Letters from the front, and at the back

A guy gave me his card the other day, and it really needed to be about a foot wide to get in all the letters after his name, some of which were.. a stretch. I afraid it all rather left me feeling that one last set was rather in order: Pl. Onker.

This ran though my mind today as I read my welcome letter from the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining. I feel like I have joined a Post-it note!

Anyway, it was addressed to [me], A Inst Pkg. How cool is that?

Now, at first blush it looks like I, as an aspiring planet-saver, have gone over to the Dark Side, lured by Darth Shrinkwrap, but I deem it a very worthy attempt on my part to try and engage with, understand and hence report on what is after all a very significant part of all Junkk.com is involved with.

All things considered, it's a pretty affordable membership I'm surprised a few other media who see fit to critique this industry would do well to embrace.

May is so over

I just read a short, but interesting piece in the Indy.

And without apology, but due accreditation, print it fullishly here, with a few highlights of my own:

All goods may be labelled with 'carbon footprint'

A new eco label may show the environmental damage done goods and services in shops. The Government has begun a "carbon footprint" project to work out how to count emissions from everything from crisps to flights [Let us pray the enviROI derived is genuine, and that we, the public, are able to get to grips with it such that it is not just another vast, money-sucking box-ticking exercise].

The scheme, which could be the first step towards an international standard [like all previous efforts at local - we seem to have two health standards already, so the packs are going to get pretty crowed with this guff - and global cooperation have been successful so far. No reason not to try, but I do trust the basis is not so much to line consultants' pockets in the effort as to actually move policies] for measuring the greenhouse effect, will [well, that's more positive] be used on packaging to allow consumers to weigh up [so it's back to us doing the tricky stuff again, is it? And doubtless fined if we don't do it right. What about a bit more effort on what goes into the system at the front end????!] the climate change impact [please.... make it an effective measure!] of different products [I... we... are going to stand there, assessing - if we are able - every item going into our baskets. This is asking us to weigh apples vs. oranges, literally]

The Carbon Trust, a government body briefed to create a low carbon economy [with how much money to be blown on salaries and comms, with almost no ROI and/or enviROI that is publicly accountable to an effective degree?] is developing the scheme with companies such as [why these guys? Are they enough? Are they being funded or helping out for free...if so big up to them. If not... hmnnn.] Tesco, Boots, B&Q, Marks & Spencer and BT. A panel of technical experts will take around 18 months [Dome. Olympics. NHS. Air traffic. Need I infer more?] to finalise the measurement of stages such as production and transport.

Announcing the plan yesterday, the Environment Minister, Ian Pearson, said: "Businesses are looking for ways [Looking's good. Finding is better. Committing the best] to reduce their impact on the environment. To help them achieve that we need a consistent way [Just like the health standards, eh?] to measure these impacts that businesses recognise, trust and understand." [Let's not forget the consumer recognising, trusting, understanding... and being able to engage with in a meaningful way, as well]

That's an awful lot of doubts I have raised from just a few paras. I wonder why? Maybe it is because this consumer doesn't recognise much so far in this area that has made sense, trusts little these protagonists do to actually have my kids' future enviROI at heart, or ever get shared in a way that is understandable of capable of rational engagement.

But we can hope this time it will be different. Here's hoping the mainstream media stay on their case (packaging pun intended).

Guardian - Carbon labels to help shoppers save planet

Treehugger - Carbon Footprint Labels for UK Produce

In the piece I read, in the Independent, the announcement was littered with words like 'may' and 'could', which usually presages a lot of money getting spent on a bunch of consultants, and then sod all of any use happening once the requisite boxes have been ticked.

There is also the small matter of what happened with the health composition labelling. In some places we get a traffic light system, and in others a row of figures that look like the periodic table.

It's going to get pretty crowded on the side of each pack, and I have my doubts anyone will have the slightest clue what they are looking at, much less be able to make a coherent decision based on it. I for one have not bothered to scrutinise each item I select. For start, what am I comparing? Apples and oranges? Well, of course a Spanish orange may be better than a South African apple, but who on earth is going to get into that????!

If there is any serious intent to make a difference here, it needs to be at the in-point, not throwing it on the poor blooming consumer to try and sort out the fudge government and industry are trying to shuffle around.

So do I feel my kids' future is being protected by this? Well, may... be... not.

Plastic Tracks

I think I can be credited by wanting to know, and hence seeking the most objective explanations wherever possible, but I have to say I just came across a couple of bits of packaging technology and application that have left me stumped for a reasonable raison d'etre.

At some stage the relative merits of in-person vs. online shopping will be clear (well, vs. no shopping at all, I guess), but as a family we do tend to prefer the latter.

Hence the men from TNT, Royal Mail and DHL are often at our door.

And they are always bearing boxes. Now, I'm the first to accept that a damaged item is not helping the planet in terms of waste of material, manufacture and journeys made, but lately the relative sizes of the boxes to the item have got waaaay out of proportion.

And, to compensate, the packing filler has expanded to match... or cope. So I now have miles of this stuff, and am struggling to find a location, suspecting that I might be only one of few who might be so minded.

I am also intrigued by the little 'eco' label on each air-sac. Better than nothing, maybe, but surely to heavens there has to be a better, equally affordable alternative?

The Banana Metaphor

Sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel, doesn't it?

And apt that I should be penning this having just read this moments before:

The scandal of overpackaging on the doorstep of Parliament

By my best understanding from the organisers, neither the Independent nor any political critic, especially any mentioned here (a real shame, becuase I rated him until now), made it to the Total Packaging Show, at which I have spent the last few days. And that's a pity, because they all might benefit for being a bit better informed, and possibly retain some professional credibility as qualified commentators as well.

I have to say the whole piece seems outrageous just as a free-thinking individual, never mind having had the benefit of some further education at the show on the whys and wherefores of packaging. So I reckon the true scandal can be laid at the door of those seeking to profit from very dodgy politics and reporting.


'His mission was to locate the worst examples and report them to Westminster Council trading standards department for possible prosecution.'

I have to be grateful to the piece for one thing, as part of my learning curve I now have heard of The 2003 Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations, which theoretically outlaws products with unnecessary wrapping, and under which Environment minister (sic) Ben Bradshaw has apparently urged the public to report the worst examples.

"I would regard that as unnecessary" says Mr. Baker.

Has he asked why it is done like that? And in any case who is he to say what is, and is not... 'necessary'. I'm sure the suit he wears is not 'necessary'. But it is a consumer society, free...ish for now, and he chose it. It was on sale, so one can only presume it was permitted to be presented for him to buy it. Are we to believe that government, with all its rules and fees and licences and inspectors and committees and quangos, is seriously saying that it is only when it hits the rubbish bin that they have any part in authorising an item's existence, and are asking the public to police it (fines at the ready) for them on top? Bonkers. If you don't like what comes out at the end, deal with what goes in at the front! Or might that run afoul of a few tax revenues?

One thing I have learned at the show is that almost (an important caveat) no manufacturer, retailer or supplier in their right mind spends more than necessary on packaging. It simply adds cost.

Which brings me to the Banana Metaphor.

In one of the many seminars, a lady from the WI whipped out a cellophane-wrapped bag of bananas. 'Awful', she said. 'No reason for it', she huffed. And there it lay, on the podium, taunting us with its offensiveness.

Thing is, I wondered why it was so wrapped... and asked. She didn't know, and seemed rather stunned at our reaction that she didn't, and hadn't bothered to find out. She had had meetings with Gordon Brown, Terry Leahy and Lord alone knows who else to 'discuss' (they must p*ss themselves laughing as such folk walk out the door thinking they have had a fair hearing - the guy from ASDA actually offered that 'now this has been raised we must discuss it with you', obviously forgetting that the reason for the original campaign was because no one answered the WI's calls and questions) such travesties, but this was someone who didn't know why it had been done in the first place. How can you mount a campaign such as this without knowing all the facts!!! While her heart was in the right place, such lack of preparation undercut her whole message, which was a real shame.

But still, for now, as to why that banana was wrapped, I do not know all the possible reasons, and certainly not for certain. The guy from ASDA had a stab and said it was because they gave off an organic gas that accelerated rotting in other fruit and veg. Fair enough, if true, and not a bad mitigation as food waste is waaaay worse than packaging waste. You are offended by a wrapper? Try a pile of rotting fruit that has been flown from halfway round the world to go off (see the slide above? that's one from a Tesco speaker on carbon footprints, proving that a flower from Kenya can still be better than one from Holland. And I must say it made sense as I saw it).

In a future blog I will share some other stats I have been given which need to be checked, but really do put a different spin on things, as if enough were not being spun out of all reasonable control already. A guy from the floor, who packs for Tescos, offered that it was because it kept the hands together, as loose bananas were not picked up by shoppers and... went to waste.

See where I am going? For a start, it is not so simple as presented, but then there is the fact that the issues are being presented so WOEFULLY by all concerned, and frankly disingenuously for hugely selfish reasons by some, such that the consumer has no clue what to think. And, by my estimation, is thinking up a very wrong tree by what is being served up by our political and media establishments. However, the packaging industry does need to look at itself by fighting its corner so poorly. You may argue that it's not their job; they are merely a business responding to the specifications of those higher up the chain. But this is the new reality, and perception is every bit as key as truth.

"The worst example is the Ferrero Rocher chocolate... The box is probably worth more than the chocolates."

Well, yes, probably. Back to the suit, mate. It is possibly worth more than what's in it too. It's called gilding the lily. Get on this route and we are looking at being told how every free-thinking aspect of our lives is conducted, with no acceptance of style, choice or anything else. You can forget design, advertising...

I am not defending excess, but will totally fight against any hint of such nanny-state, killjoy intervention to freedom of thought and action, by self-appointed 'guardians' with agendas. Whatever means there are to curb excess there have been, are and may yet come, this is not it.

"It is perfectly possible to sell a lot of products without any packaging at all."

Some, yes. But it's a different world now. He, and others, are trying to tackle a global situation of immensely complex, interactive components, by scapegoating, to an incredibly simplistic degree, one, very small aspect. Just like trashing 4x4s lets every Londoner off the hook as they fly off for a skiing weekend because they have bought a Prius to beat the C-charge. It may buy a few more trendy-liberal votes and readers, but it does not make the planet better for my kids.

The Westminster Council decision was a great one for this environmentalist... for common sense. A prosecution here would be like taking a 12 year old to court for not disposing of litter in the right bin... oh, they have, haven't they? Are we really handing over our future, and that of our kids, to such shallow zealots?

"It's terribly wasteful, it won't break down."

Yes. And yes. But it is a box of luxury chocolates. Apply this logic to just about any aspect of our life today. It is one that demands we sit in a small box of our own, in a one-piece overall eating Soylent Green. That is not living, that is simply existing.


"It will go into a landfill site as it is and will sit there for decades."

Probably. But how about coordinating the waste strategy a bit better at your level, matey? That way the public can recycle it effectively. Or... reuse it. Now there is a site that helps with that. . Now, what was it? Not in the Indy because they have other agendas to shriek about... J...something.

"Fruit should be sold loose."

Er, not necessarily. I stand ready to see this further debated, but we get back to what is used and what is wasted, versus what is added by way of packaging to prevent waste. I will put my hand up with an example. My kids will not eat a bruised apple. Call it bad parenting, yoof of today or whatever, but that's the case. So if I buy loose apples they don't get eaten. I buy them protected and they get eaten. There can often be method in this, and the consumer is more often than not the culprit, not the innocent victim to be 'saved' by these folk.

Undoubtedly, some of these examples do seriously breach my ultimate test, which is the enviROI. But against that there are certain freedoms of consumer choice in a democratic society.

Remember that word: CHOICE. I like being able to exercise my right to make it, and to do so on a fully informed basis. This piece and such campaigns that lie behind do not, at least to me, come across as anything like that.

Doers or Shakers?

I read a lot of wild and wonderful things in my day. And so my eye is attuned to a potential nugget. Bearing in mind Junkk.com gets scores of questions about plastics recycling this one caught my eye as a potential plastic fantastic:

Plans on the table for food-grade PET recycling plant

So far, so rehashed press release. With a bit of that much loved, and now noted hype, spin and lack of substance we are seeing from all quarters these days, especially the environment. And too often faithfully trotted out by a rather compliant fourth estate. These days, I read 'could have' as 'here's a complete punt' when issued by official sources, especially when hand in hand with 'by the end of the year'. I'll be impressed if anything that cannot be confirmed now is up and operating in 10 months. It takes that long to get planning permission for a conservatory!

So my interest was piqued by the rather contrary comment at the end, from a well-established recycler such as Linpac.

I sense dissent amongst the vast silent, suffering majority of fellow doers in the environmental world, when vast, bloated, over-funded and totally inefficient, seemingly unaccountable quangos like WARP... sorry, WRAP, get gazillions of public money. And proceed to p*ss it all away on nothing that actually does anything other than expand and support their empires and nice lunches with COI ad agencies in SoHo. I am now building up a fair dossier of hard-working organisations who have been blown out by this old-boy outfit in favour of such needy causes as Tesco and Heinz.

What was that I wrote earlier about 'First against the wall..'.

When will the major media, and hence public, get to wake up to the sheer waste of money that is not going to secure a better future for our kids, at the expense of endless officers, boards, salaries, pensions and trips to Bali to discuss the consequences trips to Bali?

Enough!

letsrecycle

OK, tell me how to get past his genius gatekeepers

Terry Leahy: Don't blame us: we can't get rid of all packaging

"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."

I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...

I've just written to the Indy's Editor:

Dear Sir,

"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."

I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years to get through. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...

Can you help us get past the pen-pushing, bean-counting, career and hence profit-obsessed minions inbetween initiatives like ours and Sirs Terry and Michael, etc and their new-found green commitments. Or indeed Ministers like Miliband, Bradshaw, etc, as they keep churning out more 3rd sector, we must engage with social entrepreneur guff?

Our site is free. It gets good editorial. The public likes it. It makes the environment fun. And it needn't cost anyone (biz, gov or tax/ratepayer) a penny. In fact, by finding ways to reuse packs and packaging it may even add to the marketing, PR and CSR stories of these businesses in a very non-greenwash manner.

When are people going to stop talking long enough to listen to others outside their elite circles who may have complementary solutions on offer.

If you can help I'd be grateful.

BBC - Ask Tel

Make that 11!

I am hoping against hope that a medium such as the Indy (which, to be fair, has mentioned us in passing before), will give us a 'BIG UP' in such as the campaign they are running. I've tried to reach them and offer some input. No return as yet. Never say never.

It can just be so frustrating seeing headlines such as this, making out there is everything going on elsewhere and nothing here, when so much is being done on our doorsteps. Just... maybe not by those paid millions to do it.


Anyway, fingers crossed they will register us again soon and 'gis a mention.

I sent our January newsletter out the other night, after much faffing about with the technology... again. I think it's improving with each issue, and with luck is set to get better, and more useful soon.

I've been pretty blown away with the response, which has been a double-edged sword: yet more things now on top to edit and add to the site.But this is, of course, a 'happy problem'.

PRW - Excessive packaging under spotlight

Nice pack. Shame about what's in it.

An archive clipping, but topical.

I actually cut it out because of the nifty packs on show, a few of which already grace our site.

But sadly, it seems those in the UK are less up-front about the pipe-clogger contents when compared to our US cousins.

Still, it all tastes nice and we can make stuff out of them. Ashes conatiners?