We already know of the cost of plastic pollution, just do a freaking Google search. From there it's easy to weigh down the payoff vs. cost.
(If you're too lazy to do, yes, reducing plastic pollution will save a good deal of wildlife, and improve human health too, as probably there will be less toxic bisphenol and polystyrene in that tuna can you pick from the supermarket aisle from plastic pollutants which easily land back in our food chain).
And why should they not do this based on the mere presumption that there could be a cheaper way? Everyone else is free to come up with a better idea.
Your post is incredibly intellectually disingenuous just for the sake of being critical.
(If you're too lazy to do, yes, reducing plastic pollution will save a good deal of wildlife, and improve human health too, as probably there will be less toxic bisphenol and polystyrene in that tuna can you pick from the supermarket aisle from plastic pollutants which easily land back in our food chain).
And why should they not do this based on the mere presumption that there could be a cheaper way? Everyone else is free to come up with a better idea.
Your post is incredibly intellectually disingenuous just for the sake of being critical.