Collective Weight

Every so often a notion occurs.

And I think I am getting to an age where it's best to pop it down somewhere as my mind these days is so filled with competing thoughts, and evidently less able to recall them, a written record seems a wise precaution.

I was clearing out some junk, as the proportion that has remained junk as opposed to getting converted into useful 'Junkk' is still, sadly, skewed towards the divorce courts.

Amongst a lot that really has to go, and doesn't look like inspiring much now if it hasn't already, is a fair old selection of cardboard, especially in the form of Pizza and Cereal boxes. Still great for filing, but... there's really only so much filing one needs now, especially as that little box just over there is storing 500GB paperlessly, with an even smaller one next to it in reassuring back-up, with the cloud as belt and braces.

The loo rolls are staying, as I have a pretty nifty scheme for these, involving an old drill stand I located (see if you can guess what may be going down there before I unveil this idea).

I think the Tetrapaks have to go, too. I may keep the spout/caps, but they are a lot of bulk with little second use so far inspired.

Which brings me to the cans. Steel ones not so many as we seem to be getting fresher and fresher in our diet, and while I can see some value in the lipped variety connecting together to form tubing, they are darn near uncrushable and hog space.

Which brings me to the aluminiums. For sure we have a lovely haul of ring pulls to conjure with, but the cans themselves? 

I had been simply crushing them to save space, but even this has mounted up.

Cue... the notion.

On our own, over time, we have created a fair old collection, and in crushed form the sacks are barely liftable. But if I simply pop them in the recycling, I am sure the bin men will grumble but their bosses will be thrilled. Pre-processed raw metal!

A while ago I did ask around at what point it all got financially viable to 'the industry' and, hence, in turn, the individual.

A few questions arose and still need clarifying...

1) What quantity makes a delivery (by me) viable?

2) What more makes a collection (by them) viable?

Simple stuff, as I am thinking of creating a Junkk.com master page with a chart. Something like:

RECYCLATE - Delivery/ton - Collection/ton - Value/ton - Local connection
Steel______l____________l____________l_________l_____________
Alumimium_l____________l____________l_________l_____________
Glass______l____________l____________l_________l_____________
Plastic_____l____________l____________l_________l_____________
Textiles____l____________l____________l_________l_____________

(see how Blogger formatting messes with that between post creation and print)

This can then be simply cut and pasted as data comes in on a postcode by postcode area basis.

I see potential because, presuming any community can find its own storage area, while one person may struggle in a sensible timeframe to build up enough to make it worthwhile, many pooling resources might yet see enough to profit in the effort.

REview - Movie - 'Trashed' - More clever than wise

That last line is not a critique of the movie.

It's a quote from it:

"The difference between the clever man and the wise man is that the clever man can extricate himself from difficult and intricate situations that the wise man would never have gotten into in the first place."

Author: Jewish proverb

I had been invited to our local Ross theatre (rediscovering what a great little venue it is), by a local media baron, and approached with some misgivings, not least because I also dragged along 'she who must be entertained'.

Me because I have not had the best experiences with such documentaries, and on the missus' behalf because, well, if you are not a bit of an eco-activist, the subject matter does not exactly equate to the latest Twilight. And one and a half hrs plus on Trash talk is a fair old whack.

But I need not have worried. That time passed quickly and was well spent... for both of us, and I think the rest of the audience, which I was thrilled to discover included 'Mrs. Green' of My Zero Waste and her family. Their presence in part being explained by her having a featured role as a zero waste advocate.

However, in doing justice to an objective review, it is not a movie that will be everyone's idea of a good night out, or to their tastes. I think you would need to be interested in the topic, and happy to see your money going to such an exercise in necessary awareness.

But even if it doesn't appeal as a movie experience, I'd say catching it if and when it is on TV, or when the DVD is released, is a worthy consideration.

There's stuff worth knowing, and it is presented well.

The script is solid, and not preachy, and with a presenter/VO the calibre of Jeremy Irons, and music backdrop by Vangelis, the audio-visual experience is top notch.

Though the full HD impact of a 40m wall of rubbish calving into the sea at the East end of the Med is pretty revolting.

This was one of the biggest out of control land dumps there is, at Sidon, and though vile had an awesomely fascinating aspect to it too. It was like those rock strata you see science types getting excited about to explain dinosaur extinctions or tsunamis.

Which is apt, because in a way it is a waste mountain version of the cr*p 'we' throw out over the decades... centuries. No further back than that, as it was pointed out that it's really only in the last hundred years that we moved from 'natural' materials that degraded 'naturally' on disposal to those that do not, if at all. Or, if they do, into something not nice at all.

This was a thread throughout, and was indeed an area that informed even me, when I thought I was quite on top of the messy aspects of human imposition on this planet.

The expert 'talking heads' referred to were very good, and unlike many advocates came across as reasoned and well-informed. And realistic.

But what they had to share, and show, was not too palatable, even as one sits in a comfy cinema in the well-regulated West. Lured into a false sense on security by 3rd world horror stories, I was unprepared to what was closer to home for comfort.

And Mr. Irons was a great guide in complement. Not too earnest if passionate, and even cynical and self-mocking with a wicked sense of humour on occasion to lighten what too easily could become a voyage into darkness if not careful.

But careful we need to be. I was pretty aware of many of the issues around biodegradability (and will need to revisit my open-ended investigation on this topic that I started a long time ago), but the microparticle 'soup' that plastics which enter the eco-system create was really horrifying to be reminded about. And while 'witches' knickers bags are the stuff of many an M&S/Daily Mail PR stunt, this is an area I am much more concerned about.

Also incineration, especially the so-called newly-rebranded 'Energy from waste' variety.

The theory is good, and the intentions of some noble. But I now have serious outstanding concerns on the practice... and the intentions of others.

One look at the news these days shows the 'authorities' are not always smart or to be trusted, especially when in thrall of big business or under fiscal pressures.

The movie spent a lot of time on what comes out of the chimney, and it's not pretty if the thing is not set up right and run right... including changing filters that are needed to meet safety levels, but get bunged up pronto and need replacing a lot... at vast cost.

I was reminded of our 'bagless' Dyson vacuum, that was to 'save' us a fortune, but whose EPA filter ran up such a replacement bill we got rid of it. So too with such facilities. They cost a lot to build, and more to run. And if the money gets tight, they either run dirty or they shut down.

And if they don't shut down and run dirty... you don't want to be near. And by 'near', I mean on the planet. Like plastic micro/nano particles, what goes up, or down, or in the water, goes around... everywhere.

A large chunk of what is in there that shouldn't be are dioxins, and these are not nice. At all.

A distressing part of the narrative was necessary, and this was a visit to Vietnam, to see the results of dioxin contamination as a result of the Agent Orange spraying during the war there.

Now this was concentrated hugely (and there may be other factors), but even after all this time there seems no doubt that this stuff is not great to get into the food chain, and especially by the time it works up to apex predators... like us. 

There was a very nasty scene in a pathology lab in Vietnam to illustrate the one way humans, or at least half of us, can purge out bodies of dioxins, and that is from Mother to unborn child. If you watch... be forewarned, and prepared.

Yet even here in the UK there are 'officials' who at best seem... too comfortable with reassurances from those they'd prefer to hear from than those who don't suit.

And with our headlines currently full of breaches of trust from those in authority... and even complicit media driven more by agendas than professional integrity... I tend to err on the precautionary principle advocated by the Professors and experts we were presented with throughout.

And it's not like some 'we're all doomongering' efforts where the pulls are economic vs. environment; there are compelling triple bottom line arguments in mitigation to be had too. Win-win-wins abounding, just like those we try and push here at Junkk.com or with RE:tie. It doesn't have to be a stark choice between living in a cave or dying a horrible slow death.

If I was to offer a critique, it would be that the movie was 80% problem, and 20% more positive. Though the positives were inspiring. I was thrilled to see a section on the inspirational unpackaged concept, for instance, and especially to hear their spokeslady talk not just in savings terms, but also... shock... making a profit!

But it is necessary to grasp and appreciate that there are some ideals that reality may not allow. Population densities, budgets... time.

These are all vast, intermingled issues that are hugely complex and need to be discussed as part of the whole 'green' deal (and another time than here). And too often this rather key fact gets lost in focusing on one issue. Focus is good, but it can lead to dogma, and dogma can create pockets, and pockets competing for attention can mean inconvenient truths that don't suit get ignored to push the passion, more than being aware of the pragmatic actualities.

The movie made me realise how easy it is to get caught up on one's own little area of concern, and perhaps ignore the bigger picture and how others in theirs need to be related to. But on the whole I felt a strong sense of vindication with what we at Junkk are trying to do, and how it can't hurt and hopefully can help. If in a small way. But it also made me realise that the movie addressed reduction (which has limits), and recycling (which has 'issues') and disposal (which has huge consequences), but barely even tipped a hat at the potential of reuse... especially designed-in reuse, or repair.

Now these are niche and poor cousins, but with a bit of imagination and will, they could become just as big as solutions... and money-making ones too. I hate to say it, but a lot of effort does seem focused on areas of dealing with waste that are now profitable but maybe not that great on enviROI and hence as good for the planet as often claimed. Box-tickers and target-setters do like such things as rates and bonusses can be easily related.

Yes, sending a container with bales of compressed milk bottles to be 'recycled' is better than sending it empty... but what about the possibility they don't need 'processing' at all, and get sent to a place where they can become a new, long-lasting product in their own right? The movie well showed that the resilience of these new waste materials makes them pretty effective in aggressive environments. Why not apply them rather than keep looking for ways to deal with them, if not having them is simply not a consumer society-realistic option?

I noticed that a member of the Rausing family had helped with the funding.

Maybe Tetrapak would be open to an approach from Junkk.com or RE:tie again on the back of this movie, when any tries before have not got past the gatekeepers who can often talk a good tale, but end up failing to walk quite as well in complement?

If they did, maybe together we can find ways to be both clever... and wise?

Caption: By coincidence, in chatting with said media baron last week, I happened to stumble across an experiment I had bee conducting, namely leaving a bio-degradable shopping bag to do its thing. Clearly, after a few years, it is on its way, but if non longer a turtle-choking threat, those little pieces are still not very benign. 

ADDENDUM 1 - In researching this further, and in wishing all on the US Eastern seaboard well post-Sandy, I found this interesting:

http://www.lastnightsgarbage.com/?p=2890


‘New York City is an island built on garbage. Dutch settlers constructed much of the southern tip of Manhattan by extending the shoreline with landfill.’

ADDENDUM 2 - A URL of a new post about the issue closer to home:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20154032

ADDENDUM 3 - In compelment to the Energy from Waste segment:

http://www.fastcoexist.com/1680763/sweden-needs-more-trash-because-it-has-turned-all-its-got-into-energy

ADDENDUM 4 - an interview with the producer by the packaging industry:

http://www.packagingnews.co.uk/environment/trashed-challenges-world-to-change-habits-profile/

Shut it and save

The other day I heard a BBC West Midlands 'report' that a town in my 'hood, Herefordshire, was launching a 'ban the bag' campaign.

So far, so, um, what words can I think of? Behind the curve? Bandwagon jumping? Potentially misguided? No longer news?

It had all the usual components. A Yummie earth mother and her moppet who walk from their Georgian townhouse in this market town with their one bag to buy their organic tofu. A jovial local butcher who thought it was great because as soon as he had worked through the evil plastic jobbies he was getting the non-evil, biodegradable... plastic jobbies. And the gushing local news bouffant who was tasked to make this a big deal.

Thing is, as my recent attempted effort at understanding the issues showed, there is certainly nothing wrong with reduction in any form, so long as it is in the right way for the right reasons. But I'm afraid this still seems to fail on waaaay too many counts, not that it matters to those in government, commerce and media who see virtue in distracting away from the real failings at system level.

So I have decided to pose a question that has struck me before, but more so after this, as I walked around a very similar Herefordshire market town: Why are all the shop doors open?

Which, in turn, I think could lead to a campaign, whose slogan I would suggest could/would be 'Shut it and save!'. That's save money (retailers, which can be passed on to clientele in energy costs saved)... plus planet.

Of course I know why the doors are open. They represent a barrier to entry, and hence sales. This was confirmed by the poor check out girl at the local organic shop, who approved (along with management) of my rejecting the proffered bag, but who was more onside with my notions on the open door policy (not shared with us by management, apparently).

Now, unlike carrier bags, I don't see jobs being lost, but of course there is the real chance of reduced sales, which will not make my idea popular with the local chamber. Unless of course it is made mandatory for all, as is proposed with plastic carriers. Then the comparative 'hassle' of opening a door is equal amongst all options and hence removed. With a ton of hot air being spared the eventing to the open sky.

And that seems to me to have a pretty clear enviROI.

Before I charge aherad thoughlessly... any comments, suggestions?

This isn't a ban. It's just a sensible alternative course of action with an enviROI+ result.

Yes?

I have now found a piece on this topic: Hay aims to bag plastic problem

First up, I wasn't aware that Hay was in Wales. My bad.

I will also need to try and figure what exactly the enviROI is on 'specially ordered Hay cotton bags and cornstarch Biobags'.

While this - Support has also been forthcoming through a £1,000 grant from the Sustainable Development Fund and the introduction by the council of extra plastic bag recycling points - at first seems positive, I still wonder if this is a) the best use of money and b) how the recycling point will address mixed medium recyclables.

More information on this scheme is available at www.theendofplasticbags.co.uk

Couldn't resist. I had to write in:

While reduction in any form has to be applauded, I have often wondered if plastic bags represent the greatest threat to our planet’s future, and indeed that some alternatives mooted have been sufficiently challenged to represent any better enviROI. So I'm just hoping recyclables are to be appropriately separated to avoid cross-contamination, and the compostables provided in a form that can either be processed at home or directed to a facility that can deal with them.

Anyhoo, now the cat is out of the bag (or the bag is no longer a cat...egory), and the banwagon is up to steam, as we are on planetary saving roll may I suggest the next target for consideration.

In our fair market towns I cannot not help but notice the number of shops and stores with gaping entrances pumping hot air out into the atmosphere.

Without seeking to put too many honest folk out of business or even inconvenience the understandable (indeed essential) consumerist advocacy of some retailers, and the simple preferences of the rest of us who patronise their establishments, might I suggest they be encouraged to keep doors closed when the temperature inside is greater than that outside?

I'd go for 'Shut it and save', which can of course can apply to money (in energy cost to both retailer and, if passed on, their customers) as well as the planet.

I'd also hazard that this could be quite easily done, might actually help and not require a ton more stuff that may or may not actually work to have a positive impact.

Green can be and often is great. But it also still needs thinking about carefully.

Addendum

Two years hence and the banner has been taken up as I, to my shame, could and should have done (so many eco-ideas; so little time. Like JunkkYard vs. FreeCycle, maybe another I should have pursued over others): Close the Door

JUNKK CATEGORY - PLASTIC

Kicking off with carriers. They're big in the news. I guess it's worth running a factual tally as a category.

Carrier Bags

Junkk Blog - inspired by an Indy piece

Guardian - some facts, if from a certain direction

Plastic

Junkk Blog - about the hazards of disolved plastics in the ecosystem - inspired by the BBC

Plastics News - Time discovers the 'truth' about plastics
Time - The piece in question

BBC - A month without plastic - Lone woman sets off on personal campaign for a wee while. Gets lots of coverage from national broadcaster.

ps: I have kept all my waste for sveral years, luv... and advocate making stuff out of it. I wonder if she lives near White City by chance, or works in PR?

BBC - Her blog - Actually quite interesting, while it lasts, which can be a slight probelm with these (tried it for a while and then gave up when the funding stopped) efforts. Not all of us have a blog/commission that supports the effort. Or see it as a finite project measured in units of days.

Plastics News - Living without (some) plastics - Picked up and got 'em thing across the pond, mind. Time to get busy with my store of junk!

Earthfirst - The Impossible Task of Cutting Plastic Out of Your Life - Nothing is impossible. Just sometimes circumstances mean a few sensibel compromises need to be made.

Wasteonline -

Reuters - Scientists study huge plastic patch in Pacific - Not sure if such an area counts as a 'patch' mind. I still think if they are looking at mining landfills, this source is a no-brainer.

Reminds me of a Futurama episode

Information

Answers.com - NEW - How long does plastic take to break down?

One man banned?

I'll have to be careful.

But every time I see one of these...

How hard is it to live plastic-free?

...well-meaning but ultimately endless talkfests on how best to ban stuff with little sense or science on viable reductions, I feel it my duty to pop in a positive to show the joys of reuse.

Maybe it's a male thing, but I feel making something from waste can be every bit as satisfying as just moaning about it.

Mind you, at the moment their direction gets a more empathetic audience, and pays better.

Build 'em up; shoot 'em down

I'm watching the BBC Breakfast News, where 'Supermarkets are accused of playing up the whole plastic bag issue'.

Hmn. I wonder who else was pretty high on the ban-wagon not so long ago?

I seem to recall endless features with various retail Sirs that seemed pretty supportive.

Now, as it seems some (ta-da!) have suggested that this was both trivial and a real distraction if not plain incorrect, the opportunity has been grabbed to now shout and scream in a totally different direction.

What I still do not see, or hear, is any sensible analyses of the actual best enviROI situations that should be embraced by the authority/manufacture/retailer cabal to work together so willing consumers can easily and sensibly cooperate.

Addendum 1:

Found the BBC URL : Plastic bag policy 'a diversion'

Also just watched a spokseman from Morrisons, Angus MacIver, pretty much take apart the bouffant's 'interview' questions. Oddly, it was cut short quick smart.

Addendum 2:

Just watched yet more on this. First up, the Minister in question, Joan Ruddock, is blithely saying the only reason for all this is that it is 'popular'. No worries bout it being right. And I really dislike being told that I, as a part of the 'public', support this. How the heck does she know?

There was also a twofer. One was a spokesman from the Carrier Bag Consortium, and the other a Green rep. from the London Assembly.

What astounds me is how, after all this time, the two could state and/or exchange facts (such as the success, or otherwise, of the Irish experience - which the assemblyman seems to have included in a world fact-finding tour. No irony there) with, still, no definitive evidence one way or the other.

This, to a bewildered consumer, is PATHETIC, on the part of those in authority, in government, quango and media.

Smokin'!

Carbon emissions to be turned into CDs

Hey, if it works as billed, what’s not to like?
So long as the energy used in reprocessing adds up, I’m sure if the resultant raw material is reliable then many re:uses can be found.
Thumbs up from here on what’s been shared so far!

In the soup?

I am no great defender of plastic. But it is hard to imagine how we would exist without it and, that said, cease to use it.

Hence I tend to approach efforts like this with eyebrow-cocked: Warning on plastic's toxic threat

There's no doubt that the stuff is not great once it moves from its first use and gets disposed of.

But all the media/PR effort seems to ignore the main issue, which is correct disposal.

And, frankly, most of us are powerless in this regard, and hence there is little we can DO.

Hence a piece like this seems to be rather pointless other than being another 'woe is us' piece that gets a bunch of folk on a nice (if polluted) island to raise 'awareness'.

I can't see the value as a consumer news piece unless there is some connection to mitigation made.

However the science is interesting, and I do wonder how some of this relates to the effects of so-called 'biodegradables', which are often touted as 'solutions', but as matter can neither be created or destroyed do simply cease to be visible. The potential negative impact remains.

Weeeee...d!

No, not a piece on the WEEE Directive.

Actually, it's about pots... plant pots.

I just watched a BBC News piece about the things, and it stuck a chord. Especially as I have hundreds in the garden cluttering things up.

Apparently there are 500 million made, and chucked away to landfill, a year.

So moves are afoot to recycle them.

Well, by a few isolated, and I bet uncoordinated by officialdom, places.

The piece mentioned garden centres Wyevale, and also recyclers Linpac. I have emailed the former for more details, and the latter don't have an email on their website, oddly.

And having been told to check your local area before heading off (wisely), I now head to the dire BBC website to see if they actually make it easy to DO what they SAY. It is a major beef of mine that they broadcast such stuff but often make it difficult to find out any more to act on their brief green pieces' advocacy.

Semantic Antics

Again the plastic bag issue rears its head on the BBC, but in so doing rather highlights another 'Two 'E's' issue, this time Ecology vs. Environment.

I was moved to request that this dilemma at least be better addressed:

I see the BBC again plugging the notion that celebs buying designer reuseables at 'only ' £5 a pop is the best 'awareness' way to be greener.

Having done the free commercial for the luvvie brigade's profits, on a more pragmatic level we have the reporter standing in Oxford Street. But then we get into semantics. He is bang on when he says that retailers are responding to 'solve' the 'ecological' problem with... paper bags. No choking a turtle there.

However, I'd be keen for the national news broadcaster to inform me as to the 'environmental' impact of this switch...

I believe the greenhouse gas consequences of this option might be of relevance in the mix.

Now I am worried

Gordon Brown gives supermarkets one year to start charging for plastic bags ... or else

I wondered how long it would take for our Dear Leader to decide he was on safe enough ground to emerge from his bunker and take charge of this truly critical issue.

Not too sure if any of the other stuff, including a few other matters of pressing environmental concern, might register with his spinometer for a while now.

Thanks Daily Mail, for showing leadership to our leadership, and getting our priorities truly in the right order.

Gaurdian - How the Daily Mail seized the moment to go into battle - yes, but which one?

Right result? Right reasons?

Yesterday, at the height of the Daily Mail/M&S 5p bag frenzy, I popped into a LIDL, a store proudly pointing out it was tackling the scourge of the bag by charging for them.

And, in a telling example of personal shopping choice I made a purchase: this cutter set.

Now how much was my decision based on the fact that I could see all the blades I would use? Hence the box in which they were contained was splayed open, and then popped in a blister pack.

Totally, and I don't fling this word about lightly, unnecessary. But certainly it, and my actions in being seduced (would a poster or image on the lid have worked to attract me as well?), are pretty much key to the whole issue.

While some small 'victories' may be scored in trying to cut down on waste and our addiction to buying more and more 'stuff', this little war on plastic bags rather conceals the fact that the last thing these noble manufacturers and retailers, and the media industry who serves them, want us to do is buy any less.

Hence we get bought off (ironically by paying more) with a bag levy, and perhaps get distracted from pondering any more about what we are buying in the first place.

Here's the latest press release that has popped into my in-box, which I re-print verbatim:

IKEA SAVES 100 MILLION PLASTIC BAGS SINCE 2006 In support of the Daily Mail's campaign to ban the use of all single-use disposable plastic bags, IKEA UK today announced that a total of 100 million plastic bags have been saved since first launching a 10p charge in June 2006 and then a complete phasing out of plastic bags in July 2007. In 2005 IKEA UK gave away 32 million bags. Laid out, they would stretch 19,200 kilometres, or the equivalent of a return journey from London to Tokyo. After a successful two year trial in its Edinburgh store, on World Environment Day in June 2006, IKEA UK announced it was to stop offering free plastic carrier bags to customers introducing a 10p charge for them.� All money raised by the charge of plastic bags was to be donated to the organisation �Community Forests�.� It was part of a three step initiative that included changing the material of standard plastic bags to a biodegradable material and encouraging customers to use reusable bags by reducing the cost of the iconic �big blue bag�. It was estimated that this would reduce plastic bag consumption in IKEA UK stores by 20 million to 12 million bags a year. However, pricing plastic bags at 10p saw a 95% reduction in use to just 1.6 million a year � much higher than ever expected. As a result IKEA UK took the decision that plastic bags were no longer needed and completely removed plastic bags from all stores throughout the UK in July 2007. Charlie Brown, IKEA UK Environment Manager, said: �'It�s fantastic to see other retailers taking such positive steps to minimise plastic bag usage. Our role as retailers is to help customers make small changes that will reduce their environmental impact. Together we have a huge opportunity to make a real difference.'� The phase out of single-use plastic bags follows far-reaching steps already taken by IKEA to reduce energy consumption, cut emissions and to source products from sustainable suppliers.

I must say I stumbled over 'today announcing' something they have been doing for a while, which just shows what the impact of the weight of the Daily Mail readership and M&S PR machine is; all sorts of guys are tripping overthemselves to be first to be second to tell people they were first. Hardly edifying.

And I still don't see how a 10p bag doesn't choke a turtle any more than a 5p one.

The only bit of sensible insight is buried away at the end (highlighted), and at least shows the potential value of this campaign, even though I think it has been orchestrated by the wrong folk in the wrong way for mostly all the wrong reasons. But maybe the end (still unsure on the impact of the alternatives being scattered about) result could yet be worth it. Maybe a few eggs need to be broken for this omelette.

But let's now see who they turn their sights on next, and in what way the mob is directed. Just so long as the enviROI ends up positive, and it's all not just for show and ratings and a short term feel-good for the chattering classes, at the expense of those less able to cope with impositions and costs.... or even the planet.

I just wonder how long the likes of the Daily Mail or M& S will stay true to the overall cause, though both look like riding a hell of a decent wave for now.

But I rather suspect that even if Al Gore invented a $100 wind turbine, if GM offered a free Humvee to every reader or BA a free flight to Hawaii, the paper's front page would look a tad different. And even if editorial did move on to the 'necessity' of cut flowers and New Zealand lamb (ignoring the debate that the carbon consequence of their rearing cancels out the food miles in the shipping vs. buying local), the ad department may have a few words to offer via their client feedback.

Interesting times. What we really need is more positives that serve the consumer process AND the environment. Now, where on earth might we find such a concept? Oh... say... a nice little website that advocates reuse, both from existing packs and, in future, designed-in?

Sadly, I could only open that pack above by destroying it. So no reuse ideas there. I will walk it round the plastics skip, but have litte faith that it will be recycled effectively. Which, at about the equivalent of 50 plastic bags in one shot, is the real concern I have.

Careful what you wish for

I do believe the whole plastic bag thing is now a done deal. Just like any attempt at discussing climate change. At least for reasoned debate. You are either for the ban, or you are an enemy of Gaia. No matter whether it, other in the most simplistic, absolutist terms, might or might not be effective on a few key environmental levels, at least without some other more pressing and vital areas (such as sorting out our woeful waste collection and disposal systems) being addressed first.

Some noisy people have spoken, the media mob has seen a soft target, decided, and it's all over bar the P45s... and possible worse planetary enviROI from the as yet not very clearly explained alternatives (Paper? Much worse for carbon. Biodegradables/compostables? Not really ready to be dealt with properly as yet. Bags for life? Well, yes, but these do seem to be getting rushed out a bit).

No issue that these things are not optimal on about any level, but I'd love such as the Daily Mail to please explain how 'M&S banishing the FREE bag' (today's headline) stops 5p plastic bags getting into the waste stream and choking a turtle. Or at least becoming part of a toxic soup solution. It's mankind's consumerism, and the fact there are an awful lot of us (and growing) consuming ever more, that is pumping ever more crud into the air, land and sea, mostly thoughtlessly or carelessly, that is doing for these precious icons of nature.

And it is driven by a much broader set of entities all complicit in this, including those placing the ads such as those on p24 of the Mail, for M&S, suggesting we dash out and buy Mum a nice bunch of posies (from where?) and chocolates (wrapped in what?). Ditto Tesco on P30. Plus booze. Pampers at Sainsbury’s p18, if you fancy the next cause, guys. I personally support Green Nappies, but not sure what their ad budget is.

But I guess fewer bags might help... maybe along with those in papers that hold the inserts and FREE CDs, etc. And I do notice that on top of the efforts of the Indy and Guardian, the Telegraph today has a FREE 'eco-friendly bag' for each reader... which you need to send off for. Oh, just noticed; the Daily Mail too. What are they giving away next week to persuade us to buy their papers that gets posted back? The container ships (shipping is an issue, too, I imagine, for anything in the sea) from the East must be bulging! Bless.

And in the spirit of jumping bandwagons, as I was listening to the Jeremy Vine show today, there was the delicious irony of one caller in favour of an immediate Planet Ban-it (all anti's selected by being rabid 'who cares about nature' nutters), who had just 'flown in' from her dive business on the Red Sea... and these things were spoiling her UK clients' weekend getaways. Bless. Hope they cycle there and don't use sunscreen (apparently it kills coral).

Yes, things that are harmful to the environment do need to be identified and phased out where alternatives can be found (and maybe even if they cannot). But when the barely informed (I'm still on a steep learning curve ) mob rules, careful what you wish for. Who knows what... or who... may be next in line?

Mail - Marks & Spencer joins The Mail's campaign to Banish the Bags by charging for them

Rose-tinted reporting

I am awaiting the BBC Breakfast News to wheel out Sir Michael Rose of M&S to share with us the exclusive news that his dealing with the plastic bags issue.

Now, one could wonder why him, again, when many others are already doing so. But hey.

There are a few other matters I wrote to ask in hope we get get reporting rather than propagandising, especially as a few questions were posed by earlier consumers:

Re: Why not biodegradable plastic bags? Why not paper?

Good questions all. Maybe as a retail expert Sir. Stuart Rose can answer?

Or explain how charging 5p prevents a bag getting into the ecosphere and choking a turtle?

I don't know, which is why I'd like answers.

Are you going to feature other industry experts to cover the whole issue?

*ps: I'm trying to find out.

My information so far is biodegradables/compostables require levels of waste system complement that may not make them as effective as they can be.

Paper may actually be worse for the environment, but not for wildlife.

It probably isn't as simple as made out.

ADDENDUM:

Just watched the man himself on the sofa. Interesting. I thought the plastic bag (well, no one quite seems to know what they are banning or bringing in by way of substitute) must be a dead duck by now, at least with the current level of (mostly pretty mis-informed) negative PR.

But, despite being there to plug Plan A, Sir Stuart fought a pretty good corner. Mind you, he was hijacked at the end by the reporters trying to get him to make the simplistic pledge to 'ban' them outright.

His main focus of defence was the customer is king (the issue of packaging waste vs. food waste as a consequence of cuctomer rejection came up), which is well focussed as a sales spiel, but one wonders how it went down with the PR dept. or Sustainability Manager.

What did impress is that he addressed those two questions above. In detail.

He dragged the authorities back into the recycling issue, which I am sure they are trying to duck in this big time. Also he.... at last.... raised the enviROI aspects. Sadly, of course, this is one where the environment may be split between ECO(logical) and Environmental, at least if one still accepts there are ECO(nomic) drivers that are inevitable.

And he also clarified the actual limitations of many bio/compost options, though it's a shame he had no time to explain the difference betwen a landfill, an in-vessel composter and your back yard effort in dealing with them. Pretty key.

As to turtles, I'm guessing biodegradables may well be better as they must fall apart pretty quick, but as to the effect of what they break down into solution on the ecosphere (plastic soup, anyone?) I am not so sure.

All I know is that clear, balanced information on this is noticeable by its absence. You can expect, and dismiss it from the Daily Mail (though I think they have pretty much nailed the coffin of this aspect of the plastics industry with their reach and influence). I expect better from the BBC.

It's academic... apparently. Still

Close the loop on plastic, says leading academic

Couldn't agree more with Dr. Thompson. Though why it is an academic issue... still... now... rather defeats me.

But then, I'm only a consumer.

And that, 'scuse the pun, seems to make me just... fine.

Taking the wrap

I just wanted to share this morning's mail delivery. And (left/top) the week's so far.

In it were three magazines, two of an eco bent.

Now I understand all the issues faced in safe delivery, so I am not going there.

What is more of interest to me is the disconnect between all those who should be dealing with this, from the suppliers to publishers to consumers to waste disposal entities, commercial and public, for profit and legislative.

Two of my haul claim to be safely disposable in landfill. Rather confusingly (well, to this consumer) one is oxy-degradable and the other biodegradable. Same thing?

The other is 'recyclable'.

Now I know enough to wonder whether the landfill-friendly efforts are only going to work if processed properly. And that by being mixed with the other the whole thing is probably a mess anyway.

I doubt many would be even so troubled. And in the absence of any information to the contrary, or mechanisms to deal with it properly anyway, it's all going in the same basket, and I'll then let the supermarket decide this weekend when I stick it in the bag box, or the swimming pool carpark skip's plastic bag binliner.

Not, I imagine, the best enviROI, really.

The world's larget rubbish dump

Reported in the Independent this morning, this is absolutely amazing!

"A 'plastic soup' of waste floating in the Pacific Ocean is growing at an alarming rate and now covers an area twice the size of the continental United States, scientists have said."

Known as the "Great Pacific Garbage Patch" or "trash vortex", it is estimated to contain some 100 million tons of flotsam!

"The vast expanse of debris – in effect the world's largest rubbish dump – is held in place by swirling underwater currents. This drifting 'soup' stretches from about 500 nautical miles off the Californian coast, across the northern Pacific, past Hawaii and almost as far as Japan."

"Plastic is believed to constitute 90 per cent of all rubbish floating in the oceans. The UN Environment Programme estimated in 2006 that every square mile of ocean contains 46,000 pieces of floating plastic."

And some people still insist that rubbish thrown out to sea doesn't constitute a problem!

Addendum (Junkk Male) - Well, someone seems to think there's an angle.

Good News Friday - Plastic Fantastic!

Nice to share something nifty. Actually a few somethings.

First up there was a slot on BBC Midlands Today just now about a recycled plastic process that actually will handle mixed media. No more contamination issues! OK, it's fence posts and not the next water bottle, but it gets around that big issue of co-mingling spoiling the batch.

There is a follow-up report tonight at 6.30pm if you want to catch it (Good luck, with the fun I'm having with the BBC site either reading or commenting - if I see one more 402 or 502 error...)

That's the other bit of good news. I emailed the enviro correspondent concerned, Dr. David Gregory, to find out more and got a nice, helpful reply straight back:

At the moment* they're called

Encapsulated Waste Limited
The Old Transformer House
Showell Road
Wolverhampton
West Midlands
WV10 9LU

*Evidently, as the Google I did got this...;( Shame to have a PR and no 'go to' in support!

Anyway, maybe I should quit for the weekend now, while I'm ahead!

Getting noticed #101: banning is best

Making things is usually a long process of increments. And sadly our media these days like quick, big, immediate hits.

So a good way to get noticed is to crank up a ban. Not sure it's worked quite the way the DPM intended with her prostitution solution, but it certainly seems to have worked for others: PLASTIC BAGS

I feel a tad uncomfortable questioning such a person, who is obviously sincere, but as part of the bigger picture I just need to ensure, for the sake of my kids' futures, that she is at least well guided. Not to mention supported by the right folk for the right reasons.

In a year where so much of such vast importance and impact in the world of climate change has come to the fore, I have always found the issue of plastic bags in the great scheme of things intriguing. Depending on who is quoted, some 200 per person per annum. I wonder if those at Blue Peter could tell us how many Fairy Liquid bottles they represent in terms of oil-based manufacture and disposal consequences?

But this lady's passion is undoubted and her concern admirable. And her story more than impactful, with its successful uptake a sure indication of the public mood. No wonder the media has found it so attractive. I can't imagine what it must be like to spend one's career as a documentary film-maker flying around the world to enjoy and capture nature's beauty, and find it so casually spoiled by the impositions of modern society.

There are so few positives about these things they make an excellent, and obvious target. But then I started to ponder the alternatives. It's one thing to ban something, but then having banned it one must look at the alternatives. Which is what I decided to do. Mainly because I felt I was getting a lot on the ban, but not as much on the consequences.

http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/11/junkk-category-plastic-bags.html

It's an ongoing education, and indeed this programme has added to it, at least indirectly, as there was one small informational piece that has resulted, namely the experience of the Irish contributor above. This provides an interesting and worthy counterpoint to other experiences I had learned of that were less positive, at least when it comes to the overall enviROI of the exercises. What seems undoubted is that the scourge of 'witches knickers' has been dealt with, but I still wonder at what cost in other areas.

It also has served to highlight the critical need for coordinated approaches between government, local authorities and business in creating logistical systems that are both effective environmentally (cost is 'an' issue, but trade-offs may need to be factored in if our priority is emissions as opposed to profits or litter) and capable of being easily engaged with by the public/consumer. Popping in the village deli with one's bike basket daily is one thing. Tescos en route home of a Friday night for a weekly shop is another. And here I am less convinced of deliverables. Especially when confronted with solutions that have 'bio' in the description.

Yes, with all else we are confronting in matters climatic, I did notice Mr. Brown has thrown his full weight behind... banning plastic bags. So one looks forward to him, and the media, getting as interested, and in the necessary detail, to do justice to all the other topics of high relevance to our nation's carbon footprint. Maybe next a ban on pets, perhaps? Or imported wine? Or beer (how much water consumed to create a pint?). Or...

Instead of, and hence less media attractive as a ban, as a fellow small town-dweller I was thinking more of a campaign to encourage our local retailers to shut their doors during cold snaps to avoid the heat loss pouring out into the sky. I rather fancied 'Shut it and Save'. The only down side I can perceive is the potential consumer-reluctance posed by a closed door, but everything else seems a win-win all round, even to their utility costs. What do you reckon?

Indy - Unbelievable bags - at least it has been asked. I look forward to the answer.

Sir: Last week I visited a Waterstone's bookstore to buy a couple of book tokens as Christmas presents. I asked the shop assistant for a paper bag to protect the tokens but was told that Waterstone's prefer to use plastic bags because the carbon footprint of paper bags is greater than for plastic, because of shipping from abroad, which is where most paper bags are sourced. If true, this is astonishing. Perhaps other readers could clarify the situation.

Gaurdian - Dialling danger

Why here? For this, albeit subjective, comment: "The purge on plastic bags in Ireland has also been a dramatic success." Oh dear gawd, I thought this silliness was confined to Annapolis. More energy and waste is produced making paper bags than are used make plastic bags. Also, plastic bags are also useful for picking up my dogs poop.

Are we there yet?

Does one give into pester power? It's a question I have pondered for a while on a few areas, such as this: London joins national campaign to banish the curse of the plastic bag

It's not quite on a par with 'giving in to terrorists or kidnappers', so I am tempted to go along and swallow the possible consequences of 'giving in to..'.

And it's not like I don't get the point. Plastic bags, if there are better alternatives (the enviROI of plastic vs. alternatives not having been clearly explained to me at all yet, much less convincingly. For example, I can't see a ship-load of hessian sacks getting shipped from India to be sold for a £1 and then forgotten about in the back of a drawer come the next outing - who can carry a bunch of these around all day in case they pop in the shops? - is going to help much either. But hey-ho) and are not being reused or recycled effectively (seems not), are certainly a landfill-destined waste of resource. I don't use 'em if I can help it, though have to admit that when I don't happen to have 4 hemp bags on my person would find it a bit of a pain not to have them, or wonder where the money I have to hand over is going to. Plus a small tilt towards those who have lost their jobs as a consequence of such a ban (and wonder who is next, until the truly worthy contributors to society who inhabit Islington and Westminster decide to feed on each other's productive career contributions).

But I am erring on just getting it over with, if only to get it out of the way and move on to hopefully more important things. Though the trivial obsessions of most involved in such campaigns don't encourage me too much. They'll need another outlet. And I doubt banning pets, skiing holidays or leg waxing products as 'unnecessary' will top their lists.

Especially as major proponents are such as newspapers and LAs, who don't seem so shy on sending out their own hordes of mailings in plastic wrappers.

Yesterday Modbury, today London, tomorrow the Isle of Wight... and then... ze verld!

Thing is, as an ad man, I wonder what will happen when attentions drift elsewhere.

The shop which has already set out its stall to get rid of packaging

Because if everyone is doing it, then there is no value in being different. You get in the Indy if you have 'a' shop that is eco-twee and all the luvvies get their free-range Priuses for the weekend there, but how about the real world of a 8pm Friday rainy-night dash to the Tesco on the way home down a Midlands motorway?

One wonders if you might see the genesis of ad campaigns with 'free plastic bags' like 'no VAT' to entice people in by way of being an exception.

And who is to define when a plastic carrying device is 'legal' or 'illegal'? Maybe we will get bag-leggers smuggling in dangerous loads of plastic over the Mexican border.

At least I get blogs and blogs out of it. Just not sure it's moving my kids' futures on as much as some other efforts deserving such energies.