Anyway, at the risk of rehashing a very old argument, OP presumably means that if you want to reduce the effects (landfill, increased consumption of plastics etc) then the best place to apply your effort is in industrial contexts.
It's good to reduce any waste but it's rational to apply your finite efforts where they'll give the best return.
The vast majority of people don't have control over industrial waste. Of course I can vote for someone who says they will but that doesn't require focus only an action at most once a year.
I believe the OP is using whataboutism to allow himself to be selfish. "Why recycle when celebrities fly on private jets" or to make it more obvious "Why should I be good if another person isn't"
I think of it as the socialist slaveowner problem: "You can't call me a bad socialist, I'll release my slaves when everybody releases their slaves. Compared to world slavery, I'm just a drop in the bucket (I own barely 5% of them.) Actually, your obsession with me instead of the real problem says a lot about you. So convenient for you to ignore the 95% and indulge your petty, childish bigotry against equestrians."
There's no ethical consumption under capitalism!