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:

Photo courtesy of 350.org

On Sunday, 10-10-10, people in all corners of the world joined together for a Global Work Party to support the grassroots movement known as 350. Thousands of participants in 188 countries worked on more than 7,347 projects to raise awareness about, and take steps toward solving, climate change. By building community gardens to fortify local food systems and planting trees to offset CO2 emissions, to installing solar panels in the Namibian desert, project organizers hoped to send a clear message to world political leaders: “If we can get to work, so can you.”

Scientists and climate experts say that 350 parts per million is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in our atmosphere; the number currently hovers around 392 ppm, so it’s become a matter of both reducing emissions to keep the number from creeping upward, and changing behaviors to reduce the amount.

It’s a tall order, no doubt, that requires an overhaul of not only our lifestyles, but our political policies, business practices, and everything in between.

A Little Less Talk, A Lot More Action

It’s not just about 350. Reducing carbon emissions and fighting climate change are at the forefront of a worldwide dialogue, and it’s a long conversation. Add to the docket the related problems of the energy crisis, waste management, petro-laden conventional farming methods, the dwindling supply of fresh water, and the discussion could go on forever.

While having a clear understanding of the issues at hand is important, there is more than a lot of work to do to affect change on the large scale. Let’s hope the Global Work Party and similar events will inspire people and governments across the globe to get moving, and make these activities a part of everyday life. But where do we even begin, and how can the average person make a difference?

Getting to 350

Image courtesy of ENSO Bottles

The most sweeping changes must be mandated at the federal and international levels; policy and environmental impact go hand in hand, so a logical first step is to keep up with the issue and be vocal about it. Tell local and state representatives, congressmen and women, and the President how critical the issue is, then get to work at home, at work, and in your community.

Many of us are already working to reduce our impacts, and efforts like bringing reusable shopping bags to the grocery store, opting for the to-go mug instead of a paper cup, and even driving a hybrid car are a great start. But there are other overlooked steps we can take to further minimize our impacts, and make an even bigger difference.

Reduce environmental impacts at home and in the workplace by:

• Examining daily habits, including consumption, energy, and waste. Track patterns for one month.We often don’t realize how much we are consuming, and how much goes to waste in a typical month-long period of day-to-day living.

• Consuming less. Buy only what you need, share when you have extra, and use less water and electricity. You’ll save money, and reduce the amount of carbon dioxide your household contributes to the atmosphere.

• Investing in alternative, clean energy to power your home. The upfront cost of technologies like solar panels is coming down, and many states offer tax credits and rebates to help offset the initial investment.

• Understanding that all labels are not created equally. Currently, the onus is on the consumer to know what they’re buying. Just because a product claims to be eco-friendly that it really is; research, and substantiate green claims.

• Changing the way we look at waste. Whether we recycle or not, all waste eventually ends up in the landfill, and can take thousands of years to degrade–if ever. It’s important to look at the inevitable last phase of the cycle, and factor it in to consumer decision-making. For example, biodegradable packaging, like ENSO Bottles, is a good option because it can be recycled along with other plastics, and completely breaks down in the landfill, often in less than a year’s time.

Paying it Forward

Photo courtesy of 350.org

Get involved with grassroots efforts already underway, like 350.org and other local causes. Once we’ve taken steps in our own lives, raising awareness and educating others is the only way to affect change on a large scale. For our kids, families, neighbors and our friends, set the example, and inspire others to take steps toward healthier living, and a healthier planet.

Share this:

Oxo biodegradable plastic fragments into small pieces animals mistake for food

Consumers have gotten somewhat familiar with what can or cannot be recycled. But few consumers understand what oxo biodegradable plastic is or the impact that it has on the environment.

Oxo Biodegradable Plastic (OBD) is a polyolefin plastic – a type of transparent plastic often with an oily or waxy feel to it – that’s had small catalytic amounts of metal salts and/or heavy metals added to it.

According to the Oxo-Biodegradable Plastics Association, “until the plastic has degraded, it has the same strength, impermeability, printability and other characteristics of normal plastic.”

This statement, however, is misleading. The nature of oxo biodegradable plastic is that it begins to break down almost from the point of its manufacture. This is what gives it a limited shelf life. Manufacturers have tried to combat this by adding anti-oxygen components to the plastic. This, however, weakens the polymer and ends up contaminating the recycling stream. Also these salts and metals are inorganic materials and, because they don’t break down, will remain in the soil or environment long after the material itself breaks down.

This type of plastic poses a real hazard to the environment.  Its components break down in fragments, small pieces that are often mistaken by animals for food. There’s no real scientific evidence that small microbes are breaking the plastic down to its natural elements.

ENSO bottles won't contaminiate the recycling stream or the environment

ENSO plastic bottles are more environmentally-friendly.

ENSO’s additive is comprised of organic renewable sources. The additive doesn’t react to anything in the plastic, allowing it to retain its original strength, rather than breaking down when exposed to light or oxygen as oxo biodegradable plastic does.

ENSO bottles only begin to break down when placed in a dirt or some other microbial environment that allows microbes to colonize on the plastic, utilizing it as a food source  then beginning the process of breaking it down to its basic components of biogas and biomass. ENSO bottles can also safely be integrated into the recycling stream without any worries of contaminating it.

The difference between plastics can be both simple and profound. The type you use can either have a negative impact on the environment such as with oxo biodegradable plastic or a more neutral impact as with ENSO bottles.

Which one you choose makes a difference.

Share this:

So, if you are taking an active part to keep our world green, let us hear about it.

Share this:

It’s an interesting look at the systems that make up the human body, how they interact with one another and how those systems can be disrupted by outside forces.  In the case of our bodies, those outside forces are the foods we eat, water we drink, chemicals we’re exposed to, etc.  It got me to thinking about how much our systems are like our planet’s systems.

For example it’s a fairly complex system and interrelationships of systems that produce the oxygen we need to survive.  Our bodies and the Earth are designed with systems that we use to heal ourselves.  The earth, like our bodies will gradually lose the ability to heal itself if exposed to more harmful substances then its systems handle.   Any system if exposed to enough harmful substances will begin to weaken and ultimately fail.  When the systems in our bodies weaken and don’t perform as designed they can turn on us becoming our worst health problems.

The same thing can be said with our earth, it has multiple systems many of which it can use to heal itself.  And when earth’s systems weaken they too can wreck havoc on the earth and its inhabitants.   Our oceans have the capability to scrub CO2 from our atmosphere but there is a limit to the amount of CO2 the ocean can absorb.  Our rain forests and plants use CO2 for their survival and in turn provide us with oxygen, we are experiencing less oxygen in our atmosphere due to vast areas of rain forests being cleared farm land.  Like the systems in our bodies, earth’s systems are also interrelated.  If one system begins to fail or can’t handle all the problems placed upon it, other systems are affected.  When systems as big as the earth are changed the affects can be catastrophic for humans.  If enough systems begin to fail the host dies.  We are just a small part of our planet’s systems but our influence on earth’s systems is growing.

We have come to a point in our history that the decisions and actions of humankind are having a huge impact the health of our planet.  Our decisions and the way we live is going to have an impact on future of humans.   The question is…will it be for good?  Like some diseases that grow slowly in our bodies, our actions may take thousands of years before the full impact on our environment is known.

I believe that it’s not hopeless, we can do things that will have a positive impact on earth’s systems and   I believe the most positive thing we can do, is for manufacturers to design products and packaging to be “Cradle to Cradle.”  Cradle to cradle products are environmentally friendly, can be reused, can be recycled and when the life of the product is over, it can be returned to the earth as a harmless substance.

WE need to commit to leaving the earth a better place then we found it…a good motto to live by.

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

Share this:

There is a better design for a landfill which is called a “Bioreactor landfill.” Bioreactor landfills are designed to enhance biodegradation and create biogases (Also called landfill gases). LFG’s are being used to produce clean energy. Additionally, Bioreactor landfills have a longer life then the traditional dry tomb site and that means we need less land for garbage disposal.

If we are going to help our environment and leave our planet a healthier place for future generations we’re going to have to start thinking “Cradle to Cradle” with every product that is produced. We as consumers need to demand that manufacturers take stewardship for the products they make. They should be willing to take back packaging which by some accounts is more than 25 percent of all garbage. They should be willing to take back products for recycling or disposal once a product is no longer serviceable. Manufacturers who take stewardship for their products will be more inclined to design products which are better for our environment.

Fixing our environmental problems isn’t going to be easy, but I believe we humans have the capacity to do the right thing. Being environmentally friendly doesn’t mean we have to do without. Being environmentally friendly can mean we start thinking about the products we use and their impact on our planet.

Max

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:

Nestlé expecting sustainability-savvy suppliers

By Mike Verespej

CHICAGO (Nov. 21, 4:15 p.m. ET) — There are a lot of things companies can do that create an appearance of being green and sustainable. But Kim Jeffery wants to do things that actually enhance sustainability and the environment.

“Are you trying to look good, or are you trying to do good?” asked the president and chief executive officer of Nestlé Waters North America, in a Nov. 6 interview during Sustain ’08 in Chicago.

“If going for energy credits is all you are going to do and you are not going to work on your supply chain, it doesn’t pass the sniff test,” he said.

“I want to be known as a company that does good. We are going to hold ourselves to be self-accountable in a very transparent way” with goals and milestones, many of which were outlined in the company’s corporate citizenship report in October.

A company must first get its own house in order and develop ways to “use less of something” to save money, resources and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and its carbon footprint, said Jeffery. But he added that a company then must “go outside its own four walls.”

For its part, Nestlé Waters reduced the size of its half-liter PET water bottle 15 percent this year, and will reduce it another 20 percent in 2009, cutting its weight to 9.8 grams. Using less material results in energy savings and reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

Nestlé Waters is working with its suppliers to achieve additional sustainability gains.“We are just getting to the point where people will have to have their house in order to do business with us,” said Jeffery. “We are going to be pushing more on our suppliers to figure some of this stuff out. By 2013, we plan to reduce carbon intensity by 20 percent across our full value chain — from the production of plastic resin to delivery of products to our customers.”

Jeffery also wants to ensure Nestlé makes the right sustainability and environmental decisions on the use of recycled content in its bottles and the use of bioplastics as a feedstock.

Nestlé has set a goal of producing a bottle with up to 25 percent recycled PET by 2013, and developing and producing a “next-generation bot- tle” manufactured entirely from recycled materials or renewable materials by 2020, Jeffery said.

But Jeffery has some concerns about both of those concepts. “It sounds good to have recycled content,” said Jeffery. “But it takes more energy to use recycled PET and it may be more expensive than using virgin resin because of processing costs. So it is not particularly attractive” from an economic standpoint.

Jeffery contends that right now it makes more sense, economically, to use recycled PET for carpets and strapping. “We should operate on a hierarchical approach and use [recycled PET] in the most efficient uses first,” he said. “So unless you have used recycled PET for other products first, using [it] for bottles may not be the best use of that material.”

Similarly, he said, while polylactic acid is being used to make water bottles, at this point, “it uses a lot more material and it is used once” because of the paucity of industrial composting facilities in the U.S. In addition, Jeffery said PLA “can’t be commingled with other plastics that are recycled [because] it will disrupt the float-sink process to sort plastics and because it looks identical to PET containers.”

“Is using bioplastics the best solution?” questioned Jeffery. “The better solution may be getting better at PET recycling, but that is also the harder solution.” The Sustain ’08 conference was organized by Plastics News and the Washington-based Society of the Plastics Industry Inc.

************************************************************

Here’s a great source for plastics/going geen/ information.

Max

http://www.plasticsnews.com.

Share this:

Are you thinking green?  Worried that it will “hurt” your bottom line?

If you’re in the plastics business you might want to think about putting the idea in your business model.    Attached is an interesting reprint of a talk that you should read… and start thinking about how your business might PROFIT from “Going GREEN.”

Get green before it gets you, speaker advises

By Mike Verespej

CHICAGO (Nov. 20, 1:50 p.m. ET) — When it comes to doing something with sustainability and climate change, “No is not an option.”

That was the message that keynote speaker Andrew Winston, founder of Winston Eco-Strategies in Riverside, Conn., delivered at Sustain 08 in Chicago.

“It is not just an add-on to your job. It is your job,” said Winston, who urged plastics industry executives to make green thinking and sustainability a core part of their strategy instead of thinking of them as just costs.

“Apply a green lens to your business. This is happening. This is real. It is time to start moving,” he said.

The Nov. 5-7 conference was organized jointly by Plastics News and the Society of the Plastics Industry Inc.

“You have to be the brain trust on this,” he said. “You don’t want someone else to do it for you. You need to be the solution and help your customers find ways to change their carbon footprint up and down the value chain. You have to compete or you will fall behind.”

Winston told attendees to think broadly and creatively about sustainability and climate-change issues. Companies should heed the new drivers in the marketplace and changing attitudes among customers and communities, he said.

“Governments are now regulating things down to the chemical level,” said Winston, pointing to European Union regulations;, state take-back laws and bans in the United States; the Western Climate Initiative; and the growing debate on cap-and-trade programs for carbon emissions.

There is no federal action so far on climate change, but that is likely to change after President-elect Barack Obama takes office. In a taped message to a bipartisan conference on climate change Nov. 18, Obama said, “Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating climate change. Now is the time to confront this challenge once and for all.”

In addition, retailers are forcing changes, Winston said.

He noted that Wal-Mart Stores Inc. now wants a “sustainability footprint” for every product it sells and is setting standards, such as how much lead toys can contain, that are “stricter than the federal government.”

“Compliance now is compliance with your customer,” he said, pointing out how Wal-Mart told detergent makers to eliminate water from their products destined for its stores and to sell concentrates — a standard that reduced the amount of resin in such containers by 95 million pounds annually and the water in those detergents by 450 million gallons.

In addition, he said, consumers are deselecting products with a perceived, even if unproven, risk to health or the environment. For example, Winston predicts the plastic bag “will be gone globally in its present form” in 10 years.

“Feelings are facts,” Winston stressed. “It may be easier to design something out than to argue with [consumers]. You should not seek out applications where the [consumer] use is about two minutes.”

He noted there are other, more valuable opportunities that can be found to replace revenue from plastic bags.

“Instead of fighting losing battles, plastics companies should be asking themselves, “What can we do to reduce the carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions globally, ” said Winston. To do that well, they need to look at more than just their own products and manufacturing operations to the full value chain.

“You need to look downstream to your customers and upstream to your suppliers” to determine where the biggest impact can occur, said Winston. “You don’t want to make the wrong investments” and spend money in one area when dollars spent elsewhere can have a greater effect.

It also means thinking creatively, he said.

For example:

* Procter & Gamble Co. determined that developing a cold-water detergent would have the biggest impact on the carbon footprint of its laundry products, so it developed Tide Coldwater.

* UPS developed delivery routes for its drivers that eliminated left turns, reducing wasteful idling and cutting fuel use by 3 million gallons annually.

* Wal-Mart cut energy use in the dairy sections of its stores by 70 percent by putting doors on its refrigerated aisles. It also is using a redesigned, square plastic milk container at some of its Sam’s Club stores. The container needs only half the storage space used previously, eliminates crates and cuts transportation costs by using 60 percent fewer trucks.

“You have to learn how to make products using a lot less stuff,” Winston said, noting global competition for limited resources. China is building the equivalent of 30 midtown Manhattans each year, he said, and 30 people in India move to cities each minute, creating the equivalent of 400-500 new cities in India annually.

“The challenge for us is to provide solutions,” he said. “Five years ago, the companies leading the sustainability charge were not U.S. companies. They were in Europe because they have a much more strict regulatory environment in the European Union. They are much more aggressive about the precautionary principle and ahead of us in managing waste.”

But the payoff can be the difference between making and losing money, as well as marketplace survival. A case in point: the money DuPont Co. saved from waste reduction and keeping energy costs flat from 2003-07 equaled its net profit in that time frame, said Winston.

Share this: