If a tension rod doesn’t work for you I would say f-it and just drill holes for the curtain bracket assuming the screw anchors aren’t absurdly large. Assuming your walls are neutral colored, I think it’s easier and less noticeable to patch a hole than it is to match paint on the chance the adhesive you use pulls the paint off during its removal.

Not necessarily, trash in developed counties tend to go to a sealed landfill along with all the other plastic materials we discard.

I don’t think it’s that simple because the alternatives have environmental issues as well. For example, cotton is very carbon and water intensive (organic even more so) for the amount of times you can use it before it breaks down (see: cotton vs plastic shopping bags). Presumably recycled plastic clothing is less carbon intensive than cotton.

Textile production accounts for about 10% of carbon emissions. I’m not sure we currently have a good way to compare the negative externalities of additional carbon footprint and micro plastic pollution.

I think the ideal solution likely involves consumers keeping their clothing for longer, purchasing more durable clothing and not participating in “fast fashion”.

Don’t get me wrong, I prefer cotton and wool. Synthetics also have their place in many speciality and sporting applications. I believe main issue is the sheer scale of consumption and waste that we encourage in a consumer economy.

If anyone knows about the carbon footprint of wool, hemp or alternative textiles I would be curious to hear.

I’ve heard this argument many times and I just don’t agree. It’s a straw man argument. By your logic, toll roads are also a tax on the poor. Or you could say taking the T is a tax on the poor. This doesn’t make sense as a toll model is a fee-for-service model just like many things in this world. Except EZpass tolls and the MBTA are tax deductible as commuter benefits. Or, we could exempt Boston residents from the congestion toll. It’s an inappropriate assumption that a congestion tax cannot be implemented without disproportionately affecting those who are low income.

Not only that, but we know that the pollution created by ICE vehicles disproportionately affects poorer residents who are more as risk for respiratory illness, so it’s not so easy to just say “drive tax bad for poor” because driving is already bad for them.

edit: typo