Between 500 billion and a trillion plastic grocery bags are consumed worldwide each year. The most ubiquitous consumer item on Earth, the lowly plastic bag is an environmental scourge like none other. Say no to plasic bags! Please visit: http://www.project-forest.o rg/index.php?ndp=plastic.php">http://www.project-forest.o rg/index.php?ndp=plastic.php Intention of project is to use the strength of numbers and synergy of action to make positive changes. It is our goal to wake awareness of problems to population and give people means to act in few single steps. People do not like problems, they strive to forget them (if you don't think about it maybe it will disappear). Because of that please send this email to your friends and ask them to do the same. With time news will spread and awareness will grow and with awareness the will to act will be stronger. Best regards.
I think that the clamour one hears against plastic bags is little more than tokenism.
People give up plastic bags and it seems are suffused with such a "green" glow that they then happily fill their "green" bags with all manner of plastic packaging and Aluminium cans etc., which are just as bad if not worse.
The reason why plastic bags are given away is because the stuff they are made from, ethylene, is a very cheap by product of oil refining and natural gas production, if plastic bags are banned what happens to the ethylene? it will no doubt still end up in the environment in some form or another but this time paid for by consumers.
The contention that plastic bag banning should be done because wildlife gets caught up in these bags, (cut to heart rending picture of same), completely disregards the pressure of other forms of environmental degradation that overpopulation, overfishing and chemical pollution etc causes.
The campaign to ban plastic bags is nothing more than picking the low hanging fruit. It allows politicians to claim that they have done something for the environment, environmentalists to feel good, the green glow everybody is bathed in blinding them to the fact it is just tokenism, that allows the larger issues to be forgotten.
True, up to a point. This campaign of aversion to plastic bags is nothing "new". Like many other aspects, it is simply a "recycling" of an idea from the last time "environmental consciousness / green living" became popular in the early 1990's.
To some extent, plastic bags are very useful, and many of us have become accustomed to recycling or re-using them (albeit on a small-scale) for storing various items, such as documents. That can lead to problems with some of these "eco-friendly" plastic bags, especially the photo-degradable ones. Sometimes you might unknowingly put something in one of those, and a few months later instead of being stored in a bag, you find it surrounded by "shards" of crumbling powdery plastic-bag residue.
But as cynical or critical as some of that may sound, and the fact that plastic bags probably do not represent much in terms of the "bigger picture" of the environmental issues at stake, it does represent an example of small-scale individual action, and helps to some extent in providing a "beacon of hope" to many, at a time of both increased apathy and pessimism to environmental issues and the sustainability of our future.
The reality is that individuals can do little or nothing (directly) to address the "real" issues of water pollution, emissions, and the environmental policies of politicians and corporations, but at least this is something. That scenario you mentioned of people being "suffused with a green glow" and then doing things which neutralise the positive effects of their actions may be true to some extent, but it is unlikely that it would be so for the majority of people (we can still hope).
Back in the day (early 1990's) one of the watchwords was "Think Globally, Act Locally" and that is just as (if not more) relevant now than it was then. It is like watching history repeat itself, but there is no reason to not be optimistic that it may last longer this time. This is the most practical way any "culture" of environmental concern can become entrenched, and remain in the mainstream. It's really up to us (not the politicians or the corporations). We as a "species" have not reached where we are today by chance or an inability to adapt to new circumstances in our environments. Survival is entrenched in our DNA, and despite modern technology natural selection will always prevail.
Overall, plastic bags may not be much in terms of solving the bigger environmental aspects of sustainability, but they are a useful starting point, and a way to encourage people to begin (and continue) thinking more about the impacts of their simple day-to-day activities, and reassure them that their small (local) actions can indeed cumulatively add up to something more substantial (globally).
In any case, some of the concerns about plastic bags, such as the effects of plastic materials on endangered species of marine turtles, are quite valid.
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
Overall, plastic bags may not be much in terms of solving the bigger environmental aspects of sustainability, but they are a useful starting point, and a way to encourage people to begin (and continue) thinking more about the impacts of their simple day-to-day activities, and reassure them that their small (local) actions can indeed cumulatively add up to something more substantial (globally).
Ok, since you opened up this can of worms, what do you propose we do? I'm pursuing a career in the sustainable materials field, and I would appreciate your ideas, and also if you could point me to the sources that paint the "bigger picture", I would appreciate it as well.
Overall, plastic bags may not be much in terms of solving the bigger environmental aspects of sustainability, but they are a useful starting point, and a way to encourage people to begin (and continue) thinking more about the impacts of their simple day-to-day activities, and reassure them that their small (local) actions can indeed cumulatively add up to something more substantial (globally).
Ok, since you opened up this can of worms, what do you propose we do? I'm pursuing a career in the sustainable materials field, and I would appreciate your ideas, and also if you could point me to the sources that paint the "bigger picture", I would appreciate it as well.
I am not convinced that any of the four previous participants opened a “can of worms” in this thread; please clarify what that statement refers to, especially since the quote in the above post is actually a composite quote of two (individual and separate) replies – rc white (post #2) and Karl (post #4); further to which, neither of the two repliers from which your composite quote was created, were the one who actually started this thread! But I know that is not the real point.
We are still talking about plastic bags, right? To stay within the topic of this thread, you may need to revisit the original assertions of sevko (in post #1).
What exactly is the “sustainable materials field”; moreover, is it an entire field in itself or a part of a wider programme in, say, Materials Science or Materials Technology or Mechanical Engineering or Environmental Management (or in some combination thereof). That will help in clarifying the motivations in so far as the exact nature of your query (especially since it appears to be premised upon the sampling of fragments of the separate posts of two individuals into a single composite entity).
The field of “sustainable materials” certainly sounds interesting, and I am sure that our members (and guests) would appreciate if you can give us more details as to what it entails. Having said that, however, I would strongly suggest it as the topic for a new thread, since this discussion is intended to focus on plastic bags (and I imagine that “sustainable materials” is far wider in focus).
What particularly intrigues me, is what processes exist that sustainably produce materials? The only such process I can think of, offhand, is photosynthesis in green plants, which is the materials production process closest to being “sustainable” – as long as the sun shines (i.e., solar energy is available for the plants to convert into matter).
Getting back to the topic, how “sustainable” are plastic bags, from a materials production perspective? If the ready availability of plastics for making consumable/non-durable items such as bags is dependent upon the ubiquity of ethylene as an industrial by-product of petro-chemical refineries, the implication is that with the increasing unavailability of (or competition for) hydrocarbons as time progresses, reliance on cheap ethylene for plastics production (as a de facto waste transfer mechanism) is in itself inherently unsustainable. Therefore, this adds another dimension to the plastic bags sustainability debate – we should probably be looking for some substitute material for things like bags for reasons other than their (direct) environmental impact.
In terms of sources pointing to a painting of a bigger picture of sustainability, I am not sure that I can help in relation to the topic of this thread, or your chosen field, but some of these may provide some generalized perspectives (of others) in that regard:
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/ag_systems/pdfs/keynote.pdf
No Impact Man: Sustainability and the meaning of life
Big Picture TV
Bigger Thinking / Sustainability
Incidentally, you would be very aware that “worms” (by the can or otherwise) do play a critical role in the sustainability of materials in the bigger picture of Earth processes – soil conditioning, agriculture, natural recycling of nutrients and energy in the biosphere, etc. So, opening a “can of worms” in itself cannot be objectionable in the context of “sustainable materials” per se, although admittedly plastic bags are (so far) not one of the materials that we can rely on worms to recycle on our behalf…
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
hello rc white and sevko,
Any ideas on how to house the rubbish we accumulate? I used to use plastic grocery/general shopping bags, (I'm sure they are not all ethylene...) but since converting to green bags, my housemate just bought some... Not my idea...
Would love any suggestions.
Thanks and regards!
As far as I know Rose bags used in Australia are made from high density polyethylene.
I also use the bags for rubbish disposal and I remember starting to do this many years ago when supermarkets in Australia introduced the bio degradable plastic bag.
These quickly disappeared as they had the unfortunate habit of bio degrading as you were taking your shopping home, perhaps they have improved since then.
At the present time ethylene is made from ethane by "steam cracking", another process makes ethanol.
Since ethanol can be made from cellulose in a sustainable way then it is conceivable that we can still have very useful polymers such as high density polyethylene as part of a biopolymer suite, from this source however it will be far too expensive to use in disposable bags.
One important point is that the plant-based (as opposed to fossil-based) source of the ethylene is not expected to actually affect its status as being biodegradable – the idea of bio-polymers (despite the implication of their name) is more from the perspective of the source of the raw materials, than their actual structure or physical properties. I have not been following recent developments in degradable plastics (such as "eco-friendly" grocery bags) too closely in recent years. However, I recall that the two main areas in which degrading plastics were being developed (and to some extent marketed) in the recent past were:
• Photodegradation
• Biodegradation
However, it is important to note that the "degradability" of these materials is generally in terms of their macrostructure (as opposed to their innate properties); unlike truly biodegradable materials they do not degrade away literally to nothing. As such, while marketed as an "eco-friendly" environmental technology, they have a much more limited role in mitigating the issues associated with disposal of plastics and are not actually final solutions – in general, both the photodegradable and biodegradable plastics are usually conventional polymers modified to allow the discarded materials to lose the bulk of their structural integrity (with most of the synthetic polymer remaining chemically intact).
One approach to photodegradable plastics involved the introduction of a small amount of carbon monoxide in the polyethylene structure. The presence of the CO results in the polymer having a small proportion of randomly allocated carbonyl group, which allow them to undergo chain scission upon absorption of light in the 300-320 nm range – this mechanism gradually creating 'cracks' in the polymer chain leading to loss of structural integrity. This leads to the plastic degrading physically, although from a chemistry perspective little of the material actually decomposes – the chief advantage being that unsightly plastic litter "disappears" to a powdery residue on sufficient exposure to sunlight. The main problem is that when these materials are disposed of too quickly (i.e., buried in landfills) they do not degrade any further since they are no longer exposed to direct solar radiation
Other mechanisms for photodegradable plastics included the incorporation of a "photosensitizer" into the formulation of the plastic rather than altering the chemical constitution of the polymer; this photosensitizer being a light-absorbing substance which initiates chemical attack on the polymer molecules. For example hydrogen atom abstraction followed by attack of atmospheric oxygen – the redox properties of a number of transition metals making their compounds suitable photosensitizers.
The so-called "biodegradable" plastics have traditionally been conventional polymer materials formulated with 5-10% of starch as a binder – these have been most frequently used for the "eco-friendly" plastic grocery bags. The starch (an isomer of polyglucose) is readily biodegradable, and when this binder degrades the bag loses its structural integrity. However, once again, it is only the binder component that is actually biodegradable – the remaining synthetic polymer remains unconsumed but as a less noticeable powder (or from my personal experience as "shards" of crumbling powdery plastic bag residue). Some of the problems associated with these materials are that the binders are incompatible with climates of higher humidity (insofar as the microbial degradation is initiated before the product has fulfilled its consumer life-cycle).
A few years ago there were reports of developments in genuinely biodegradable plastics – using bacteria such as Alcaligenes eutrophus which produces the polyester polyhydroxybutyric acid (which has properties suitable for making softdrink bottles); there was also talk of developments in bacteria that produce more flexible copolymers suitable for plastic bags and packaging materials. These would be completely biodegradable plastics, but I am uncertain of how much progress has been made in that particular area.
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
I am no expert in plastics so I am talking from a laymans point of view. Would it not be dangerous to have bacteria attack plastic to degrade it? What if they start "nibbling" on plastics we need to last for a long time? That would be a disaster.
I think every little bit helps. One CAN do ones own bit and does not have to wait for everyone else or the big conglomerates to do something or force the Government to create new laws.
I found a middle way. Use less plastic bags by also using real bags for shopping. There are still needs for the odd plastic bag here or there.
Buy bins that do not have holes in them for office refuse or for the bathroom. Then empty into the trashcan outside.
Be disciplined and sort everything right away, dont mix up your trash which you then have to sort out again and then you probably wont do it.
Dont buy stuff with lots of packaging. I take some of the things off when buying and leaving it at the shops. let them get rid of it. They will soon put pressure on the manufacturers to change the packaging. It worked in Germany 20 years ago, it worked in other European countries so it can work here and elsewhere too.
Some more information on the general topic of plastic wastes and their environmental impact / sustainability:
The world's rubbish dump: a garbage tip that stretches from Hawaii to Japan - Environment - The Independent
The plastic “trash vortex” that has been reported for the Pacific Ocean – stretching from about 500 nautical miles off the Californian coast, across the northern Pacific, past Hawaii and almost as far as Japan.
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
I have seen some more recent information related to “biodegradable” plastics:
Degradable Plastic
Oxo-Biodegradable Plastic is truly Green | EcoSafe Degradable Plastics
According to those “product descriptions”:
Quote:
“The length of time it takes for the plastic to degrade totally can be “programmed” at the time of manufacture and can be as little as a few months or as much as a few years.
It will also be consumed by bacteria and fungi after the additive has reduced the molecular structure to a level that permits micro-organisms access to the carbon and hydrogen within. The material has then ceased to be a plastic and has become a food source. This type of degradable plastic can therefore be properly described as fully "biodegradable".
Biodegradable plastic have the same properties as conventional plastic products. It is water and air tight, can be printed on, can be used together with food products, is transparent and compares in strength too.”
It seems that they use different amounts of some "additive" or inhibitor depending on the expected consumer life-cycle of the plastic, so that the micro-organisms would not degrade the material before it is finished being used. However, what would be interesting is whether these programmed times are "calibrated" for any particular climate; for example, there have been problems with the earlier technologies which did not cater for areas of higher humidity, and when exported to such areas for use as a "green" technology they started to degrade too early.
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
Am happy to see anti plastics campaign gaining momentum around the world.
You may want to view and use a presentation made by me on the same topic and which has gained good momentum around the world.
The link to the same is Ramjee's Learning: Say No To Plastics
also I've uploaded it as video file on you tube:YouTube - Say No To Plastics from where you could get the file linked to or downloaded and uploaded on your site.
If you wish to embed it on your site please do that using the following url code http://www.youtube.com/v/bF7LgTL6rGU&hl=en
Thank you.
With kind regards,
ramjee
Beyond labels: Identifying the value of bioplastics
The International Herald Tribune, July 7, 2008
Biodegradable plastic products offer the possibility of relieving consumers of guilt and manufacturers of the responsibilities associated with growing landfills and garbage-choked oceans. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, only 6.9 percent of plastics were recycled in the United States in 2006, partly because many plastics are composites of different materials and are hard to recycle. In addition, consumers have recently become more aware of how many products are oil-based, said Steve Davies, marketing director of NatureWorks, a company that makes a bioplastic from plants. With oil prices up sharply, ''it's now obvious to just about everybody that our overdependence on oil is bad for our environment, bad for our economy.''
The term bioplastics actually has two meanings: sometimes it is used to refer to plastics that contain a percentage of renewable materials; and sometimes to plastics that are both made from renewable materials and are biodegradable. This ambiguity - and the fact that some bioplastics may also contain petroleum-based polymers - can cloud the green pedigree of a product.
Meanwhile, studies show that consumers are also confused about terms like ''renewable'' and ''biodegradable.'' ''Consumers believe that if it's renewable, then it's inherently good and it's inherently biodegradable,'' said Steve Mojo, executive director of the Biodegradable Products Institute, an advocacy group. ''They also believe that biodegradation is a magical process that will make things disappear.'' In fact, biodegradable means susceptible to degradation by microorganisms. But nothing actually breaks down in landfills. Modern landfills are, by design, hermetically sealed tombs for waste. Nor will biodegradable products necessarily break down if tossed on the side of the road or buried in a backyard. A less confusing term is compostable, which means a product that can be returned to the soil in a beneficial manner. ''Compostable tells a consumer what to do with it,'' Mojo said, ''whereas biodegradable doesn't.''
Read Full Article: World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
Efsa issues guidelines for plastic recyclers
Source: http://www.endseuropedaily.com/articles/index.cfm?action=article&ref=25787
The European food safety authority (Efsa) has published guidelines for information that plastics recyclers must submit if they wish to sell recyclate for use in food contact applications. Authorisation of such recycling operations is required under EU rules adopted in March. Contamination fears have hindered reuse of plastics in food contact information. The new authorisation system is intended to ensure that recycled plastics can be used safely as food packaging. See Efsa guidelines, press release and EU regulation on recycled plastics.
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
An interesting "slideshow" on the anti-plastic bags campaign, using some very effective images to put across their message:
PoconoRecord.com: Slideshow: The dangers of plastic bags
(NB: Once in the slideshow use the bar on the right to scroll down to see the next image...)
Related: https://www.xing.com/app/forum?op=showarticles;id=11021177
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
It seems the pressure is on to get supermarkets to get rid of the free plastic bags they give out by the million. I notice that several of the supermarkets are now offering a "bag for life" idea, which means they give you a stronger, less degradable bag, which you get replaced when it fails (presumably these returned bags then get recyled).
The plastic bag is so prevalent around the world that it may take decades to see the end of them. I expect part of the problem is that people don't tend to carry bags around with them, when they do a bit of opportunistic shopping. Perhaps we need to build cotton bags into our clothing, so we can just whip one out when they are needed?
San Francisco (where I live) and some other cities in the US have now banned plastic bags to some extent. Here, for example, grocery stores that sell over a certain amount in revenues cannot offer plastic bags. (They do have paper bags, many of which get doubled-up, but that's another story.) The program is now being expanded to include drugstores as well.
All of the shops now offer relatively cheap reusable bags however, usually selling for about a dollar. My favorite ones can be balled up into a little packet about the size of a fist, which fits easily in my backpack or purse so I use it all the time. Whole Foods sells one made from recycled plastic bottles.
Karl, with respect to your think globally, act locally post, well-said on all points!
The plastic bag is so prevalent around the world that it may take decades to see the end of them. I expect part of the problem is that people don't tend to carry bags around with them, when they do a bit of opportunistic shopping. Perhaps we need to build cotton bags into our clothing, so we can just whip one out when they are needed?
One word "convenience" is why companies and other groups will fight to keep it around..
In other areas like at the library I suggested that the monitor to the computer go to hibernate when not being used which is most of the time, then turn on when either the mouse or keyboard is moved. They told me one word why they won't ever do it "convenience"
Same with demo TV and other electrical stuff from stores that are on all the time for "convenience" of not having to turn it on and off when not in use.
Why are we so hung up on luxury claiming luxury is necessity rather than luxury it is.
By the way I use Cotton tote bags and I have to fight with businesses to NOT give me any bags or napkins. For they have the company logo on it which does not get shown once the food or product is in my own tote.
We can talk till we are blue in the face, The real impact of change is when we take action based on information we have talked about. So lets do more action to create change. :)
Corey, I swear the perception of convenience is going to put me in a mental institution one day. What is so inconvenient about moving a mouse? So inconvenient about changing a power setting ONCE?
Is there an emoticon for banging my head on the wall?
Its not as if they were paying us to advertise their products or services - we already pay THEM money for the purchase, and after that we are expected to give them further advertisement (in exchange for "convenience" in carrying the items home). And later, when the bag is conveniently reused for some other purpose, the free advertising continues even when that use is unrelated to them or their product...
I suppose this is one instance where "business sustainability" and "corporate responsibility" mean two entirely different things :) (http://www.sustainabilityforum.com/forum/sustainabilityblog-org/2421-corporate-responsibility-business-sustainability.html)
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
Plastic bags, really all plastic packaging, should be changed to biodegradable. Some plastics are carcinogenic (PVC) and don't break down for many thousands of years. The six huge gyres of floating plastic pollution in the world's oceans, and the loss of landfills within 10 years are very big and disgusting problems. The twice the size of Texas gyre between California and Hawaii is the worst. Waste is a function of population, and habits. California has converted to mostly 66% more per capita trash producing people (Mexicans, from 1995 research) from invasion and over-immigration in the past 25 years, and this is where most of the trash in that gyre comes from, by wind. Then we have places where, because the government went broke, trash has piled up 4 feet high with narrow paths through it, in Africa. I expect it to happen to California cities, too, as their state government goes further in the red. A portent for world conditions--broke governments and overflowing waste of all kinds, leading to a higher disease rate. Biodegradable packaging will help, some.
:confused:
Unless I am misreading this statement, it appears you are suggesting that the "trash vortex" in the Pacific has been caused (or worsened) by Mexican immigrants in California. That idea seems improbable and illogical, since the Pacific coastline is shared by both the Northern part of California (which is currently part of the USA) and the Southern part of California (which is still part of Mexico).
So, are you seriously suggesting that there is something about the immigration process that causes them to generate more plastic wastes upon the crossing of an artificial boundary line? Or is it that they are simply more conscientious about waste disposal practices when in Mexico?
If you are seriously alleging that the "trash vortex" is caused by Mexicans along the US Pacific coast (and not along the Mexico Pacific coast), you will need to explain why (and how) this happens exactly. Is there an underwater wall that divides the northern and southern coastal environment? That would be the only rational explanation for how plastic waste from Mexico does not enter the Pacific "trash vortex".
What about the rest of the US east coast or even the Canadian Pacific - does none of the garbage come from there, or is it also subject to the bizarre form of oceanographic currents and circulation patterns that divide the Mexican-Californian nearshore waters from the US-Californian nearshore waters? Such a phenomenon would have far reaching consequences beyond the dispersal and distribution plastic trash in the marine ecosystem (e.g., for biological population dynamics...).
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
The Pacific(plastic bags, mostly) trash gyre twice as big as Texas, one of at least six in the world, goes from near the California Coastline, Northern Baja, and north to northern California. About 100 miles from the coast west and southwest to within 300 miles of Hawaii. Some has traveled from other places in the Pacific, some from illegal dumping.
Like I said, >>>it is a function of overpopulation and people's habits.>>> The 1995 study of trash production in >>>"Trash: the Looming Crisis", listed Mexicans as producing 66% more trash per capita than Americans(actual data). It is easily verified by visiting their enclaves.
The article on the plastic trash floating in the gyres stated that most came from the nearest coastline by wind. The overpopulation of California isn't caused by historic Americans, but by legal and illegal invasion from Mexico(just by the math). Most of the liberal whites, who are now the minority, are conscientious about their trash and recycle. The major costs to the California government are from illegal and legal Mexican invaders allowed and pandered to (feloniously) by the liberals(and many "conservatives", the law is Sec8USC1324). Both groups don't actually see the massive gyre of trash they have contributed a great deal to, and most of the whites(and some immigrants, and others) care enough to not just throw trash in the street. The major amount of trash is basically foreign made(by the math), and much that does go to dumps, also gets blown by the heavy winds(the light plastic bags especially).
Yes, indeed, Mexicans are, >on average,< pigs. Over-breeding(4.4 TFR in 24 years) and 80 IQ(data from "the Bell Curve"), at that, >on average>. Certainly not a positive help to overpopulation, trash, and the reduce, reuse, recycle, go solar environmental movement, or planetary sustainablity. If the truth hurts, too bad, but that is a major source of the plastic bags blowing into the ocean.
Plastic bags are just one small part of the problem but, removing them, symbolises what can be achieved by people power.
Bio bags are not recommended by my local authority, by all accounts, it can corrupt the recycling plastics mix, and it can't be put into amenity composting, it screws-up their shredding machines? Sounds a bit feeble but, that's the feedback I get. Also has been suggested to me that having packaging made totally from a suitable plastic, is actually the way to go. 'If' all these were returned to our recyclers, it would make perfect sense. In the real world though, I'm not sure perhaps, only a % would return.
Packaged products need to be hygienic, robust, and attractive (buy me). Now that sustainability is being seen as the way forward, recyclability is being added to this list, broadly speaking though, this is a relatively new design imperative/vision.
It's also true to say that, some corporations use the whole sustainability thing, as a cynical “Green Wash”. But, when one considers that perhaps as much as 90%+ of packaging isn't easily kerbside recyclable, and that the packaging industry is immensely powerful, with turnover to match. It's hardly surprising that it's a very difficult juggernaut to move from it's determined course.
But, move it must and, it knows it.
Being a pragmatic individual, I saw this problem about three years ago and, decided to do something about it. I was also tired of being encouraged to mess about with ill-thought-through packaging for our many recycling bins. It's just unreasonable and defies logic.
So, I built PullApart:
PullApart® Packaging Survey, Graded for Easy Kerbside recycling. First Page(Area Selector):
It demonstrates graphically, how poor our packaging is for kerbside recycling and offers local people colour coded information as to the breaking down of packaging for our many bins. It's also about material choices, recycling awareness and how packaging now delivers bad value for consumer £££.
For a local website, I receive a considerable number of visitors, professionals and the public alike, from home and abroad. It's probably one of the most advanced (free), kerbside recycling systems in the world (other peoples words, not mine).
It places the environment and consumers first.
What's now needed is; good rubbish.
However, at times, I'm frustrated at the slow pace of packaging change but, re above, hardly surprising. On the bright side though; retailers are now printing “sorry” on packaging for “none recyclable!” The organisation responsible for packaging design, recommendations, seems to have finally woken-up to the significance of these recycling and sustainability issues. Also the industry has flattened in the use of plastics, a lot of effort has recently gone into quantity of plastic/package reduction for a growing market.
Personally I say; councils please take the best advice available, try and be consistent with other council areas, and speak with one UK voice. Manufactures please listen to the recyclers, they know what material are of most value. Make your packaging of these materials only, and use sparingly, where absolutely necessary. Display plastic recycling codes/numbers loudly, don't be shy, sometimes the plastic is different from that stated on the box! Develop designs that require no/minimal consumer water/energy use. Plastics; use only low number, no colour added, with paper labels, that's consistent with most/all council areas. Don't stick labels on fruit, or plastic string bag them. In multi pack products, use only cardboard retainers/trays, and please don't be tempted to add superfluous plastic wrap or cardboard boxes and sleeves.
I also think that, in time, there will be a local product kerbside recycling standard. If your product doesn't meet this, it can not be sold here!
All this will not happen if people remain silent and do nothing (constructive), so, well done to all those plastic bag people, for demonstrating to the rest of us - what can be achieved, when the public's imagination is fired-up.
Does that label help in solving or mitigating the problem? :headscratch:
:computer:
* XING Profile
* Sustainable Land Use & Impact Assessment
Does that label help in solving or mitigating the problem? :headscratch:
Sorry about the delay Karl, I'm still having finger troubles with the forum's controls :confused:
I'll get there in the end, hopefully.
My cynical head tells me that it doesn't make a jot of difference but, being kind, it's probably indicative of some shift in perspective by this vast industry.
It just could be a minor throw-away gesture and/or cheap “green wash” pitch. But, I think that it's certainly better than an arrogant, no response, apology at all, which was the case three years ago. And I do believe that 'they' think that 'they' are producing 'some', inappropriate packaging, causing consumers 'some' hassle, perhaps through confused kerbside recycling, with each council area on a different agenda. From their perspective this is also a mess.
But, it seems to me that it's a mess, that we as consumers, as always, are picking up the tab for, as this juggernaut - thunders on.
It's really not so difficult to rationalise major chunks of this problem, a great deal could be achieved with little effort/cost, it's all about material choices and a willingness to change. Also, people need to stop defending their own dysfunctional part of this dysfunctional problem, and start viewing it from a near complete vision as possible. Placing (rightfully), the environment and consumers in joint first position afterall, all rest we pay for, in more ways than one.
We really have no other choice, the old world has gone!