How much do smokers really pollute?

Question

There's cigarette butts being thrown out the window at EVERY single stop light I stop at and not to mention ashes. How badly does that affect our environment. Maybe if I have an answer I won't be screaming at the person in the car next to me, or it will give me even more reason to do so.

Answer 1

Ever been on a clean drive where you pick up other people garbage? Butts are not biodegradable - or at least they don't degrade much over time. At certain intersections - like the stoplights before entering a major business, company, or other facility where a lot of people go, but can't smoke inside - you will find so many butts that you can't possibly pick them all up.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Pollution is directly related to excess consumption. And cigarettes cause excess consumption. Not just from smoking the product itself, but from the billions of dollars that go up in smoke (pun intended) treating smoking-related diseases.

Answer 2

Well the cigarette butts will probably break down quite quickly without much damage (even if animals eat them it's not going to kill them; I know of people who eat cigarette butts, gross but it doesn't hurt them), though they are still an eyesore and it's dangerous to other drivers who could get burned when one flies through a window, sunroof or convertible top.

I think the real pollution from cigarettes is that it pollutes the bodies of the people around the smokers. This is why they are banning smoking in public places.

Answer 3

First off we need to do some math and a bit of guesswork...

Using statistics available from Europe and the US: 18% of the population smoke and the average smoker gets through 22 cigarettes per day, weight of tobacco in an average cigarette is 1.136g

Worldwide there are 6.5 billion people, if 18% of them smoke there are 1.17 billion smokers. 22 cigarettes per day = 9.4 trillion cigarettes smoked globally each year with a total weight of 10.7 million tons.

So very roughly, each year there's about 10 million tons of smoke produced and about 10 trillion cigarette butts to be disposed of. Sounds a lot but in the overall scheme of things it's merely a drop in the ocean.

If all the butts were made into one great big pile and that pile was 100 metres high it would be dwarfed by the pile next to it - some 227km high and representing all other garbage.

The weight of tobacco that goes up in smoke is no more than the weight of fuel that a single power station can burn in a year, so again, in comparison it's a very small amount.

That said, there's no excuse for discarding cigarette butts out of the window, they probably toss empty bottles and candy wrappers on the floor as well. So keep screaming at the people in the car next to you.

Answer 4

Not all smokers pollute. Despite the carbon monoxide which a cigarette emits (which is FAR lower than automobile emissions!), I NEVER EVER throw a cigarette butt!!!! EVER!!! If there is no ashtray, I flick out the cherry and put it in my pocket and throw out later. Yeah it stinks, but that's what I get for being a smoker.

And it's not just smokers. A LOT of people litter all sorts of things. Just remember that.

Answer 5

They pollute. But in relations to factories, car emissions, etc it isnt that large a factor.

Before you all start taking pot shots at smokers for polluting, clean up your life first. When you fix all that you possibly can to do your part to clean the world up then you can make suggestions for everyone else to follow suit. Until then its hypocritcal to suggest other people change thier ways to help the earth.

Answer 6

Cigarettes cause some pollution when being smoked, but most of the pollution probably comes from their manufacture and packaging. More comes from treatment used in treating smoking-related sicknesses and injuries.

Answer 7

As an alternative to smoking bans, some economists have proposed a system of tradable smoking permits as a solution to the problem of cigarette-smoking "externalities" in public bars and restaurants. Tradable smoking pollution permit systems work similar to other cap-and-trade emissions trading systems successfully used by the Environmental Protection Agency since the 1970s to curb other types of pollution. The proposal has been suggested by Profs. Robert Haveman and John Mullahy of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.[1]

Emissions trading systems allow lawmakers to define the overall level of pollution that is socially acceptable, and then issue tradable permits corresponding to that amount. Companies who wish to pollute must hold permits equal to their emissions. This market-based approach to pollution control provides firms with economic incentives to minimize pollution -- as they can sell unused permits to other firms -- rather than direct regulatory penalties, which tend to have high administrative costs.

Tradable pollution permits as a market-based alternative to smoking bans have been suggested as follows: Lawmakers decide the optimal level of smoking establishments for an area. The total fire occupancies -- or some proxy based on alcohol sales receipts -- for those establishments is totaled up, and smoking pollution permits are issued accordingly. Establishments are required to hold permits equal to size -- fire occupancies or level of alcohol receipts -- if they wish to allow smoking. In essence, they are required to own the property rights over the clean air space of all occupants before any can smoke. Establishments with unused permits can sell them on the open market to smoking establishments, providing economic incentives to reduce smoking in bars and restaurants.

Answer 8

lets put all the smokers in a big hole and then see how they like it. then we bury them. good ridons. thats what they deserve for destroying where we live.

Answer 9

each time they burn they pollute.

Answer 10

it destroys more than we know