made in order to benefit the planet as a whole. And these jobs will not be lost - if governments&corporations invest in new, renewable, sustainable industry&research, many more jobs will be created than lost in a potential-filled new industry with so many opportunities.

    6)if banned, more cardboard would have 2b made

    --> w/investment&research in renewable energies&materials, this can be avoided. Cardboard is not the sole other material 2replace styrofoam. Consider biomaterials!

  • Most arguments that oppose a ban don't acknowledge limitations (refer to first post on NO side)

    One list of arguments I saw-these can all be refuted by counterarguments&I hope that this will encourage people 2reevaluate their positions.

    It's actually more safe than cardboard

    *[from the points below, the only way in which it's safer is that it supposedly produces less pollution to make. 1) do you have credible statistics to prove this? 2) Styrofoam, since it decomposes in millions of years, has a far bigger negative impact on environment, ex.Leaching chemicals into ground&being eaten by marine life, then failing to be digested. It also leaches cancer-causing chemicals into hot food&drinks that are put into styrofoam containers.]*

    Reasons why styrofoam>cardboard
    1) cheaper to make than paper-based materials
    --> this is true, but at what cost? Can money stand alone as an important factor in an argument? Even so, I do acknowledge that this is a large factor in deciding to ban a material and plays a big role for the economy.

    2) doesnt decompose, but can be compressed 2fit more in landfills
    --> This can be interpreted as an argument in favour of being banned. If it can be compressed to fit more in landfills, that means a greater amount of chemicals being leached into the same ground area of landfill. What you're arguing here is that you can fit more of it in landfills than cardboard materials, which is a good characteristic, because it will save land space. This is a weak argument because it argues that we should keep styrofoam because we can fit a lot of it in landfills - how about other biodegradable materials that will degrade into healthy soil&after a few months not take up any landfill space at all?

    3) cardboard pollution>styrofoam pollution
    --> have you researched the amount of pollution it takes to make styrofoam and other oil-based plastic materials? Consider all the pollution and waste that is created from the removal of oil/bitumen from the earth, transportation of those materials and then creation in a factory. Fabrication of plastics is much worse than most other materials.

    4) 2expensive for businesses to change
    --> you're arguing that it would be too expensive and too much of a hassle for them to switch. This is a valid point, and is part of the reason why this ban hasn't occurred. Gov'ts must create legislation that makes it less of a burden!

    5) jobs created
    --> this is a one-sided argument. Sure, styrofoam industry creates many jobs, but in face of environmental impact, & an evolution towards sustainable industry that must be made, there are decisions like this that must be made in order to benefit the planet as a whole. And these jobs will not be lost - if governments&corporations invest in new, renewable, sustainable industry&research, many more jobs will be created than lost in a potential-filled new industry with so many opportunities.

    6)if banned, more cardboard would have 2b made

    --> w/investment&research in renewable energies&materials, this can be avoided. Cardboard is not the sole other material 2replace styrofoam. Consider biomaterials!

  • Say No to Foam!

    Perhaps the easiest way to reduce the amount of styrofoam being produced and therefor disposed of is through restaurant cups and takeout containers. Studies show the cost differences between styrofoam and paperboard are fairly negligible and in some cases paper is cheaper. Some may argue it is not as durable and that's true, but what better way to encourage people to bring their own reusable containers to a restaurant or coffee shop! Just do bit of research on the 5 ocean garbage patches or just take a stroll down your local beach or park and you'll see the lasting affects of foam/plastic pollution.

  • We should ban styrofoam!

    Styrofoam is bad for the environment. Because it doesn't decompose more than 1 million years and it is not recyclable, it just stays as trash. Take out food is usually put into styrofoam containers and many people just dump the food in nature which causes a lot of animals to start eating it. This makes many animals start to die.

  • M m m

    M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

  • I think u.

    M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m m mm m mmm m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m

  • I think u.

    M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m m mm m mmm m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m

  • I think u.

    M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m m mm m mmm m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m

  • I think u.

    M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m m mm m mmm m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m

  • Show ACTUAL evidence of this MASSIVE damage caused by styrofoam, or go home. Show the ACTUAL study and its supporting documentation.

    There has been ZERO evidence presented showing that styrofoam poses ANY major problem for the planet or people. Lots of screeching that it does but ZERO evidence. Stating some of its properties does NOT show the huge problem for the planet that is being spoken about in this debate here.

  • It's actually more safe than cardboard

    Here's some reasons why styrofoam is more safe than cardboard:
    1) it's a heck of a lot cheaper to make than cardboard or paper
    2) though it doesn't easily decompose, it compresses much easier than paper or cardboard, so you can fit more of it in landfills
    3) cardboard causes a lot more air and water pollution when it's made in those factories
    4) so many coffee shops and resturaunts use styrofoam for heat insulation that it would be far too expensive to make the switch for them to bother
    5) the production of styrofoam allows jobs to open up
    6) if styrofoam is banned, then twice as much cardboard will have to be made, causing a more concentrated amount of pollution into the air and water

  • Vital Insulator Can Build Homes

    Styrofoam was a wonderful invention when it hit the market. It is a fantastic insulator even though it destroys the environment and is nearly impossible to break down. Despite its drawbacks, innovations like insulated concrete forms (ICFs) make hurricane-proof and tornado-proof houses possible. ICFs also save on people's energy bills over the life of the home. Banning Styrofoam isn't prudent as developing countries may rely on the substance for various sectors of their society as well.

  • Infringes on economic freedom and is illogical

    The government would be putting a halt/damper on the economy by banning a product that is not directly harmful to any individual. It is like the government legislating morality by not allowing the keystone pipeline, the pipeline would improve standard of living and the economy, but due to some idiotic moral relativism that exists in society and that somehow we owe the environment something, we are losing out on buttloads of money that would help our economy.

  • Styrofoam Is Necessary

    Styrofoam is a useful product that has yet to be improved by a more economical, better substitute in certain circumstances. Window air conditioners are an example of where Styrofoam is used not only in the packaging for shipping but also in the internal construction where it is used as the air conduit. The material is light, strong and versatile. These qualities actually make products cheaper to produce and ship which saves money and natural resources more than if Styrofoam was banned.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.