Our group believed there are two main culprits of the K-Cups waste. One we agreed was Keurig as a company, but our other main culprits were consumers. It is obvious that Keurig is largely to blame for introducing these unrecyclable products to the market without correcting for their negative environmental impacts. It is also largely Keurig’s fault for still not coming up with a sustainable solution years later. This isn’t just Keurig’s problem though. Consumers are personally responsible for actively choosing products that are environmentally friendly. There are alternate forms of K-Cups that consumers can choose between to lessen waste. For example, Molly and Laura use a reusable K-Cups that they refill every day. This consumer decision eliminated K-Cups waste from their household. After reflecting on consumer’s choices and the immense increase in K-Cups usage over the years, we believe that the blame may be placed on society’s’ views on environmental issues. Many people are ignorant to the impacts of our decisions and product usage on the environment wholistically, not just in reference to K-Cups. If there was a greater understanding and widespread sympathy for detriment our products have on the environment, consumers may be more willing to turn to alternative environmentally friendly products. Ultimately the fault of K-Cups overwhelming the landfills cannot be blamed only on Keurig, but also on the countless number of people who choose to use them.
Our group did not agree that the government is to blame for the K-Cups waste. On one hand banning K-Cups would not solve the problem because the K-Cups machine does actually have some environmental benefits; however, the government is also in charge of creating regulation to uphold recycling infrastructure. To begin, the Chicago Tribune argues that pod-based coffee makers are more energy efficient than drip coffee makers because they power down when not in use. They continue to argue that Keurig machines do not waste nearly as much coffee or water due to its single serving size feature [1]. On other side of the coin, it is estimated that half of the plastics people recycle doesn’t go to a recycling center [2]. That falls on the government, local and federal, upholding/regulating the infrastructure necessary for the recycling process. There is a lack of investment in infrastructure, as we shipped many plastics to China for so long when they were in a raw material shortage. This caused us to deal with 21st century recycling stream with 20th century infrastructure after China no longer needed our plastics [2]. In conclusion, there are ways it seems like the government is to blame, but others where they shouldn’t shoulder the responsibility.
[1]Minter, Adam. “No, Your Coffee Pods Aren’t Killing the Planet.” Chicagotribune.com, Chicago Tribune, 11 May 2019, www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-coffee-pods-keurig-kcups-environment-20160225-story.html.
[2]“The US Recycling System Is Garbage.” Sierra Club, 26 June 2019, www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2019-4-july-august/feature/us-recycling-system-garbage.