The only analyses worth giving any time of the day are “cradle to grave”, those that comprehensively identify the full range of inputs and their costs, cost of consumption, and costs of disposal/recycling and value of their recoverable outputs such as methane, or glass/paper/plastic feedstocks. The publicly broadcast noise/hysteria about one or another material’s harm/benefit to the ecosystem tend to omit large swaths of the cradle to grave cycle’s components, let alone examine feasible (emphasis on feasible) alternatives. From most of what we read, hedonics – not verifiable data or credibly tested engineering and economics – drives most self-proclaimed saviors of the planet. Intentions and feelings do not make for constructive policy leaving more than fewer better off.
I saw this.
The main thing seens to be the assumption that anyone making coffee, not with a pod, make too much and throws some away. And since they include production and transport cost, pods come out pretty well.
Not included is the rising number of people with a semi professional machine that makes coffee per cup (espresso, cappuchino, americano), and also little filter coffee set up’s making 1 or 2 cups, aeropress, 1 cup French press etc
