IS (BLANK) BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT?

Because of my career as an ecologist, people sometimes ask my opinion about the environmental impact of one consumer product or action compared to others. Someone recently asked my opinion about dishcloths advertised as environmentally friendly compared to others, so I did a bit of research and replied. This is a good example of the conundrum in which we consumers find ourselves; the answer is usually "I don't know."

Here is the problem. As consumers, we don't have enough information (data rules!) to make these decisions. There is a growing body of evidence, for example, that plastic grocery bags are better for the environment than the cotton or recycled plastic fiber bags we carry in our cars when we go shopping. This is often true if the cradle-to-grave effects of an item are considered, not just one factor, such as plastic pollution of the ocean, in this example.

Here is an over-simplified diagram of cradle-to-grave effects analysis.

As shown above, we need to consider the inputs of energy and raw materials, as well as the emissions of contaminants to water and air from every phase in the life cycle of an item in order to understand the environmental impact associated with it. This includes, of course, the transportation of raw materials and products and recycled items. 

We also need to be aware of the fate of items we place into a recycling system. An old saying of mine is, just because an item has a recycling symbol on it does not mean that it can be recycled. 

Some analysts have suggested, based on their own research, that for many items such as plastic waste, landfilling is better for the environment than recycling. One factor in this analysis is that much of the plastic being recycled in the USA is actually shipped overseas for recycling. The environmental costs associated with shipping (fuel, emissions, etc.) are large, and the receiving countries generally are not as good as they should be about wastes from their recycling processes (there are even some reports that loads of plastic deemed by the receiving countries to be too contaminated with non-plastics and non-recyclable plastics are dumped in the ocean). The comparison includes the fuel used and emissions from transporting waste from homes to a landfill, versus the fuel used and emissions from transporting waste from homes to a transfer station to a sorting facility to a port to an overseas port to a recycling facility.  

As usual, in my opinion, consumers are tasked with trying to figure all of this out and being responsible for disposal of the packaging and items we buy. Should the companies that produce, package, ship and sell the items bear some responsibility for handling the wastes associated with their products? 

Consumers are also responsible for trying to determine the environmental footprint of a product before purchasing it. There are some, but very few exceptions to this, such as the paper food bags sold in the box seen in the following photo.

(Paper Snack and Sandwich Bags, manufactured in Sweden. If You Care, Ltd.)

This kind of informative labeling is very rare, and it helps consumers make informed choices. I buy these because they appear to be a good choice environmentally; however, because they are manufactured in Europe, I have to assume that the transportation environmental costs are outweighed by the overall low environmental cost. 

So as I said at the beginning, the answer to the question “Is (blank) better for the environment?” is - I usually don’t know. The best I can do is to encourage everyone to be thoughtful consumers: think about where it is made, what it is made from, how it gets to you and what you will do with the associated wastes before you purchase an item. Most of the time it will be an educated guess, but being more aware is a good thing.

—-