| |
11 Mar 05 - bicycles; sugar; schools; toilet paper; cleaning; organic; diapers
** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM **
-- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition
--------
Forum archive: http://www.nwpcarchive.org
---------------------
From Jeff Laufle, Seattle, responding to the 3/3/05 news item about
California legislation proposing that a $7 fee be added to the cost of
bicycles, to promote reuse and recycling of bikes:
I strongly doubt a $7 fee for an apparently worthy cause would hurt
retailers, especially if good information resources were available to them.
Buyers of lower-priced bicycles, and lower-income folks who might at some
point be the beneficiaries of the program, could understand it. Anyone
willing to spend $500 (not really a high price for a decent bike these days)
to $2,000 or more on a bicycle will not mind an extra $7, especially if they
understand the benefits. There are certainly already programs for reusing
frames and other components - I believe Seattle has one that allows kids to
learn bike repair skills and ultimately get a rebuilt bicycle from their
participation. If the proposed fee could bring about more such programs,
great.
As to whether a free bike would get a commuter out of his or her car, well -
maybe. As a regular practitioner and active promoter of bike commuting, I
can say there's a lot more involved in that psychology than just owning a
bike. But maybe the fee would open some doors for people who can't afford a
reliable auto. And more bike stations for commuters wouldn't hurt.
Whether or not this bill is ideal, the opponents are always free to offer
their own constructive alternatives. I'm convinced the benefits of cycling
as a transportation alternative are too great to dismiss any opportunities
to further it.
E-mail: jcl ( A T ) foxinternet ( D O T ) com
---------------------
From Susanne Brunhart Wiggins, Montgomery County Division of Solid Waste
Services, Rockville, MD:
Seen in the 3/6/05 Sunday newspaper coupons: Domino sugar in a fabulously
improved package - "introducing Domino's new 4 lb. canister"! The features
of this plastic wonder include "easy grip handle, an easy open/air-tight
lid, no sugar spills, easy to measure, recyclable."
I haven't yet rushed to the store, armed with my 35-cents-off coupon, to
procure this item for my own pantry. I imagine the price will be comparable
to the old-fashioned 5-pound paper bag, which - gasp - is similarly easy to
open and recyclable. If the bag doesn't end up in my paper recycling cart,
it takes a little trip out to one of my worm bins or compost piles, where
I'm sure the worms enjoy their sugar infusion as much as the rest of us do.
E-mail: susanne (DOT) wiggins (AT) montgomerycountymd (DOT) gov
---------------------
Link to information on a "green schools" contest sponsored by Ford and
National Geographic (first seen in the Pacific Northwest Pollution
Prevention Resource Center bulletin):
- http://www.nationalgeographic.com/gogreen/ford/index.html
This contest
is open to kindergarten through sixth grade teachers at public or private
schools, who can enter on behalf of their class. Entries must be postmarked
by April 7, 2005. The winning school will be awarded $100,000 to make
improvements at the school that benefit the environment.
----------------------
From Tom Watson, King County Solid Waste Division, Seattle, WA, and the
National Waste Prevention Coalition:
I just heard about a new product that seems like a step forward for waste
prevention: Procter & Gamble's new "Charmin Mega Roll" size of toilet
paper: http://www.charmin.com/en_us/pages/prod_mega.shtml
If this big roll of
toilet paper is really the size of four regular rolls, as they claim, that
could reduce packaging quite a bit. One thing that might keep it from being
widely accepted is that it requires an extender for a standard toilet paper
dispenser. On this web page, they say you can get a free extender by
signing up on the web page. However, in an ad for this product in last
Sunday's newspaper, it says an extender is included in the package when you
buy it at the store.
I'll be very interested to see how this new size does, and whether other
companies offer similar versions. Their marketing slogan is "Change the
roll less often!" I wish they would add, "Less packaging!"
E-mail: tom [DOT] watson [AT] metrokc [DOT] gov
---------------------
Excerpted from an article by Adam Doling in the February 2005 edition of
Cleaning & Maintenance Management magazine:
GREEN CLEANING PROGRAMS FOR GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS INCREASING
Green cleaning programs have gained a great deal of momentum recently. Green
cleaning protects the health of cleaning workers and the occupants of
buildings, as well as the environment, according to the movement's
advocates. Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania, as well as the
cities of Santa Monica, CA, and San Francisco, have enacted green cleaning
product purchasing plans. And New York State Governor George Pataki
announced in January 2005 that he has signed an executive order mandating
that state agencies and authorities use only non-toxic cleaning supplies. A
similar mandate is currently being created for all New York State schools.
But, just what does a switch to a green cleaning program entail? Stephen
Ashkin is president of The Ashkin Group, Bloomington, IN, a major proponent
of the green cleaning movement. Ashkin said a green cleaning program
requires facility service providers to consider chemicals, along with all
the other products and equipment used in the cleaning process, including:
Janitorial paper products; vacuum cleaners; floor machines; carpet
extractors; entry way mats; etc., as well as how these products are used. In
addition, manufacturers must ensure green cleaning products work in a way
that makes it easy for the end user to efficiently insert them into an
existing cleaning program without having to significantly rearrange the
program or retrain staff, Ashkin said.
Selecting environmentally preferable cleaning chemicals and other products,
especially those that can be "certified" by organizations such as Green
Seal, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the Carpet & Rug
Institute, is a crucial step in the process, Ashkin said. It is imperative
to explain to building occupants, managers, and facility service providers
why environmentally preferable cleaning products are used, he added.
The New York State executive order states, "All State Agencies shall procure
and use cleaning products having properties that minimize potential impacts
to human health and the environment consistent with maintenance of the
effectiveness of these products for the protection of public health and
safety." Jennifer Meicht, spokesperson for Governor Pataki, said the
executive order went into effect in January, but it will likely take state
agencies close to six months to use their remaining cleaning supplies and
ensure proper training for the use of green cleaning products. Meicht said
the cleaning products would conform to guidelines set forth by the EPA for
environmentally preferable purchasing.
In addition, the New York State Office of General Services (OGS) will work
to create a centralized contract where state agencies can buy the products
through contracts set up by the OGS. The switch to using all green cleaning
products - which will require new procedures to safely and effectively use
the products - will not create additional costs for the state because, when
OGS puts a product on contract, it has found the best price for that
product, said OGS spokesperson Jennifer Morris. While green products may
require slightly different techniques to use them, Ashkin agreed that they
do not generally cost more or work that much differently than traditional
cleaning products.
---------------------
Excerpted from an article by Anne Raver in the 3/3/05 New York Times:
ORGANIC FERTILIZER USE GROWING
There is an increasing awareness, even among casual gardeners, that soil has
a huge effect on the success, or failure, of their gardens. Those gardeners
are spending more money every year on soil-enriching products. Between 1999
and 2003, according to the National Gardening Association, the number of
American households buying organic fertilizer nearly tripled, to 11.7
million.
---------------------
Excerpted from an article by Becky Gaylord in the 3/8/05 Cleveland Plain
Dealer:
A CHANGE OF DIAPERS: IMPROVEMENTS BRING CLOTH BACK INTO VOGUE
Cloth diapers have gone groovy. Some newfangled versions are barely distant
cousins to the soggy squares of cotton that slouched around baby bottoms a
generation ago. No pins. No smelly plastic pants. No soaking. No kidding.
This renaissance of reusables has evolved from some of the traditional
concerns: cost, impact on environment and parents' desire to keep natural
materials next to their babies' bottoms. But modern reusable diapers can
boast two things the old-school kind cannot: convenience and performance.
Innovative fabrics, like those seen in surgical gowns, make these diapers
waterproof but soft and supple. Materials that wick moisture, like Polartec,
are used closest to the baby. And these fabrics don't stain or hold onto
messes like old-fashioned cotton diapers. Users just flick the yucky stuff
into the toilet and flush.
Nylon snaps guaranteed for life or imported fastening tape similar to Velcro
holds these high-tech diapers snugly in place. The latest cloth diapers are
trim and shaped to fit like disposables. Unlike the throwaway kind, they
come in such bold colors and prints that a pile of them looks like a
painter's palette.
Cloth diapers of yesteryear are still around. Traditionalists sniff that
real diapers should be only all-natural, unbleached fibers, such as wool,
cotton or hemp. Some holdouts even like to pin. The quiet revolution hasn't
led to a resurgence of diaper services, because most modern cloth-diaper
users wash their own. The chemicals commercial services use would ruin the
high-performance fabrics, which can't even take bleach or softeners. Still,
because solid waste doesn't stick to these fabrics, washing these diapers at
home isn't much different from doing the rest of the family's wash.
A virtual army of manufacturers and retailers, from micro- to medium-size,
has used the Internet to create a market and a community, said Lori Taylor
of Buffalo, NY, co-founder and chairwoman of the Real Diaper Association
(http://www.realdiaperassociation.org
), an advocacy group that began last year. Mothers spread the word through
the Web, and by word of mouth when they take out a colorful cloth diaper
when changing a baby in public.
To get started with contemporary cloth diapers in a low-fuss way, you need
about two to three dozen, which lets you wash several times a week. The cost
of stocking even the most expensive modern cloth styles is cheaper than
using disposables - which can run about $20 per week. New all-in-one
diapers, which have an outside, waterproof layer fused to an absorbent layer
and don't need covers, cost about $15 each. Pocket-style diapers which have
an opening between the inner and waterproof layers and dry in minutes also
cost about $15 each but need absorbent cotton or hemp inserts. Those are
purchased separately from the diapers for about $3 each. Some brands come in
sizes from small to large; others say that one size fits babies from 8 to 30
pounds.
The most sought-after modern cloth diaper brands sell on eBay, used, for as
much as three-fourths of the original price. New, manufacturers' seconds
fetch anywhere from half to full price on the auction site, depending on the
demand. Auctions can lure scores of bids. I bought 27 new, nearly perfect
pocket-style diapers called Fuzzi Bunz in a frenzied fit of eBay bidding
late last year for an average of $9 each.
- end -
|
