A shopper experience study done by The Integer Group and M/A/R/C Research has revealed some anticipated results. The results of the study showed that 1 in four shoppers are willing to pay more for a product if they feel they are contributing to helping the environment. As far as age goes, 18 -34 year old shoppers take more time to embrace purchases that benefit the environment than shoppers between the ages of 35-44 and 55-64. This is great news for those wanting to find a earth friendly alternative to traditional plastics like ENSO biodegradable plastics.
It’s often assumed that college aged shoppers are likely to jump on the trend of environmentally friendly products but the study shows they are not willing to pay more to do so. This is not so surprising considering most college students are on a budget, however even college students will fork out the money for products they must have. College aged shoppers do not stay in their niche for long and this is something to consider. Going green can expand your market; if your product has typically been targeted to that age group…going green can expand your market to the older consumers who are more likely to pay a premium for green. This is something to consider when marketing your made over product.
Products that give not only supply a functional need but an emotional benefit make a product feel worthwhile to consumers. It’s these types of products that grow return customers because there is an emotional attachment or an emotional need for them to purchase the product. Figuring out how to position your product, and market that emotional factor is unique to every product but once you find it, you will succeed. This can directly apply to those companies who target their products to younger, say college aged shoppers. If you are wanting to go green and be successful your product needs to give consumers especially college aged kids on a budget, that emotional benefit so that they will feel they can spend the premium.

http://www.beverageworld.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=39183:… 7/20/2011

Share this:

It’s no secret that ENSO Plastics’ biodegradable plastic technology brings the most desirable premium feature to any plastic product on the market wanting to go green. Interested? Intrigued? If you are attending PACK EXPO in Vegas get excited, because ENSO Plastics will be there and making noise in a way that you have not seen before. ENSO is bring the Plastic monster to PACK EXPO!

If you haven’t heard of PACK EXPO you’re missing out because PACK is North America’s largest packaging and processing show. With the opportunity to see 1600 world class suppliers, explore cutting edge technologies for all vertical markets , and discover a brand new array of products, why would you miss out on expanding your network and broadening your packaging knowledge?!

PACK EXPO 2011 | September 26–28, 2011
Las Vegas Convention Center | Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
http://www.packexpo.com/pelv2011/public/enter.aspx

Whether you are just attending, sporting a booth, or if we have intrigued you enough to make last minute plans to attend, I hope to see you in Vegas! Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like me to visit your booth or would like to personally meet and engage an ENSO Business Development professional.

Share this:

Cheese makes a tasty addition to any meal, but did you ever guess it could be used for packaging?

Researchers say that a biodegradable plastic made from cheese byproducts could reduce the need for synthetic packaging and keep useful materials out of the landfill.

The bioplastic made from whey protein is the result of the three-year WheyLayer project, a European Commission-funded research and development project in Spain’s Catalonia region that aims to solve a common packaging woe.

In the food industry, oxidation of oils, fats and other components can lead to unpleasant colors and flavors. So, keeping oxygen out of packaged food is essential.

SEE: 5 Absurdly Over-Packaged Foods

Plastics like PE (polyethylene) and PP (polypropylene) are excellent moisture-blockers, but to keep out oxygen, they must be coated with expensive synthetic polymers.

Most of these polymers – such as EVOH (ethylene vinyl alcohol polymer) and PVDC (polyvinylidene chloride polymer) – are petroleum-based and extremely difficult to reuse, as it is almost impossible to separate each layer for individual recycling.

Whey, the milk protein byproduct of cheese production, provides similar oxygen-blocking properties, but it’s much cheaper and more environmentally friendly.

The new packaging – developed by Barcelona-based research company IRIS – replaces synthetics with whey protein-coated plastic fibers, which could save loads of money and make packaging more readily recyclable.

After packaging is used, whey protein can be chemically or enzymatically removed, and underlying plastic can be easily recycled or reused to make new packaging.

RECYCLING MYSTERY: Bioplastics

In addition to saving money and raw materials, the new application could also keep millions of tons of whey out of European landfills. Each year, European cheese factories produce 50 million tons of whey. Some of it is reused as food additives, but almost 40 percent is thrown away.

Discarded whey collected from cheese producers can be filtered and dried to extract the pure whey protein, which can be used in several thin layers to create a plastic film for use in food packaging.

While the packaging is subject to patent applications, researchers expect it to appear in consumer products within a year. The bioplastic is expected to be used for cosmetics packaging first, and food packaging applications will follow.

The technology will likely be used in the European market at first. But many companies from around the globe showed interest in the packaging when researchers took it to the Interpack international trade fair for packaging and processes back in May.

Share this:

Plastic: It’s what’s for dinner

Conservation of mass often applies to college-level physics problems: in a closed system, mass can neither be created nor destroyed. In the case of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch – a gigantic section of the ocean littered with an unusually high amount of man-made trash — the system is clearly not closed. Yet conservation of mass is almost precisely what we see, both in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans: more than 20 years of waste plastic studies in these oceans have demonstrated that the garbage patches are neither growing in size nor shrinking. They have conserved their mass. While plastic production rates have skyrocketed, as well as human consumption of plastic-contained goods, the plastic masses in these oceanic gyres (very large circular current patterns spanning thousands of miles) are incontrovertibly the same now as they were in the 1980s.

Interesting. If the rate at which plastic enters the patch has increased while the total mass of the patch has remained constant, then there must have been a corresponding increase in the rate at which plastic leaves the patch, to balance. Some scientists have hypothesized that the depths of the oceans act as plastic “sinks” from which waste never returns. If this were true, huge collections of settled ocean plastic debris should be established across the world. But for all their efforts, scientists have not been able to locate such sinks. With no evidence to support the ocean sink hypothesis, researchers have been looking for alternative answers for decades. What they have recently found may surprise you.

In a recent article appearing in Nature News, marine chemist Tracy Mincer and colleagues at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) reported the observation of oceanic bacteria actively consuming bits of plastic recovered from ocean gyres. At a glance, their result are not so shocking. After all, we have long known that microbial communities can (slowly) degrade plastic in landfills, over many years. However, it had been previously thought that the ocean gyres were too nutrient-poor to sustain substantial bacterial colonies. Therefore, the group’s findings help shed light on what has been a rather intriguing puzzle to scientists.

Of course, all scientists know that by answering one question, hundreds more arise. Most importantly, currently no one knows what chemical compounds microbes degrade plastic into. They could be biologically benign compounds, or they could be toxic. Concentrated breakdown of plastic into toxic compounds in ocean gyre masses, or landfills, could spell eventual disaster for local ecological communities. Through biological magnification, toxins can be stored inside animals’ bodies. As prey is consumed at higher and higher levels up the food web, the largest predators end up with the highest concentrations of toxins – think the bald eagle and DDT. Then multiply the issue by the size of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which is swirling away inside the largest ecosystem on the planet.

Whatever scientists determine about the toxicity of the microbial degradation products of plastic, the rest of the conserved mass of floating plastic will still be there. If we continue our current plastic consumption as societies, then billions of micron-sized particles of human trash will continue to float in our oceans for decades or centuries, just flinking along while fish, whales, and seabirds consume them for dinner. Of course, we can also clearly see that preventative measures would have a profound effect here: if we actively reduce the mass of plastic entering the system while microbial degradation activity remains high, then the total mass of plastic in the oceanic gyres will also decrease. In other words, your actions today directly contribute to the health of our oceans in the future.

I urge you to think about consumption habits that you can change, like carrying a reusable water bottle instead of purchasing bottled water. I never go anywhere without my half-liter Nalgene. Also, you will be happy to know that the I Heart Tap Water campaign is well underway here at UC Berkeley. You can find campus water bottle filling stations on a Google map here.

It’s your choice. You can either let ocean microbes struggle to clean up our oceans for us, or you can actively prevent the contamination of our water with plastic debris by choosing to reduce your plastic consumption and recycling as much as possible.

Share this:

But the Mesa, Ariz., man’s venture has run into opposition from a large and unexpected source: the $400 billion recycling industry, which fears that making plastic bottles biodegradable will reduce the stream of plastic refuse used to make everything from carpet to clothing to new bottles. In addition, the industry fears that changing the makeup of plastic bottles could make it more difficult to recycle them.

With plastic-bottle sales already slowing and only a small amount being recycled, the industry is meeting threats to its profits head-on, actively campaigning against attempts by companies like Clark’s to make bottles biodegradable.

Billions of plastic bottles, which take millions of barrels of oil to produce, appear on supermarket shelves every year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Only about 28% of bottles manufactured in the U.S. end up being recycled, the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers said.

The other 72% wind up in landfills or as litter. Environmentalists point to a phenomenon known as the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch,” a floating island of discarded plastic debris that is twice the size of Texas and held together by swirling ocean currents, as an example of the proliferation of plastic pollution.

Clark, who said he is trying to leave “a legacy that we’ve done something positive in the environment,” was inspired to quit his job as a communications engineer to form a team of microbiologists and polymer chemists to develop his bottle technology three years ago.

“Bottles are a big issue. It’s talked about, and it’s pretty visible,” Clark said.

He launched his start-up, Enso Bottles, in 2008 and says he has come up with a truly biodegradable and recyclable polyethylene terephthalate, or PET, plastic bottle.

PET is used to make a wide range of products, particularly packaging containers for consumer goods, such as water and soda bottles. Traditional plastic PET bottles can take hundreds of years to break into smaller pieces, but those pieces never actually decompose.

Clark’s company produces an additive used in the plastic-manufacturing process and says on its website that independent testing data show bottles start to biodegrade in as little as 250 days in a controlled environment or as long as five years in the elements. In addition, Clark’s data show that the additive doesn’t diminish the quality or effectiveness of the plastic, he says.

Clark said that technologies allowing plastics to biodegrade have been around for several decades but had not been applied to PET bottles.

Recycling-industry experts have concerns about Enso’s biodegradable efforts, saying they are not convinced the technology works, but they also worry that if it does, it will damage their business.

Dennis Sabourin of the National Association for PET Container Resources said the association is not in favor of anything that disrupts that recycled-product stream.

“We want to make sure it does not affect the raw material,” Sabourin said. “Does it affect the service life of products that are being made today with (PET bottles)?”

More than a year ago, the association sent out a news release to all PET manufacturers asking them to refrain from using biodegradable additives. The experts say biodegradable products are more difficult and costly to recycle than PET bottles.

David Cornell of the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers said Enso has tried to convince them that the biodegradable additive will not hurt their business, but the recycling industry still fears it poses a threat.

“So far, we haven’t seen that it does degrade or is not hostile to recycling. If it doesn’t degrade, then who wants it? If it does degrade, what does it do to recycling?”

Cornell credits Enso for trying to solve a problem and said that, unlike some other companies, Enso has tried to work with the industry and communicate about product tests.

“They’re working on it. I will give them credit,” Cornell said.

by Angelique Soenarie
The Arizona Republic

View article on USA Today
View article on Arizona Republic

Share this:

Photo by eco-wisdom

Last week, we weighed in on the Paper vs. Plastic Debate, and examined the pros and cons of each where waste, energy, and resources are concerned. This week, we’ll take a look at how the contenders fare when it comes to pollution and recycling.

Pondering Pollution

Myth #3: Plastic is man-made and chemical-based, so it’s better to choose paper.

When it comes to pollution, plastic has become the chosen whipping boy, but in fact, craft paper production requires huge amounts of chemicals, that end up in our rivers each year, and are released into the air contributing to air pollution. Plastic production generates about 60% fewer greenhouse gases than turning wood pulp into paper bags.

Let’s consider PLA. It’s been touted as a panacea for the plastic problem, because it’s compostable, and comes from a renewable resource. But upon closer examination, unless the corn crop is grown organically, it still requires fossil fuel-based fertilizers and chemicals that cause other environmental problems and does not reduce our dependency on oil. In fact, one study found that the production of corn- and other bio-based plastics actually use more fossil fuels than a standard PET plastic. PLA isn’t as eco-friendly as it seems.

When it comes to waste and pollution, the frontrunner so far is the bag made from biodegradable plastic.

Reconsidering Recycling

Myth #4: It’s easier to recycle paper, so it’s the more sustainable choice.

Photo by greennature.com

In reality, it is more efficient to recycle plastic, requiring about 91% less energy pound for pound than paper, but the sad truth is that the recycling track record for either bag isn’t good. Only about 10-15% of paper bags, and just 1-3% of plastic bags are recycled; although paper bags have a higher recycle rate than plastic, every new paper bag is made from virgin pulp instead of recycled fibers for better strength, while many plastic bags are made from once-recycled plastic polymers.

PLA and other bio-plastics get another strike when it comes to recyclability. They cannot be recycled with regular plastics, but so often are, creating an expensive problem of having to sort them from the rest of the plastics.

Plastics that are biodegradable in the landfill and under natural conditions, like ENSO’s products, are recyclable with conventional plastics, and do not contaminate the recycling stream.

The Bottom Line

Choosing paper or plastic is still a tough decision because biodegradable plastics are not yet mainstream. The biodegradable disposable bag is the best solution because it can be recycled if that’s an option, or thrown into the landfill where it will biodegrade in a relatively short amount of time. In addition, the industry is moving toward renewable sources, like algae, for plastic production, improving biodegradable plastics even further. For now, bring your reusable bags, or choose a plastic bag and reuse it or recycle it, and keep up with latest developments on the biodegradable plastics front.

Share this:

Plastic garbage washed up on an island off Baja, California

Our world’s oceans are home to five growing plastic gyres – vortexes of swirling ocean currents filled with degrading plastic that pose a serious threat to marine life.

Captain Charles Moore, noted author and oceanographer, has spent years conducting ocean and coastal samplings documenting plastic fragments along the 40,000 miles of the North Pacific Ocean. Captain Moore was the first to discover the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, otherwise known as the Pacific Gyre, which lies in the northern Pacific near Hawaii. This is the largest of the known gyres – roughly 12,400 square miles in size and growing – and filled with swirling fragmented colorful plastic debris.

Plastic in the ocean takes roughly 600 years to degrade fully. Marine life like sharks, dolphins, whales and numerous species of fish mistake these colorful remnants of our castoff trash as food, often suffering starvation due to the trash being indigestible. Oddly, it’s only the colored plastic they go for, though the clear plastic is also hazardous. Plastic water bottles are regularly found tangled in ocean coral, littering the ocean floor.

Can you find the sand on Plastic Beach (Kamilo Beach, Hawaii)?

Plastic garbage doesn’t just stay in the ocean. Storms periodically break gyres up, pushing waves of trash onto beaches around the globe. Hawaii’s Kamilo Beach is frequently known as Plastic Beach due to its continually being overrun with plastic trash brought in by the ocean’s waves.

This plastic comes in all sizes and forms – discarded toothbrushes, combs, cups and, of course, plastic water bottles. Plastic trash discarded in Asia and Europe makes its way to the ocean, gets caught in the Indian Ocean gyre, then gets pushed back again to litter the once pristine shoreline.

We use 2 million plastic beverage bottles every 5 minutes in the U.S.

“No one is (looking) at it as a global phenomena and at the root causes (to) try to make it stop,” said Cecilia Nord, Vice President – Floor Care Sustainability and Environmental Affairs of Swedish-based Electrolux.

“We need to make it stop,” she said.

Marine life die from starvation after ingesting plastic garbage from the sea

“Only we humans make waste that Nature can’t digest,” says Moore.

ENSO Bottles realizes that what’s needed is a shift in thinking as well as action.  By creating their innovative biodegradable plastic bottle with the ENSO additive, these PET-based bottles break down, rather than contribute to the world’s plastic pollution. It’s part of ENSO’s commitment “to act as environmental stewards.”

With plastic trash increasing the world over, and the devastating effect this has on marine life, it’s crucial for consumers to become responsible stewards who take on recycling to a level not seen before is needed.

Individuals doing their part can make the difference.

Share this:

Photo by Shira Golding

Corn-based and other plant-derived plastics are all the rage these days, and are marketed as the ideal way to treat our plastic addiction. They’re made from a renewable resource, lessening our dependency on fossil fuels, and they are compostable, reducing the amount of plastic waste lingering in our landfills—what could be bad about that?

Not so fast. The issue is a bit more complex than it seems on the surface, and it turns out that these plastics still have big environmental impacts, just in different ways.

Cool, My Cutlery is Compostable!

But wait. It won’t break down in my home compost pile, or in a landfill, you say? Plant-based, or Polylactic Acid Polyesters (PLA), plastics require the near-perfect conditions found in a commercial composting facility: consistent high temperatures, ideal humidity, etc. in order to break down. Very few consumers have access to these facilities; even fewer are lucky enough to have curbside composting pickup. This means that the majority of the plastics will end up in the landfill, where contrary to popular belief, they do not biodegrade.

Recycling Rewind

Well, then I can recycle it right? Wrong. PLAs are not recyclable and contaminate the recycling stream. Removing non-recyclables from the batch is a costly and time-consuming affair, and many of these costs are passed on to the consumer. Even worse, some facilities don’t bother to sort contaminated bins, and the whole load ends up in the landfill.

Oil Free, Guilt Free

But, they’re made from a renewable resource. At least I can feel good about that! Or can you? One of the strongest sellingpoints for many consumers lies in the fact that PLAs are plant-based rather than petroleum-based, and that’s a valid argument. But, consider how the majority of crops sourced to manufacture the PLA polymer are grown. Crops like corn, beets, potatoes, and other starchy plants are grown on a huge scale, are doused with tons of petro-chemicals, i.e. fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides in order to maximize production.

Processing the plant material to make the polymer also requires energy from fossil fuels. So, unless crops grown organically, the processing plant is using clean energy from the sun or wind, the process to make PLA relies pretty heavily on petroleum.

Wanted: Farmland For Food Production

But that’s not all. Perhaps the biggest, and most controversial, impact of growing plastics is the fact that it is taking up perfectly good farmland to grow food that is not being used…for food. Scientists predict that we haven’t seen anything yet when it comes to the global food shortage, so growing plants that could be used to feed people but using them to make packaging and fuel (that’s another argument altogether) doesn’t seem like a sustainable solution.

As we continue to lose arable lands to commercial development to support the burgeoning population, cut down the rainforest to grow corn and graze cattle, it makes less and less sense to use farmland to grow plastic. Some might argue that much of our cropland is used to cultivate livestock feed to grow animals that only a small percentage of the population eats, so it’s already an inefficient system, and this is a valid point. But, it doesn’t mean that we should add insult to injury and use food as a source for plastic, it only means that the whole system needs an overhaul.

Biodegradable Plastics to the Rescue!

ENSO Bottles

So what’s an eco-conscious consumer to do? It’s not very practical (or even possible at this point) to ditch plastic altogether, so what’s the alternative?

Enter biodegradable plastics. Products made with ENSO’s leading edge technology render any conventional plastic biodegradable in a landfill setting, where most plastic ends up.

ENSO’s biodegradable bottles and other products offer a sustainable solution to the growing plastic waste problem. They disappear under natural conditions, thanks to the work of microbes that quickly and completely break them down, leaving behind only organic compounds and new soil. They’re also recyclable. To move away from dependency on petroleum to source plastic, ENSO is always working with an eye toward the future, to consider other sources like algae, and improve existing technology.

At the end of the day, the take home lesson is this: Know what you are buying, and understand the impacts of the full process of how it was made, and what happens after it’s disposed of, because green products aren’t always what they’re cracked up to be.

Share this:

Marine life can mistake pieces of plastic for food.

Imagine you’re sailing the waters between Hawaii and California. The sun is at your back, the wind is in your hair, and there’s a giant pool of plastic garbage larger than the state of Texas in front of you.

Meet the Great Pacific Garbage Patch — an enormous mess of plastic and other litter swirling around in a system of rotating ocean currents called the North Pacific Gyre. Not only is the Patch incredibly damaging to the environment, but it could also be permanent unless we reform plastic production around the globe.

See, the world produces around 300 billion pounds of plastic every year, and the Clean Air Council reports that Americans throw away 2.5 million plastic bottles every hour. Only a fraction of all this plastic is recycled, with the majority ending up in landfills. Sadly, some is also dumped illegally into our oceans by various civilian, military, cruise and merchant ships, and by other means.

The problem with traditional plastics in oceans is the same problem with traditional plastics in landfills — they could last there for hundreds or thousands of years. The sun, saltwater, currents and other elements aren’t enough to break down objects like PET plastic water bottles; the plastic will only disintegrate into smaller and smaller pieces that never fully decompose into biomass and bio-gases. Marine life can mistake these small pieces of plastic for food, eat them and become poisoned. And even if the plastic isn’t ingested, it still leaches toxic chemicals that, once released, are very harmful and impossible to collect and remove.

A traditional PET plastic bottle could last for hundreds or thousands of years in the ocean.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is 90 percent plastic, making it the ultimate example of the negative impact plastic has on our oceans. And it and other areas like it (yes, there are more) will continue to endanger plant and animal life unless manufacturers begin producing plastics that can biodegrade into safer components.

One thing that could prove crucial to this battle is the presence of oceanic microbes like bacteria and fungi. Bottle developer ENSO Bottles has designed a form of PET plastic with organic compounds in its molecular structure — nutrients that the microbes find irresistible. These microorganisms eat away at the plastic, breaking it down into non-harmful matter in a process that typically lasts between one and five years. A traditional PET plastic bottle, on the other hand, could potentially take hundreds or thousands of years.

Where our oceans are concerned, this new biodegradable PET plastic could mean the difference between a giant floating patch of plastic the size of Texas … and cleaner oceans for generations yet to come. Which version of the future will you choose to support?

For more information about the technology ENSO Bottles uses, visit ensobottles.com.

To learn more about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and the effort to eradicate it, visit tedxgreatpacificgarbagepatch.com.

Share this:

Starch from corn is used to create PLA plastic.

When you hear the word “bioplastics,” you might imagine a bottle or container that easily breaks down into soil and other natural matter soon after it’s tossed — but that’s not necessarily the case.

Bioplastics are made with ingredients from renewable sources, such as potatoes and corn starch (also called PLA plastics), rather than petroleum or natural gas, and therefore, you would expect them to be biodegradable. Surprisingly, this is not always true, and there are many drawbacks to bioplastics you may not be aware of.

First, bioplastics can’t be recycled with traditional polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastics because they contaminate the PET plastic stream. Wouldn’t it be terrible if all the plastic you’ve so diligently placed in your recycle bin for the past month winds up in a landfill because some “bioplastic” got mixed up in it? And sorting the different plastics is an option, but that takes time, accuracy and a hefty financial commitment. Second, landfill environments rarely provide a sufficient amount of heat, light and oxygen necessary for bioplastic breakdown, so bioplastics that end up there don’t decompose and instead last for hundreds, or possibly thousands, of years.

Bioplastics that are marketed as being “biodegradable” can cause a lot of confusion. The misunderstanding lies in the area between what the material is capable of (the extent and rate at which it biodegrades) and what specific conditions must be present in order for it to do so. For example, a corn starch-based plastic certainly has elements that will break down, but it needs the application of extremely high heat for this to occur, something that likely won’t be present in a landfill, nor in your compost heap in the backyard. These plastics will have to be accepted by one of the few commercial composting facilities, where all the decomposition conditions can be controlled, in order for them to successfully biodegrade.

Traditional PET and PLA bottles could last for thousands of years in a landfill.

Other drawbacks to bioplastics include abnormalities from a manufacturing and distributing standpoint. PLA plastics just don’t “behave” quite the same way that traditional plastics do. For example, bottles, utensils and other objects made of PLA plastic can only resist heat up to 110 degrees Fahrenheit (with certain resins, possibly up to 200 degrees) before their strength is compromised and they begin to melt. Additionally, bioplastics generally have weaker oxygen barriers and decreased impact resistance. All these factors can negatively impact shelf life, ease of distribution and contact with hot foods and liquids.

It would seem as though consumers have to choose either PLA plastics, which will melt, reduce product shelf life, contaminate recycling and last for centuries in a landfill, or traditional PET plastics, which work great but will last for just as long. So what do you do?

An effective solution to this problem must take the needs of manufacturers and distributors, as well as realistic landfill conditions and the processes of recycling facilities, into consideration. ENSO Bottles manufactures plastic bottles that have been specifically designed to meet those challenges. During the plastic’s creation, an additive is included which inserts organic compounds into the polymer. The result is a plastic with the same properties as traditional PET plastic (with regards to strength, heat resistance and the oxygen barrier) that can be recycled right along with PET plastic, but can also decompose in a typical anaerobic landfill environment. What’s the key? Microbes.

Check with the recycling facility to see what it does and does not accept.

With those organic compounds added into the molecular structure of the plastic, ENSO Bottles become very attractive food sources to the microbes present in landfills, and the plastic is “eaten away,” in a sense. As the microbes seek out the nutrients provided in the ENSO additive, they break down all parts of the polymer chain, including the plastic, into non-harmful bio-gases and bio-mass in a process that typically lasts between one and five years — a far shorter timeframe than the potentially hundreds or thousands of years it takes a traditional PET bottle to decompose.

So the next time you start to toss a bioplastic water bottle or packaging into a trash bin, consider where it’s probably headed: a landfill, where it will likely never experience the ideal conditions it requires to biodegrade. Contact your local collection facility instead to learn whether or not it accepts that category of plastic (referred to as #7), and better yet, consider your alternatives, such as the biodegradable ENSO Bottles.

Share this:

PLA is ONLY a industrial compostable material and if used for applications such as bottles, toys, misc packaging, etc have no chance of EVER making it into a disposal environment that is needed in order to mechanically break down the plastic.  When these products make it into the customary disposal methods of recycling or landfills they will wreak havoc on recycling and last forever in landfills.

Our mission is to address and help solve the plastic pollution issue in the world, this legislation will do nothing to move us closer to that goal.  It will hinder innovation and prevent consumers from knowing what is in the packaging material of the products they are purchasing.  We believe a better approach would be to encourage innovation, stop green-washing by requiring any claims to be backed up by scientific 3^rd party testing data using internationally recognized standards board’s testing and require brands to use definitions based on the tests performed.  We believe consumers will understand what it means when companies claim biodegradable, compostable or degradable when using these terms.

On July 26 we joined a group of like minded companies and people to create the Environmental Plastic Coalition to work towards stopping this kind of legislation.  We need your help to let the California legislators know that big business our voices do matter.  We are creators of own reality, making choices that support our reality not ones that disarm it.

Please…. Send an email no later than FRIDAY – August 5^th to: EPC@ensobottles.com with the following:  (all messages will be provided to the coalition lobbyist)

The Assembly Members need to hear from consumers on the following:

1. That you recognize the issue of plastic pollution and that plastic which are biodegradable will help solve the problem we now face.
2. Your thoughts about a system that prevents companies from promoting true green initiatives, especially when science backs up any claims.
3. How you feel about a bill that would ban and fine companies that are paving the way for a more ‘plastic less’ society.
4. Any other thoughts about the issue.

Please end with your name, the city you live in and your phone number.

We thank you for taking the time to write, solving the plastic pollution issue is a very important issue and one in which we are all involved with regardless of whether we like it or not.  We need to work together in order to solve the situation that was created from the past decades.  Doing your part along with people just like you we can and will make a difference and provide a better, cleaner world for the future.

Sincerely,

Danny Clark

President

ENSO Bottles

Share this:

Take for instance plastics. Plastics are a naturally occurring material, and have been used for millions of years. In natural plastics, the material is biodegradable meaning that once it’s use is complete, the biodegradable plastic returns naturally to the earth and a new cycle can begin. Now we have come along and created artificial plastic; a material we have modified from a natural product to create strength, protection and durability. We stand in awe at the amazing benefits of this material, while we turn a blind eye to the mountains of plastic waste piling up around us. To address this, in the past we would burn, bury or try to force artificial degradation with starch and oxo-degradable additives. This left us with toxic fumes and /or toxic particles and metals left in the environment.

There is a better way: ENSO Bottles with EcoPure, take the wisdom of nature and the creativity of man to create a truce in this battle, a collaboration of all sides. Plastics that have the durability and strength man created, coupled with the biodegradation that nature intended.  ENSO bottles facilitate natural biodegradation through the same natural microbial digestion that breaks down dead trees in a forest. Once biodegraded, ENSO biodegradable plastics leave the same natural products as that tree in the forest. Naturall biodegradable plastics a true innovation, showing that by working with nature as opposed to fighting against it, amazing things can be created.

Teresa Clark
ENSO Bottles, LLC
866-936-3676
Web: www.ensobottles.com

Share this:

There have been some in the PLA (corn plastics) industry who use quotes from Dr. Rathje’s book to support an argument that composting biodegradable plastics is better for the environment than landfilling them.  Their argument takes some of the data out on context by looking at the hundred year old “poor” environmental designs of landfills.  The printing of “RUBBISH!” was in 1991 with most data provided in the book ending in 1988.  Most of the data in the book is over 20 years old.  As with many things from our past we eventually discover better and more environmentally sound solutions.  Yes, it is absolutely true that traditional dry-tomb landfilling is not the best solution for dealing with our garbage.  As a society we have made significant improvements to the methods we use for disposing of garbage.  Since the writing of the book we have implemented hundreds of recycling programs as well as the EPA requiring methane from the anaerobic biodegradation process happening in landfills to be captured and burned or used to create clean energy.  The EPA in the last 5 years has also changed laws with recirculating leachate through a landfill so to accelerate biodegradation by up to 10x.

Dr. Rathje does briefly address composting as a solution to some of our organic garbage.  He points out that composting is expensive  and the issues is that most compost becomes tainted with hazardous elements, such as the heavy metals used in inks and pigments as well as yard waste containing traces of pesticides and herbicides.  Another issue with composting biodegradable plastics is that the corn used in fermenting the lactic acid is Genetically Modified corn, because of this, if PLA plastics are composted that compost cannot be labeled “organic”.  For many composting facilities this would severely impact the marketability of the compost material.

What Dr. William Rathje, and those using the book to bash biodegradable plastics neglect to mention is that over the last few years we have made significant improvements to the way we handle our trash.  One of these improvements is called landfill bioreactors, which is not discussed at all in the book.  These types of landfills are designed in the beginning to better control the anaerobic biodegradation process by circulating the leachate back through the garbage.  This not only helps to accelerate anaerobic biodegradation by adding moisture but it has also been discovered to improve the quality of the leachate.  These bioreactors are built with collection systems for collecting not only the leachate but also the methane.  So from the beginning of the bioreactor landfill life the methane is being captured and typically used to create clean inexpensive energy.  In fact, energy from methane captured from landfills is the least expensive form of “green” energy we can create today.  It is less costly than solar, wind, or hydro.  In April 2004, the EPA finalized a rule permitting the transformation of landfills into bioreactors.  Landfill bioreactors produce MUCH more gas than traditional landfills, about 10 times the amount and are at concentrations of up to 50%.  Bioreactors with their advanced LFG collection systems are able to collect more than 90% of the methane gasses.

Another benefit of bioreactor landfills is that the life of the landfill is extended by as much as 25 years.  This means that the same physical space of land that would traditionally have been filled up and capped can now be used for another 25 years longer before needing additional bioreactor landfill cells.  There is some discussion that a bioreactor landfill could later on be dug up to use the soil for fertilizer and then reuse the landfill space again, but this is yet to be a reality.

The key to utilizing anaerobic biodegradation with organic garbage is that it creates a greater value proposition over composting.  With composting, the organic material is artificially processed to accelerate aerobic biodegradation resulting in compost material which makes a great rich soil.  What is off gassed is CO2 which is released into the atmosphere as a GHG.  Some would argue that this would be a zero sum game but it really depends on the organic material and the life cycle of that material.

Markets for compost material are very specific to the geographical location of that composting facility.  In many cases today, there are not enough markets available to utilize the compost material and a lot of it ends up as soil cover in landfills.  With utilizing anaerobic biodegradation either in anaerobic digesters or bioreactor landfills we can capture the methane and use it for cleans energy.  Once the methane is burned to create that energy the CH4 is converted into CO2 which now we are right back to where we were with composting but now we created clean energy which reduces our reliance on fossil fuels.  The soil that remains from anaerobic biodegradation can also be used as fertilizer.  The additional value proposition of creating CH4 vs. CO2 has much more value and results in a better environmental solution.

According to the EPA as of April 2009, there are approximately 480 operational LFG energy projects in the United States. In addition, about 130 projects are currently under construction or are exploring development options and opportunities. These are landfills that convert the LFG to clean, inexpensive energy.  New Jersey’s Governor Jon S. Corzine’s Energy Master Plan touts landfill methane gas as one of the key renewable energy sources that the state hopes will combine to supply 30 percent of New Jersey’s electricity by 2020. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/new-jersey-landfills-capt_n_138076.html

There is much we can learn about our past, present and how to better design our future from both a social and environmental perspective.  It is in the nature of archaeology to look at the past but it is in the best interest for the human race to stay focused on the future.

References:

By Danny Clark
ENSO Bottles, LLC

Share this:

Did you know that Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) plastic does not float? PET is used to make the bottles you use everyday for; soda, water, juice, etc., and beverage containers are just the tip of the iceberg. Almost everything we drink from is made from PET plastic, and it doesn’t float.

What does this mean?

If you Google “Pacific Ocean Gyre” and look at some of the documentary from various informational programs, you will see the staggering issue we have created in our oceans. The really bad news is that the stuff they are reporting on is a different kind of plastic that is used for the lids and caps of these beverage drinks, as well as more industrial applications, and is the stuff that floats. So basically we are aware of the problem on the surface literally.

Greenpeace reports that 70% of our plastic that ends up in the ocean is found at the bottom of our ocean. We have no idea what the effect will be on our deep ocean ecosystem. We know that when fish and other marine life mistake the plastic for food, they are being injured and dying as a direct result of plastic pollution. Plastic has become an integral part of our lives and is probably going to stay around. We need to develop plastics that are more earth friendly, that won’t harm our oceans or future generations.

ENSO bottles provide such a solution in that they are truly biodegradable through microbial digestion. If ENSO bottles end up in the ocean, landfills or litter, they will become food for microbes found iand biodegrade into biogases and humus. Our goal is to have plastic that doesn’t become part of our food chain. If all plastics were biodegradable then plastics that end up in oceans or any other microbial environment would biodegrade by microbial activity.

We all need to do more if we want to make a difference. We need to change the way we humans look at our environment, we need to recycle more, and purchase responsibly. There is a growing interest in becoming better stewards of our planet. I believe we will come together to help, not hurt our environment. It’s for all of our future well being, besides, who wants to order a plastic sandwich instead of a fish sandwich?

By Del Andrus

Share this:

Biodegradable Plastics, what does it mean and why is there so much confusion about something that sounds so simple to define?  The ASTM defines biodegradable plastics as “a degradable plastic in which the degradation results from the action of naturally-occurring micro-organisms such as bacteria, fungi, and algae”.   Sounds simple enough, so why all the confusion?   The confusion really comes from two aspects; 1) confusion between using the term degradable vs. biodegradable and 2) the loose use of the word biodegradable.

On the market today there is really three categories of plastics that biodegrade or degrade.  Those technologies are PLA (Polylatic Acid), Oxo-degradable and a new technology called EcoPure.  So now that we know what is out on the market how do we know which ones biodegrade vs. degrade?

PLA is a bioplastic made from starch; specifically it is being manufactured by starches from genetically modified corn.  This technology and supporting organizations such as BPI (Biodegradable Products Institute) claim that PLA biodegrades.  However, this claim is confusing because they are using the term “biodegradable” extremely loosely.  PLA is a “compostable plastic” in that it goes through “degradation” to break down not true “biodegradation”.  PLA does not break down or biodegrade in a landfill and will only begin to “degrade” after being exposed to heat (specifically 140° for over a five day period).  This kind of environment can only be found in a commercial composting facility.  We find that many of the articles and organizations who support PLA are greatly contributing to the confusion by not using correct standards based definitions of that technology.  What remains behind once PLA composts is CO2 and with professional composting facilities they are currently not capturing any gases so all gases are released into the atmosphere.

Now let’s move onto Oxo-degradable, as the name implies this technology causes the product to degrade.  This particular technology incorporates the use of an additive that begins to break the plastic chains when exposed to oxygen, heat and moisture.  Although this technology is fairly upfront with the type of degradation taking place the marketing materials suggest that once the pieces of plastic have broken down into small enough fragments that it creates the opportunity for microbes to finish those plastic fragments through biodegradation.  This aspect may be true but it extremely difficult to validate as the plastic fragments must have degraded to the micro level.  There are various reports as to what remains in the soil and air once an Oxo-degradable product has degraded.  This ranges from heavy or low metals, salts, CO2 and CH4; because many of these products will degrade in a landfill the gases of CO2 and CH4 will be captured and burned.

Moving on to the final technology we find Bio-tec Environmental EcoPure.  EcoPure is the technology behind the ENSO Bottle.  This technology also is applied in the form of an additive to existing polymers.  The technology behind EcoPure is that uses organic compounds to open the polymer chain and attractants to stimulate microbial colonization on the plastic.  Because the polymer chain in open the micro organisms can use the carbon chain as a source of food and energy.  Because this is happening at the atomic level what remains is CO2, CH4 and inert humus and because many of these products will degrade in a landfill the gases of CO2 and CH4 will be captured and burned.

So there we have it, an explanation of the differences between biodegradable and degradable.  Now that we know the difference between the two it still leaves the bigger question of which technology and method is better for the environment; biodegradable or degradable?  In order to answer that question would require another blog, however you should always keep in mind that the overall net impact to the environment.  When trying to answer that question keep in mind the following; using food to create plastics, pesticides that effect water, total water consumption, total fossil fuels used in processing, greenhouse gases emitted in processing and breaking down, the benefit of the product, does the biodegradation or degradation create any benefits such as clean energy?

By – Danny Clark

Share this:

Gyres accumulate trash, where with help from the sun, it is turned into a plastic particle soup. Think of it as a bowl of soup the size of Texas.

Most of the plastics we use float. Floating on the surface they are bombarded by the suns rays, eventually breaking down into smaller and smaller pieces. Even as small pieces they continue to float and are often mistaken as food by small fish and other sea creatures. Small fish are part of the food chain they are eaten by large fish and many of those are eaten by humans. Plastic can be passed on to us when we eat fish that have made plastic part of their diet.

An interesting fact about plastics is that not all of them float. For example, PET (Polyethylene terephthalate) the plastic used for water and soft drink bottles doesn’t float. It will float if air is trapped in the bottle, but like other plastics floating on the surface, it will be broken down by the sun. Once the PET container no longer holds air it will sink to the bottom. The caps on most plastic bottles aren’t made of PET plastic they don’t sink. Plastic caps will break down into smaller pieces and become part of the goo building up in our ocean gyres.

It’s important that we find a way to clean up our oceans and keep plastic from entering our waters. We need to develop plastics that biodegrade in our oceans and streams. We need plastics that should they get in our oceans, sink to the bottom, and not leave harmful by products.

by

Max

ENSO Bottles

www.ensobottles.com

Share this:

The other night I was helping my daughter with her math homework. She was frustrated and overwhelmed with the amount of problems and the difficulty level. After several hours of this, she stopped cold in her tracks. “I am not going to do this anymore, this is too hard, there are way too many problems and I don’t even know how to solve them! I might as well just quit.”

This reminds me of the many times I have felt this way myself with environmental issues – Why does everyone litter – Do I use paper, plastic or reusable bags (I forgot my reusable bags again!) – Rain forests disappearing – Ice caps melting – Global warming – Plastic bottles – Driving my car…. The issues can sometimes seem endless and a bit overwhelming if we try to tackle everything. Sometimes I too feel like stomping my feet and giving up.

So, back to the math lesson; what happened? I covered up every math problem except one and we began to work one problem at a time. Even breaking the problems down to the individual components when a problem seemed difficult. About 30 minutes later, the lesson was complete and my eight year old stated “Once I stopped looking at the whole thing, it was easy.”

So let’s all take the advice of an eight year old and stop worrying about every environmental issue out there. Pick one simple thing and make a start – One Step to Success! (I am going to turn off the lights when I leave, how about you?)

Thanks

Teresa M Clark

Share this: