Zero waste myths: should we really be avoiding plastic?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

First of all it also must be said that “zero waste” is a myth itself. There is no such thing as “zero waste”. It will never be possible. Having said that, however, does not mean that we should not reduce waste, especially in way of packaging, and waste that occurs also through planned obsolescence.

Images of ocean plastic pollution are causing so much revulsion that many people are switching to some supposedly more “environmentally friendly” materials to try to reduce their impact. But does this actually work? How much greener are the alternatives?

Also, there is plastic and then there is plastic. Single-use plastic, in my opinion, is a bad idea. We should, with the exception of may be a few things, avoid any kind of single use altogether. Other plastics, for plastic products intended to last for a long time, are a different story and here the material, quite often, is the appropriate one, unless we return to (more) natural materials.

Plastic vs Paper: It is easy to see how paper bags are seen as and appear to be more environmentally-friendly than plastic ones. They are made from trees, which grow in nature, and can biodegrade, in fact compost, when they are finished with.

Research, however, consistently finds that paper bags have a far higher carbon footprint than plastic ones, because the process of making them uses so much energy, and not just energy but also lots of water. Trees may be in harmony with nature, but the process for mashing them up into paper is not.

True, paper bags can decompose, but it is not exactly zero waste to use so much energy producing something that is not designed to last. And if you are careful to reuse and recycle a plastic bag, it should be possible to prevent it ending up as litter or in the ocean, whereas every single paper bag will have made a hefty contribution to global warming, regardless of where it ends up. The best option, of course, is to avoid the problem of single-use waste altogether by using reusable bags.

If you are a business and you want to offer something to customers who have forgotten their own bags, consider doing as Arjuna Wholefoods in Cambridge does, which is to invite people to drop off their old plastic bags to be reused. Alternatively, bags made from recycled materials is the next best thing. Just please don't hand out new single-use bags for free, as this does not reflect how much it costs the Earth to produce them.

As for the idea that paper is “more recyclable” than plastic, this has now been repeated so many times, that it has become almost fact. While it is true that paper can be recycled, the quality of it degrades in the process. Plastic can also be recycled, although some types of plastic are easier to recycle than others, and packaging that mixes plastic with other materials can be more tricky to recycle (single-use coffee cups are the most well-known example of this), but also here, in the main, the quality deteriorates and to make good new plastic from recyclables a great deal of virgin polymer needs to be added to the mix. So, there is no such thing – generally – as 100% recycled plastic, with a few exceptions, maybe. .

So, when it comes to recyclability, there is not that much to be gained from choosing paper-based products over plastic ones, and anyway, it is actually a big mistake to be overly focused on how recyclable something is, when most of the impacts of the stuff we consume is in the process of producing it, rather than what happens to it at the end of its life. This is true regardless of the material, but in terms of paper, we need to factor in how much carbon it takes to produce it.

The best way to lower impacts from packaging waste is to reduce the amount of packaging that we buy, and where possible, buy products packaged in recycled materials. Though it has also be said that often we, as consumers, do have little choice as to the amount of packaging of any kind, be this paper, cardboard (often laminated with foil), or plastic except by voting with our wallet and not buying over-packaged products. This can be a difficult undertaking, however,

Plastic vs Metal: Stainless steel tins and bottles are something of a zero waste style statement. There is no doubt that they look good, but the process of producing metals like stainless steel and aluminium releases scary amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. This means that reusables made from metal will need to avoid a lot of waste before they save more resources than it took to produce them.

The choice is really up to each of us: Option one would be stainless steel (or other) products, which are very high impact to produce, but highly durable, or option two would be plastic bottles and containers, which are more environmentally-friendly to produce, but tend to wear out somewhat more quickly, so that you may end up using more of them in the end. This is essentially a judgment call, based on your personal routines and how much waste you expect to avoid by using your reusable bottle and containers.

Single-use cups vs reusable cups: Several studies have looked into how many times a reusable cup needs to be used before it saves more resources than it took to produce. As they are carried out by academics, there is no simple answer – it depends on which type of reusable cup you are using, which type of single-use cup you are trying avoid, and which environmental impact you are considering – but it seems to range from 5-16 times. So, if you would otherwise expect to use at least 17 single-use cups, consider investing in a reusable one. For top marks, see if you can pick one up in a charity shop or other kind of secondhand store.

Glass jars vs plastic packaging: The jury certainly appears to be out on this one still. Glass tends to lose points compared to plastic because of the high carbon emissions involved in manufacturing and transporting it (think of how much more glass weighs) but can redeem itself by being more efficient to recycle than certain types of plastic. Glass jars, for instance, if we want to be thrifty in the way our grandparents and their parents were, also have a great reuse potential for us, whether as storage jars for all kinds of things or as drinking vessels, etc. And the reuse thought should always come well before any thought of recyclability.

If you can and will reuse or refill jars, the that is your best option. Otherwise, there is, apparently, no clear justification for always choosing glass jars over plastic.

Plastic bags vs cotton or other textile bags: Its a bit of a mystery why cotton has gained a reputation for being an environmentally friendly material. It takes 20,000 liters of water to make 1kg of cotton, and much of it is sourced from countries where water is extremely scarce. Worldwide, cotton production causes pollution and biodiversity loss. But there are alternatives to cotton and cotton bags, such as hessian, aka burlap, canvas, and others, including, though it is oil-based to some extent, woven and non-woven polyester bags.

When it comes to plastic there are – if I may put it this way – good plastics and bad plastics and I am not putting so-called bio-degradable into the category of good necessarily either. Also, as far as plastic water bottles, the reusable kind I mean here, are concerned not all leach chemicals. It all depends on the plastic. The Dutch designed (and produced?) “de Dopper”, as an example, does not, and is also of a rather ingenious design.

The biggest problem is plastic packaging and the over-packaging of products, often products that do not need to be packaged in such a way at all. That is where the changes have to happen and we must force industry to make the change.

© 2018

Packaging Waste

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The greatest scourge, as far as waste is concerned and the amount of it, is packaging waste and much of it, because of the way that it is made – the packaging, not the waste – is also not recyclable.

Simple East German packaging (in this case for a pocketknife)

Industry is over-packaging almost everything that is put onto the market for us to buy and often it is a question of why in the mind of any normal and rational thinking person.

One of my favorite example are the replacement brushes for the Braun electric toothbrush. Each brush is individually encased in a plastic bubble with paper backing and the two or four little brushes are then encased in a hard plastic bubble that it is huge in comparison to the two or four small brushes. Waste of resources for starters and then, well, waste.

The packages are that size, so I have been told, so that – one – people, shoppers, can see them and – two – so they cannot be stolen easily.

Now, if I want and need those replacement brushes I buy them regardless of packaging size yelling at me “I am here” and a simple cardboard box would do equally well, as it was done some fifty or so years ago. And we can especially learn as regards to packaging and reduction of waste of same from the minimal packaging that was used in places such as the Soviet Union and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany).

There have been, over the years, attempts by makers of some products to encourage reuse of the packaging, noticeable some mustards, Nutella and also Classico pasta sauces, in that the jars were made as reusable drinking glasses or, as in the case of Classico sauces where real Atlas Mason canning jars are used, which can be reused for canning by just buying the replacement rims and lids. And, to some extent this is still happening today. It is with the Classico sauces and also some mustards.

Good packaging design, however, could contribute greatly to a reduction in packaging waste generated if it would be – the packaging, not the waste – be conceived with a second use in mind and this reuse be obvious.

Another design alternative is where, as has been done with a media center some time back, the packaging becomes the stand for it or, as in the case of a recently unveiled new computer printer where the packaging becomes the case. It can be done and is not really rocket science.

Designing packaging with reuse and second use in mind (and instructions as to how to reuse the packaging incorporated) is not – or should not be – difficult as can be seen with regards to what has been done before.

On the other hand, as far as glass bottles (and glass jars) are concerned commercial reuse, not recycling by breaking up the containers, with a deposit scheme should be reintroduced and no, it does not, as is being claimed time and again by “our” politicians unwilling to do it, require pilot projects and lengthy studies. It does work and has worked before and yes, even in Britain. We only have not done it for decades now.

However, glass bottles and glass jars are but a small section of packaging waste. A far greater amount is made up by cardboard and plastic and here is where reuse design of packaging especially comes in and into its own.

Also here it can be done and some manufacturers of sweets already make mention on their “tins”, whether they be of actual tin or of plastic, that the packaging can be reused and how.

If designers could, together with their clients in industry, create containers and other packaging that “automatically” have an obvious second use our problem with all that stuff going into landfill might get solved somewhat.

This will, however, impact on other sales and the economy if people having packaging that they can reuse for something that they otherwise would have to buy and this may upset the “we have to grow the economy” brigade. But so be it! It is the Planet that is more important that the perpetual growth economy which is not sustainable and will destroy us all if we allow it to.

© 2013

Freeplay Encore Player... from a different angle

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

No, it's not about taking a photo of it from a different perspective. I am going to be talking here about the sustainability angle.

While this Freeplay radio, MP3 player/recorder, cell phone charger and task/work light is made in China on other levels its sustainability scores are very high indeed.

Aside from the fact that the unit is powered by rechargeable batteries which are charged via solar or crank (and also via 12 V DC external source) the packaging is not wasteful at all.

With the exception of a few small plastic bags to keep small items safe while in the box prior to arriving with the customer, and a small bubble wrap “pouch” for the external solar panel, all is compostable.

The box itself is plain brown cardboard with minimal black print and the protection for the unit itself is achieved not, as is so often the case with electronic goods, by means of expanded polystyrene but by moulded cardboard material similar to that of cardboard egg cartons, and thus both can be thrown simply onto a compost heap for Nature to have its way with them. On the other hand they could also be recycled with no effort.

Not having seen the packaging of Freeplay Energy's other products the way the Encore Player is packaged is, surely, the way to go and should be an example to other producers that glossy coated print and other fancy stuff is not necessary.

Another great score for the Freeplay Encore Player and I believe this should become an industry standard.

© 2013

Britain recycles two-thirds of all packaging

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

According to report released recently by the British government the United Kingdom exceeded E.U. recycling targets last year, after nearly two thirds of all packaging produced was recycled.

The data from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Environment Agency showed that last year British businesses "contributed to the recovery" of more than seven million tonnes of packaging, of which 6.6 million tonnes were recycled.

It also calculated that recycling packaging materials resulted in around 8.9 million tonnes of CO2 emissions being avoided, equivalent to that generated by one-and-a-half million British homes each year.

"This is a really significant achievement and shows that we are making good progress on the recycling of packaging," said environment minister Jane Kennedy. "Businesses which handle packaging have a vital role to play in reducing the amount of waste we're sending to landfill and I'm pleased to see they're doing their bit."

Environment Agency chief executive Dr Paul Leinster hailed the performance as "the best year yet for the amount of packaging waste recycled", but warned that while good progress was being made the Environment Agency was still ready to take legal action against firms who failed to comply with recycling regulations.

The government's recycling targets were handed down by E.U. regulators which set minimum limits for recycling 55 per cent and recovering 60 per cent of packaging across the year.

DEFRA said Britain also met all its specific targets for different types of packaging, including exceeding the 60 per cent recycling target for paper by recycling almost 80 per cent of paper packaging. Targets for glass, metal and wood were also met, although the U.K. only just reached the minimal 22.5 per cent target for plastic packaging, recycling 23.7 per cent of the waste collected.

However, despite improvements in recycling rates some environmental groups remain convinced that not enough is being done to curb packaging levels in the first place.

A recent study from the Local Government Association found that on average 40 per cent of the packaging in a typical shopping basket could not be recycled, prompting calls from councils for the government to crackdown on excess packaging.

The councils plea for greater government action was echoed by Friends of the Earth's Michael Warhurst, who said the government should "force supermarkets to cut out waste by toughening up targets for recyclable packaging."

I am sorry to say that I just cannot believe those figures knowing that Britain has been lagging behind and still is lagging behind in recycling and such to countries such as Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands.

Will such greenwashing wash? No. Period. And it should never be attempted. But it is being tried again and again by our government(s) and also industry. Though I best not start on that or I would be digressing.

Now, why am I not buying this? Because I live in the UK and also work for the local authorities and hence I know that too much of the packaging on the market, in Britain especially, cannot be recycled because often it is a laminate of various types of materials. What this country needs is a branch of TerraCycle.

TerraCycle, with its upcycling program would be ideal to reduce a lot of that non-recyclable waste that is packaging in Britain. I mean please someone tell me what we are doing in Britain with, say, Capri Sun pouches and such? Nothing, that's what and whoever tries to tell us that they are recycling them is telling porkies.

© 2009
<>