One peak we should bring on faster: Peak plastics

Aurora · Post by **Aurora** » 20 Mar 2010, 05:27

Greenbang - 19/03/10

While most of the peaks we see looming today — peak oil, peak water, peak rare-earth metals, etc — have dire consequences for life as we know it, Rolf Halden is hoping we can bring on another peak that will spell a better world on the downward slope: peak plastics.

Article continues ...

Post by **adam2** » 09 Apr 2010, 09:47

I would agree that plastics should be less used, especialy for disposable products that are likely to be carelessly discarded and damage the enviroment.

Plastics are however invaluable for some long term uses, and may well save energy over alternatives.

Consider for example PVC hosepipe, cheap, lightweight, long lasting, and has many uses around the farm , or house.
A far supperior product to hose made of natural rubber which is heavy, expensive, less flexible and perishes rapidly if exposed to sunlight.
The use of such PVC hose facilitates small scale water reuse, water saving, rainwater capture and the like.

Likewise consider PVC or polythene insulated electric cables, cheaper and lighter in weight than natural rubber.
If correctly installed such cables should last almost indefinatly, unlike rubber cables which only have a safe life of from 15 to 25 years.
Rubber insulation is also highly flammable, a decided disadvantage.
Consider the costs and disruption of re-wiring every 20 years, as used to be advised, and is no longer required.
Consider the embodied energy in all the rubber insulated cable that would be discarded after 20 years, and hopefully recycled, or even worse dumped.
Cheap plastic cables make small scale RE much more convieient than would be case the case if rubber insulated cables were used.

Plastic crates and barrels etc. are excellent for all sorts of long term storeage, and I see little harm is useing such, provided that they are considered to be a durable and reused item and not something to be discarded and replaced on a whim.

tomhitchman · Post by **tomhitchman** » 09 Apr 2010, 18:01

I heard the other day that Riverford Organics have done a Life Cyle Analysis of reusable plastic bags for their operations (guessing their boxes but not sure) and they have come to the conclusion that they are better then the paper bags.

Anybody have confirmation of this or more details?

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 09 Apr 2010, 18:32

I have similarly heard that the disposable plastic cups you get for example in water coolers are a better alternative than using paper cups, because they are more recyclable.

That's if they do actually get recycled, of course!

I like to think that one day, the value of second hand plastic will be such that skint people go collecting all the plastic rubbish which is currently strewn about the place so they can sell it for a few quid. It would be a poetic beginning to a new era of 'keep Britain tidy'.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 09 Apr 2010, 18:35

I'd like to know that too.

We're just discussing the relative merits of recycled paper bags against not recycled, recycled aluminium foil pots against non-recycled, plastic against cornstarch 'plastic', recycled waxed paper against the ordinary.

In my daughter's deli, she is very keen to do the best thing for the environment but is frustrated that most customers don't give a damn and the 'ethical' options are all more expensive.

2 As and a B · Post by **2 As and a B** » 09 Apr 2010, 20:23

Is there a better material than plastic for making containers?

The problem is with the lack of a planned lifecycle for plastic products.

ziggy12345 · Post by **ziggy12345** » 10 Apr 2010, 00:19

Glass

2 As and a B · Post by **2 As and a B** » 10 Apr 2010, 06:59

OK, inert glass for small amounts of beverages.

JonB · Post by **JonB** » 10 Apr 2010, 21:07

ziggy12345 wrote:Glass

Not good for medical disposables. Lots of energy needed to sterilise glass, and that was in the good old days before we knew about prions. Plastic is the best solution. Also all incinerated.

Post by **adam2** » 12 Apr 2010, 09:33

foodimista wrote:Is there a better material than plastic for making containers?

The problem is with the lack of a planned lifecycle for plastic products.

There are alternatives, but often these are less satisfactory.

As others post, glass is an alternative for relatively small containers of food, drink and some other products.
Although the materials used to make glass are plentiful, it is an energy intensive process that uses a great deal of gas or or coal.
Glass containers are heavier than plastic and therefore consume more fuel in transport.
Glass is easy to recycle but this an energy intensive proccess (though not as bad a making new glass)

Large plastic drums or barrels are useful for storing water and foodstuffs, the alternatives are galvanised iron (heavy, expensive, liable to rust) or wood which is low energy but liable to rot.
For fixed water tanks, ferro-cement is a viable alternative to plastic, but both the cement and the steel mesh contain a great deal of embodied energy.

Plastic crates are useful for all manner of storeage, wood is a possible alternative but is liable to rot, is flammable, and vulnerable to attack by battery acid and by pests.
Plastic crates are available that stack safely up to a greater height than wooden boxes.

2 As and a B · Post by **2 As and a B** » 12 Apr 2010, 10:21

Porcelain/pottery as well for small amounts, but like glass they too are easily broken.

Plastics ARE very useful. For insulation and molded shapes (e.g. for computers,cars, fridges) as well as containers. But no thought nor cost-consideration had gone into how manufactured items would be disposed of at the end of their useful lives, until recently.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 12 Apr 2010, 10:27

We need to change the way stuff is produced. Manufacturers of stuff need to be made accountable for every piece of stuff they produce.

If producers of stuff got back, on their doorstep, every piece of stuff they produced that wasn't actually consumed or in use, they would soon find ways of cutting the total amount of stuff.

No incineration, no landfill, no dumping, no downstream 'recycling'. Everything should go back to its rightful owner.

syberberg · Post by **syberberg** » 12 Apr 2010, 22:49

emordnilap wrote:We need to change the way stuff is produced. Manufacturers of stuff need to be made accountable for every piece of stuff they produce.

If producers of stuff got back, on their doorstep, every piece of stuff they produced that wasn't actually consumed or in use, they would soon find ways of cutting the total amount of stuff.

No incineration, no landfill, no dumping, no downstream 'recycling'. Everything should go back to its rightful owner.

Agreed.

There used to be a time when the beer companies, I'm specifically thinking of Scottish and Newcastle, brewers of Newcastle Brown, would pay 6p per returned bottle from pubs/clubs. Those bottles would be washed and reused. I wonder how long it'll be until they start doing the same thing again?

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 12 Apr 2010, 23:10

What would happen if the government legislated that all packaging materials must be made from stuff which has already been recycled?

syberberg · Post by **syberberg** » 13 Apr 2010, 02:42

Andy Hunt wrote:What would happen if the government legislated that all packaging materials must be made from stuff which has already been recycled?

Once the White Paper was published, the corporate lobbyists would get it watered down to 50% or less recycled material used, claiming it would "stifle growth".

Or am I just being cynical? Again.