@scotroutes - it's pretty important but I think a harder sell for a lot of people. The best thing is to be vegan, failing that being vegan before 6pm (even if you're eating meat for dinner), failing that being vegetarian and at the bottom of the pile is meat eating. But reducing the amount of meat you eat, and the amount of dairy you consume, will make a big difference if you can come to terms with it in your lifestyle.
so where does meat consumption sit in that list of climate friendly choices?
If the world just stopped eating beef it would make a huge difference. That is to me a very simple solution and not difficult to do but do you see many countries in the world doing so, no didn't think so.
Another one here who's not entirely convinced. That plastic = bad in general, maybe, but not that me personally changing much will, well, change much. I recycle as much as possible and try to limit it but yeah... not convinced.
It's not like I live somewhere where it'll end up in the sea - here in Manchester all the non-recyclable waste is incinerated and generates electricity.
The whole subject is tricky anyway. Also: what does "environmentally friendly" mean? Less pollution & microplastics? Or less greenhouse gas emissions? Sometimes it's one or the other. Wasn't it Morrisons who changed all their bags for paper ones a while ago, and when it was pointed out that they are actually much more energy intensive to make than plastic said something like "yeah we know, but hey that's what customers asked for".
You can't get rid of all plastic anyway. Take cucumbers, which go bad in a couple of days on the shop shelf if not plastic wrapped. Just stop eating them?
Even recycling... I generally recycle soft plastics but it could well be that it's better to bin them. If I bin them, they go 30 miles away and get burnt to generate electricity. If I recycle them, they get shipped around the country and then melted down and made into something else in a very energy intensive process. Either that, or shipped across Europe and then burned for energy... or just dumped somewhere on a Turkish beach. Who knows.
it’s better for that packaging to be plastic than paper or metal – the carbon footprint of plastic is lower throughout its lifecycle.
Do you have a reference for that? (I am asking for information, not saying "link or it didn't happen" )
Smol products
I see these are available in supermarkets now. Before when they were delivered by post they were (in my view) just a virtue signalling product..... as for a true impact everyone would have to use them and then everyone would be getting them delivered in the post*.
Also the detergent capsule concept, is it actually better than a bottle of liquid or (cardboard) box of powder?
*extra deliveries/journeys, packaging etc. compared to supermarket shopping or delivery
@DrJ - this is the most thorough reliable link I could find -
This is also informative and from a good source, but doesn't have figures-
I reached the same conclusion as ossify. Soft plastics and other things that aren't accepted with the plastics collected by the council go in the bin for local incineration to be turned into energy. This (to me) makes more sense than it being shipped to the other side of the world and incinerated of put into landfill. Maybe I'm wrong and our outsourced recycling is actually less harmful than the local option.
Used to recycle it all religiously but seeing the Hugh fearnley wittingstall program showing what happened to it changed my habits.
From an environmental point of view a lower fertility rate and population would be better.
Maybe in time, but lots of countries will have pretty unbalanced populations from mid-century onwards, with a massive increase in older people who use more heating, often live alone in multi occupancy homes, are less mobile so need transport, more care which is expensive and aren't contributing to an economy.
I think you are doing well OP and I applaud your efforts.
as mentioned, if more people took the same stance, the world would be a better place.
so please don’t give up hope. It does make a difference and you are a shining example of what great choices we can all make.
I'm concerned that the "plastics are bad" mantra means there's a simple bit of greenwashing for people who want to make an "eco" claim. The alternatives may not actually be better. Bamboo sounds good - but its been shipped around the world, was it grown somewhere at the expense of wildlife habitat? does its cultivation involve the use of fertilisers, pesticides etc? What's the waste from cutting bamboo to handle shapes rather than moulding plastic with near zero excess? Presumably the bristles are still nylon or similar? does a decomposing bamboo brush actually release loads of bristles into the environment? Presumably they don't go into composting but rather into landfill (where it may actually decompose into methane which is a greenhouse gas?). The problem with plastics was never really the material it was the disposal - both consumer "carelessness" and waste managers "recklessness". Plastic straws kill turtles - but only if they end up in the sea. The vast majority of those straws don't get there from beachgoers.
You can apply the same logic to a lot of plastic - stuff like vegetables wrapped in plastic seems pointless, but someone chose to spend that money so there must be a reason. Possibly because it increases the shelf life - will food waste increase if you simply remove it. Everyone knows plastic bottles are bad right - but glass takes more energy to make it, weighs more (so requires more energy to ship) and is fragile. Perhaps tetrapack style cardboards are better? But they are generally much harder to recycle than plastic bottles. None of it is quite as clear cut as plastic is bad; the public can't/won't evaluate the options which means we fall into a few high profile "campaigns" and some "greenwashing"...
Some countries are facing an incredible drop in birth rate at the moment – South Korea is one of the starker examples. One of the factors that drives birth rate down surprisingly is wealth and the role wealth plays in making everything expensive – housing, eduction, maternity leave and so on, rather than just being able to feed a mouth.
I strayed onto a podcast about this recently. South Korea and Japan both have problematic birth rates, they were not suggesting it was a wealth issue at all. Rather they were saying it was very much a cultural one - whilst many other countries have moved into a society where children outside marriage is not at all uncommon, in those two countries it is very rare for people to have children out of wedlock BUT actually getting married has become less popular. Culturally they still have a society where to a large extent women make a choice of family or career, don't conflate career and wealth. BUT the analysis on that podcast was (if I remember rightly - I was driving and it autoplayed so not actually sure what it was to go and check!) that this wasn't just a "women" issue, there were many men choosing not to get married and accordingly keeping out the parenthood cycle.
My Aldi recycles film and plastics.
I try and recycle as much as I can and although it feels like small fry, it's the collective action if we have lots of us doing it
in Bury we have 4 wheely bins and the black bin goes out every 3rd week, the paper and plastic/glass on the other weeks (garden bin fortnightly, thankful that bury council send an email reminder of which to put out!) - this is better that a weekly bin that would have been the case historically, and we've been part of bury council for 15yrs now.. that adds up especially if you do stretchy plastic at Morrisons
I think it is worth it - the principle to hold is a mental benefit on the whole
And yes, driving less, fewer holidays are massive hits, every bus ride, bike ride is a massive win
My Aldi recycles film and plastics.
Same here... and most (all?) bigger supermarkets do. But it's what they actually do with it is the issue. There isn't someone sitting in the back room weaving new bags out of it!
Generally for the supermarkets, recycle means give it to a third party who "says" they recycle, then forget about it.
Bamboo sounds good
It's clear to me that tighter and stricter rules are needed, especially if something is claimed to be green or eco. Also green/eco/carbon-free/climate friendly gets conflated with healthier/safer. Electric cars are not actually very "green", but are a lot better for people in terms of local air pollution.
No point in doing anything as far too late to worry about it. We are now 100% into dealing with the issues man has caused so that should be the focus, i.e. flooding is now going to be more regular so deal with than rather than trying to stop it raining more by buying an electric car.
It will be far, far cheaper to address the root cause than the effects.
For population control, how about everyone gets a lottery ticket and every month a group of lucky winners get moved on to live in 'paradise' which is this great place that normal people don't get to visit. The randomness of an enforced lottery would help keep population profiles balanced and any regional anomalies could be resolved by 'adjusting the randomness' of tickets in that area. Keep this up until we drop the global population to the required environmentally balanced level.
Of course, I would need an exemption from the lottery, just so I can oversee the fairness of it all.
Failing that let Putin & Trump (or the Chinese, the Koreans or whichever group you assume have big =weapons and a wobbly view of survival) kick off with the big hot bombs and reduce the population significantly in a short time and also reduce the means of production of 'stuff' to rubble. Not sure that promising a nuclear war for environmental purposes will get anyone elected though.
It will be far, far cheaper to address the root cause than the effects.
Yes, but that needs a massive collective effort and political will. Simply not not going to happen anytime soon. In the shorter term people will be displaced and will die from things we can do something about far more easily (but not easily).
Its not an either/or situation, though.
Just to clarify – not saying they shouldn’t exist, just that if their parents wanted to have less environmental impact then they shouldn’t have brought them into existence.
Well I've already told my kids that I'd like c & h for my 80th birthday & if that doesn't do the trick a sea kayak for my 81st..
My job is about the environment and climate change and in answer to the original question, I borrow a slogan from Tesco; "every little helps".
In terms of the big picture, it is rather complex, highlighting the inability of political systems to deal with anything long term. My own view is that we need more climate related catastrophies before the political will is there, but my fear is that those catastrophes could escalate very quickly into full blown global food and water crisises, which will generate a completely different set of political priorities (including war).....
bought the "eco, big pack" of baby bubble bath, only to find that instead of two recyleable plastic bottles, its one, larger, wholly un-recylable tetrapack.
Plastics are not bad. Plastics are great. a group of absoloute miracle materials, light, hard wearing , waterproof, easy to shape into anything you can imagine and cheap too. I just think we (manafacturers, producers, and consumers) dont give nearly enough thought to end of life plan for all our stuff. Is it better to use 10 times more plastic in a bottle, than you would in a card/foil/plastic laminate, if you can recycle it at the end of it life?
It will be far, far cheaper to address the root cause than the effects.
It is far, far too late to be dealing with root cause as the effect has already happened whilst government/countries around the world sat and watched.
Fossil fuel dependence will stop naturally when it runs out but beef eating probably won't. Who do you think is going to make a difference big enough on any continued effects?
This is the "why aren't you out catching real criminals" argument isn't it. It's wooly logic to conclude that we should ignore small stuff because big stuff exists.
Will your recyclable toothbrush change the world? In isolation, of course it won't. But that's not really what it's about, it's about making a lifestyle change and giving some consideration towards your actions. What's an avalanche if not a lot of snowflakes?
It’s wooly logic to conclude that we should ignore small stuff because big stuff exists.
Not really, unless you think countries/governments will ever start to tackle the big stuff. I don't think they ever will so it is a case of tackling the effects but unfortunately those same governments are responsible for that too, so pretty ****ed aren't we. Still, keep those teeth clean with that recyclable toothbrush of yours.
None of it is quite as clear cut as plastic is bad; the public can’t/won’t evaluate the options which means we fall into a few high profile “campaigns” and some “greenwashing”…
Arguably, the public shouldn't have to. Governments, manufacturers, recycling companies etc should be trusted to provide sound advice and take the choice away from the great unwashed. Of course, "should" is doing some heavy lifting here...
It’s wooly logic to conclude that we should ignore small stuff because big stuff exists.
In terms of not doing anything as an individual when businesses cause so much trouble then yes, you're right. Changes by the individual will hopefully, eventually, force business and governments to change. Less so if we're talking about doing fiddly little things when there's lower hanging fruit.
Changing your bank account to one with Triodos for example will save more CO2 than not flying to the US and back twice (or at least for me, with my relatively paltry savings, it does). And you won't notice any difference in your day to day life. I tried two bamboo toothbrushes and both cut my mouth. So I gave up.
Maybe in time, but lots of countries will have pretty unbalanced populations from mid-century onwards, with a massive increase in older people who use more heating, often live alone in multi occupancy homes, are less mobile so need transport, more care which is expensive and aren’t contributing to an economy.
i agree with your point but your solution is the same old kick it down the road as it might be easier to fix then.
Arguably, the public shouldn’t have to. Governments, manufacturers, recycling companies etc should be trusted to provide sound advice and take the choice away from the great unwashed. Of course, “should” is doing some heavy lifting here…
Everyone of those has some vested interest or is not that smart and liable to be lobbied. I don’t even know that academics could come up with an eco score that they could all agree on for one thing like drinks packaging: glass, plastic, waterproof card, aluminium can, steel can etc - that considers the original production impact, recycling/reuse impacts, long term disposal, transport impact, product waste/damage, etc Then if you could agree it for say drinks would it apply to cleaning materials? Or to other products in different form factors.
I don't know about the other supermarkets but Tesco made quite a big thing about soft plastic recycling when they started doing it. Apparently they have a deal with a firm in Derbyshire that washes the plastic and turns it into bin bags and the like. Seems a logical recycling step to me.
https://www.letsrecycle.com/news/tesco-and-berry-strike-soft-plastics-recycling-deal/
I'd also note that although I haven't been to Tesco for a while they used to just use one of those 2 metre tall steel cage trolleys for collecting the stuff so no fancy plastic bin with a too small post box and being a standard delivery trolley will presumably go round the Tesco delivery system for years. Seemed a sensible and sustainable approach.
Anyhow reduce, reuse, recycle still applies. A bit more of each of those is a bit more so we should try not to lose heart and try to mainly improve, even though we inevitably lapse quite often.
I don’t think they ever will so it is a case of tackling the effects but unfortunately those same governments are responsible for that too, so pretty **** aren’t we. Still, keep those teeth clean with that recyclable toothbrush of yours.
So what's the alternative? Gallic shrug and leave it for our grandkids to worry about?
On the main road round the corner from me, the pavement is absolutely covered in cigarette butts discarded mostly by the shops' staff and patrons. At some point someone must have dropped the first one, probably thinking "what does it matter, it's only one cigarette butt." Then more people do it and there's a tipping point where the thinking becomes "what does it matter, it's only one more cigarette butt amongst loads." Possibly with a side order of "the place is a tip, why doesn't the council sweep the streets?" Monkey see monkey do, all of a sudden antisocial behaviour is normalised and it's somehow someone else's problem to deal with.
So yes, I might have a virtue-signalling toothbrush (I don't, it sounds grim TBH), but there's 67 million people in the UK and many of them have teeth.
Tesco made quite a big thing about soft plastic recycling when they started doing it
Tesco likes spouting greenwashed codswallop.
25-30 tons per month is 360 tons per year. Tesco say they've reduce plastic packaging so far by 4500+ tons per year. Regardless of how they achieved this, and how good this might be, it goes to show that any fancy announcements about 360 tons is pretty meaningless.
That said, there is a bit more info here: https://www.tescoplc.com/sustainability/planet/packaging-and-plastic
If you can believe them.
/cynic
I work in the plastic injection moulding industry and for us it works out cheaper to send waste product to landfill, than to recycling. We do try and reuse what we can (by regrinding) but a lot of the plastics properties change once moulded once.
Personally at home we recycle everything that's possible, buy most of our meat, eggs and vegetables from within a three mile radius.
Unfortunately I also have to travel 80 miles a day to work and back, though I do usually run a car into the ground and it's not worth anything.
I do agree that if everyone did a little bit it would add up to a large amount. Think more needs to be done on educating the population.
I work in the plastic injection moulding industry and for us it works out cheaper to send waste product to landfill, than to recycling
And this is because the financial costs don't account for all of the impacts of the waste product. Likewise with many other impacts of the way we live day to day. And it has been so ever since people started shitting in rivers so it would wash downstream from their drinking water.
So what’s the alternative?
There isn't an alternative that will make any noticeable impact which is why I don't think there is any point. The world is run by people who don't give a shit and they are elected by people who also don't have it as a priority.
If enough people cared the Green Party would have a lot more presence in government as they are the only party that would even start to really address anything but they have been in pretty much same position for as long as I can remember while a party like Reform comes along and is now polling ahead of them.
So yeah, we can do what we want but we are just moving those deckchairs around. Notice I said we because I actually do care (recyle, have low carbon footprint etc,.) but I still think it is pointless.
