[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"question:84:en-US":3},{"metadata":4,"sys":15,"fields":35},{"tags":5,"concepts":14},[6,11],{"sys":7},{"type":8,"linkType":9,"id":10},"Link","Tag","consumption",{"sys":12},{"type":8,"linkType":9,"id":13},"global",[],{"space":16,"id":20,"type":21,"createdAt":22,"updatedAt":23,"environment":24,"publishedVersion":28,"revision":29,"contentType":30,"locale":34},{"sys":17},{"type":8,"linkType":18,"id":19},"Space","ghhpjogyw4x7","e64e7a15f3b06098ae9dbabc22e8d78f","Entry","2022-01-03T10:58:25.912Z","2023-11-27T09:07:23.783Z",{"sys":25},{"id":26,"type":8,"linkType":27},"master","Environment",333,15,{"sys":31},{"type":8,"linkType":32,"id":33},"ContentType","question","en-US",{"globalId":36,"answers":37,"answersAsImages":57,"wrongPercentage":93,"name":94,"questionText":95,"statistics":96,"veryWrongStatistics":98,"correctSentence":100,"youWereWrong":101,"youWereRight":102,"dataSourceShortText":103,"dataSourceLinkLongText":104,"extendedAnswerText":105,"headingVeryWrong":106,"youWereVeryWrong":101,"headingWrong":106},"84",[38,59,76],{"metadata":39,"sys":42,"fields":54},{"tags":40,"concepts":41},[],[],{"space":43,"id":45,"type":21,"createdAt":46,"updatedAt":47,"environment":48,"publishedVersion":29,"revision":50,"contentType":51,"locale":34},{"sys":44},{"type":8,"linkType":18,"id":19},"f6e4d3a6caeeb97dd3e9717432e7402f","2022-01-04T09:15:34.146Z","2023-09-01T15:43:49.579Z",{"sys":49},{"id":26,"type":8,"linkType":27},10,{"sys":52},{"type":8,"linkType":32,"id":53},"answer",{"globalId":55,"correctAnswer":56,"isVeryWrong":57,"answerText":58},"84-a1",true,false,"Around 12%",{"metadata":60,"sys":63,"fields":73},{"tags":61,"concepts":62},[],[],{"space":64,"id":66,"type":21,"createdAt":67,"updatedAt":68,"environment":69,"publishedVersion":29,"revision":50,"contentType":71,"locale":34},{"sys":65},{"type":8,"linkType":18,"id":19},"b907d5a643d91127967d936b129fe8de","2022-01-04T09:15:34.177Z","2023-09-01T15:43:49.624Z",{"sys":70},{"id":26,"type":8,"linkType":27},{"sys":72},{"type":8,"linkType":32,"id":53},{"globalId":74,"correctAnswer":57,"isVeryWrong":57,"answerText":75},"84-a2","Around 42%",{"metadata":77,"sys":80,"fields":90},{"tags":78,"concepts":79},[],[],{"space":81,"id":83,"type":21,"createdAt":84,"updatedAt":85,"environment":86,"publishedVersion":29,"revision":50,"contentType":88,"locale":34},{"sys":82},{"type":8,"linkType":18,"id":19},"48e3ccd204c28bbc262f12406ace9e1d","2022-01-04T09:15:34.210Z","2023-09-01T15:43:49.667Z",{"sys":87},{"id":26,"type":8,"linkType":27},{"sys":89},{"type":8,"linkType":32,"id":53},{"globalId":91,"correctAnswer":57,"isVeryWrong":56,"answerText":92},"84-a3","Around 72%",92,"Plastic waste as share","Of all waste collected from homes, businesses and schools worldwide, how much of the total weight is plastic?",[97],"uk 0.92",[99],"uk 0.52","Worldwide, around 12% of all the garbage collected from households, schools and businesses is plastic.","No other garbage gets talked about more than plastic. The other waste is jealous. They can also do harm if not managed properly.","They overestimate how much waste is plastic, as it is the number one celebrity in the world of garbage.","Source: What a Waste 2.0","Our source for this question is global Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) data from the “What a Waste 2.0” report from the World Bank [1]. MSW accounts for about a quarter of all waste. [2] Their definition of MSW includes residential, commercial, and institutional waste, but not industrial, medical, hazardous, electronic, and construction and demolition waste, in their global average of 12% of MSW being plastic. \n\nThe UN’s Global Waste Management Outlook [2] is a slightly older report but does not include any commercial waste in their global average of plastic percentage of MSW. It puts plastic as a share of household waste at a slightly lower 10%. \n\nWe checked the correct answer with three independent researchers, two of whom agreed that 12% is correct and a third who directed us to compare with the Global Waste Management Outlook. \n\nBecause waste is hard to measure and the data uncertain, we put big differences between the three options, so that our ‘correct’ answer is ‘more correct’ than any of the other answers.\n\n[1]  [What a Waste 2.0: A global snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. World Bank Group, 2018 (page 117](https:\u002F\u002Fopenknowledge.worldbank.org\u002Fhandle\u002F10986\u002F30317)  \n[2]  [Global Waste Management Outlook, Chapter 3: Waste Management: Global Status. United Nations Environment Programme, 2015 (pages 56-57)](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.uncclearn.org\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002Flibrary\u002Funep23092015.pdf)  \n[3]  [WWF briefing on pulp and paper](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.worldwildlife.org\u002Findustries\u002Fpulp-and-paper)  ","Plastic has gotten a bad name, but it's a fantastic material in many ways. In healthcare, plastic syringes save lives every day. Fresh food wrapped in plastic reduces food waste. But plastic is also problematic. The production of plastic emits carbon dioxde which leads to global warming. Plastic pollution in nature and oceans degrades very slowly and therefore plastic waste must be managed very carefully. But thinking about plastic in a categorical way can lead to unintended consequences. People in extreme poverty often can't afford any other materials to store their food in a safe way. The alternative materials that are often suggested to replace plastic, such as fabric bags, are often bad for the environment too.\n\nOf course we need to use less plastic - this is vitally important. But the other waste materials deserve lots of attention too. We can't protect nature by simplifying the waste problem to just plastic. We must reduce all kinds of material use. We must recycle paper and other materials. Rich countries must stop wasting food. When other materials are suggested to replace plastic, the environmental impact of these materials must be fully understood, instead of simply assuming that anything is better than plastic.\n\n### Why is it a problem to be wrong about this?\nThe fixation on plastic waste as the symbol of environmental awareness can potentially lead to unintended consequences. Banning and reducing unnecessary overuse of plastics in high-income countries makes complete sense but for people in extreme poverty, often there’s no safe affordable alternative to a plastic bag, as you can see in the homes of these families living in extreme poverty with less than 2 dollars per day.\n\nThis is how they store their [grain](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.gapminder.org\u002Fdollar-street\u002Falbums\u002Fshared\u002F4uTTbXCr3duUy9fKqvtxQ0NlxH7xgLHqXTad8eNP):![Screenshot 2021-10-20 at 17.42.27](\u002F\u002Fimages.contentful.com\u002Fghhpjogyw4x7\u002F6OIY26ZW1M4OccVCnXhUAw\u002F7468f521bd011ec8ceacbf9e69f3aa1c\u002FScreenshot_2021-10-20_at_17.42.27.png)\n\n[meat](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.gapminder.org\u002Fdollar-street\u002Falbums\u002Fshared\u002F6qQdT8oZX4abKFLz8pAvkzr9FBgfahI6MoRRgRIR): ![Screenshot 2021-10-20 at 17.43.14](\u002F\u002Fimages.contentful.com\u002Fghhpjogyw4x7\u002F2VCvbqok5OE2vJJTPtgBOg\u002F31f86b2d7edcbc5345f7d450bb74650e\u002FScreenshot_2021-10-20_at_17.43.14.png)\n\nand [medicine](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.gapminder.org\u002Fdollar-street\u002Falbums\u002Fshared\u002FuZVDRhfEWRLyAAkbCrcI4M3OybaSve8VhDqWk7wK): ![Screenshot 2021-10-20 at 17.43.45](\u002F\u002Fimages.contentful.com\u002Fghhpjogyw4x7\u002F4DQYRJmAAfAdyjzlSfzKKX\u002F51efa2cd1dd4efc94c98f0f01e5a27fd\u002FScreenshot_2021-10-20_at_17.43.45.png)\n\n### Why are many wrong about this?\nCurrently plastic waste is on everyone's minds. We see it in the media all the time and it's a material we all handle ourselves daily. It is easier to find compelling photos of plastic waste than any other kind of waste.\n\n### How can plastic be a small share of waste? \nAcross the world, organic waste from food and plants make up the biggest share of household waste. In low- and middle-income countries, where 84% of humanity live, most of the food-related waste is unavoidable cut offs from cooking, whereas in high-income countries it’s often edible food that gets wasted. \n\n### What is the biggest source of waste? \nOrganic waste from food and plants make up the biggest share of household waste. Processing and then distributing food creates greenhouse gases and uses a lot of resources. Reducing waste is good for the environment, and so is making sure it is dealt with properly. That’s because when it decays it emits methane, which contributes to climate change and if it enters rivers it can reduce the amount of oxygen available to fish and increase the growth of harmful organisms. \n\nWorldwide, paper is also a bigger share of waste than plastic. We should keep pushing to recycle as much paper as we can. In some places, chopping down trees for paper is not done responsibly and causes big ecological problems. Producing paper takes lots of water and chemicals, which also strains the environment. \n\n### Can I trust this data?\n\nYes you can, but you need to be aware of the certainty of the data. Waste is difficult to measure, particularly on a global level and there can be many different definitions of municipal solid waste. Two of the experts agreed with the figure of 12% from our source, [the World Banks' What a Waste 2.0 report](https:\u002F\u002Fopenknowledge.worldbank.org\u002Fhandle\u002F10986\u002F30317) and a third suggested we compare with an older report that had the figure at a slightly lower 10%. \nBecause of the uncertainty in the exact share of plastic in household waste in the world we made our correct answer \"Around 12%\" and left large margins between the other two incorrect options. ","Garbage’s number one celebrity!"]