malkiserow Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 (edited) I am a bit hacked off about tabloid/media rubbish, Gordon Brown speaking without regard to the facts, stupid Local Authorities who have really mucked up recycling through ignorance and pathetic eco-warrior/hairshirt/tree huggers. So here goes................ Is plastic fantastic? In an article in the Daily Mail on 29th February 2008 the headline was….The Prime Minister is lending his voice to the Daily Mail's campaign against the blight of "plastic poison". Yes the carrier bag saga. Plastic bags are not so important by weight as a problem but politically and since they are so visual as litter they must be taken seriously. To put this in perspective, of all the plastic consumed in the UK about 20% is used for packaging that is in consumer items. Carrier bags account for about 10% of this. Lord Taverne chairman of Sense about Science said “The British Government is irresponsible to jump on a bandwagon that has no basis in scientific evidenceâ€. DINP and phthalates in baby equipment have been in the press and on TV for years and most recently this month. Presenters talk of the chemicals as if they are some kind of enemy of society without understanding the full facts. “It’s man made, it’s virtually indestructible and it symbolises everything that’s wrong with our throwaway consumer culture. If only the truth were that straightforward†Sam Knight, FT weekend April 26/27 2008. However, we do have litter and marine flotsam problem epitomised by images of seals cut by nets and bags floating to other continents. Aren’t these societal issues and not a function of bad materials? Most other marine waste sinks and therefore cannot be seen. The light weight of plastics makes them float and be clearly visible. The public then naturally has a hightened awareness of dumping in our oceans. If you were offered a drink that was a mixture of butanol, iso amyl alcohol, hexanol, phenyl ethanol, tannin, benzyl alcohol, caffeine, geraniol, quercetin, 3-galloyl epicatchin, 3-galloyl epigallocatchin and inorganic salts, would you take it? Of course you wouldn’t! Why not? as you probably drink this every day using the name most of us use “teaâ€. Common names are alright but chemical names somehow are bad. Would you put sodium chloride on your chips and say yummy? Most of us do, when we call it salt! What lies behind this is a natural fear of the unknown and the fact that most people do not understand chemistry. Moreover we tend to have the idea that chemicals are bad. Images of molecular chains mean nothing to most people and serve only to confuse. It gets a lot worse than being baffled by science. It has built to a point where common public perception is a fear of anything the chemical industry has to say and do. Perhaps, more importantly, we need to really understand the amounts or levels of particular chemicals to make a judgement as to the real level of danger. Then we link plastics with chemicals and we have serious confusion and fear built upon a lack of trust in the industries and the products. Next we take the British publics perception that that the word recycling is a euphemism for inferior. So one perception could be that recycled plastic is lower than pond-life? Perhaps that is why some of the plastic recycled wasted ends up as boardwalks over bogs and marshy ground in Cumbria! Should we pack up and go home? Go the way of the dodo and get eaten by the media on their sea voyage of misperception? I don’t believe we have an option, the only answer is to speak out and, more importantly, act. Why do I make this assertion? Plastics are so fantastic in their application, efficiency in production and versatility that the future of mankind will be built using plastic quite extensively. This would only change if another superior material comes along and so far it hasn’t. Abraham Maslow coined the phrase “the hierarchy of needsâ€. He clarified the requirement of satisfying the most basic human needs before greater human and self development can take place. At that most basic level he included food, water and shelter. Plastic bottles can reduce weight of transported liquids (including water) compared to glass. The carbon footprint benefits over glass are blatantly obvious. In the Guardian on 30th April 2008 our governments chief scientist said “It is the poorest people who are most in danger from increasing food prices, ……yet, with our knowledge and technology, we can drive the agricultural revolution needed to end world hunger. Can we really afford to waste so much of the worlds food without packaging or use heavy and unsustainable packaging that uses vast amount of energy for more lorries carrying more weight? Packaging of food reduces waste to 3% on current figures compared with 50% waste without packaging. The people of the world need food. Smart lightweight plastics are clearly vital in preserving it. Plastic packaging extend product life, provides tamper evidence and gives transit protection. The potential for plastics in our homes as construction materials to reduce our carbon footprint is vast. The BASF house is an example of this. Plastics are pivotal to so much of our development, healthcare, transport (including light-weighting), targeted drug delivery. The production of cars is forecast to continue to grow, therefore light weighting is key for development and carbon footprint reduction in the automotive industry. In aviation, the A380 airbus burns 12% less fuel per seat substantially derived from composites of carbon fibre with a polymer matrix. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner has a 40% plastic fuselage and a 20% fuel saving. This leaves us with a challenge of global proportions. Namely plastics are vital for human development and the fact that most inhabitants of the globe believe that plastic is a symbol of consumerism and a throw-away society. The image of plastics, the materials and the industry, is the biggest hurdle facing all the plastics industry not just recyclers. If the industry does not lobby effectively, clearly, consistently then we are likely to see legislation against polymers based on unsound information. If this were to happen it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to change. Such a situation will be detrimental to not only the industry but to development of mankind and a sustainable future. Unless we want to live like Fred and Wilma Flintstone, sustainable development and human progress is rooted in technology. Innovation and design with technology and materials development is the bedrock of improving the impact mankinds’ development and living in harmony with the planet. Returning specifically to recycling, we have heard that the Chinese are banning certain imports of post consumer and post industrial waste. Whether they have or will ban these in the future is a moot point. The fact is that the Chinese are saying that our plastic post consumer waste is the worst of all in Europe! Why is this? The issues are complex, however, the basic issue is that the polymers are contaminated from ready-meal packaging and poor separation. Why do we even want to send our plastic to China? We have all heard the phrase “oil is buried sunshineâ€. Well, plastics, in the main, come from fossil oil. When we use the 4% of oil to make all the plastics (except PVC which has a vast and commonly available salt content) we trap the energy that otherwise humans normally burn! So plastic essentially locks up the carbon (or calories). We can recycle it many times and then, if we have to, capture the energy from waste. So don’t we want to preserve our plastic into our future and our childrens’ future? What can we do to remedy this? We have something to learn from the PVC industry which has taken bold steps in improving its image. “The best example of a well functioning voluntary commitment in the EU†Monica Frassoni – Green MEP. Also Germany has a 10 year head start on public information and education for plastics and recycling. Countries with higher landfill taxes than our own recycle more, countries without landfill recycle yet more again. If we think of a route to sustainability we would probably start with reduced consumption as a component of waste minimisation, through to waste management including collections, sorting etc, move through to recycling and reprocessing incorporating new technologies and then to market development with education and increasing recycled content of products higher up the value chain. At this point we have completed the circle. Some early steps may include:- Greater plastics industry coordination towards action and education of the public, legislators and the media Greater recycling industry coordination of the public, legislators and the media Virgin plastics industry and the recyclers working in coordination for the above Clear and consistent messages from the industry Divert packaging and plastics from landfill. Development of the recycling industry Commonality of working in recycling and public information by local authorities The industry working with the local authorities and organisations who support with knowledge, changing economics of markets/materials and research. Simplification of plastics/grades used in easily recognisable products/containers, eg. A common material for a yoghurt pot that is easy to recognise. Simple and clear labeling for recycling Education so the public can understand a simpler array of plastics for the bulk of what they will handle at home for recycling Education in the value of plastics. Recyclers to aim for higher value added use of recyclate through knowledge, technology and research Clean up our polymer waste streams Understand at what point to capture energy from waste plastics and probably recover the energy on a local basis. Address the chemicals in plastics issues prioritising key areas of human health. OK I've finished for now....... If you do or don't agree speak up please. Edited May 23, 2008 by malkiserow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranfield Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Where did you "cut and paste" that from ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harv Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Where did you "cut and paste" that from ? War and Peace? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malkiserow Posted May 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 It is mine, I cut and pasted it from a Word document I wrote on Wednesday. obviously I quoted individuals as mentioned in the text. Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tulkyuk Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 (edited) Do you think that 'us' as a shooting forum really give a **** What a complete and utter waste of band width this thread is going to be Edited May 23, 2008 by tulkyuk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maiden22 Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 (edited) . Edited November 20, 2008 by Maiden22 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Do you think that 'us' as a shooting forum really give a **** What a complete and utter waste of band width this thread is going to be :o just using a bit more bandwith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveK Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 So to use Maslows hierarchy of needs in relation to DaveK's belly (albeit reducing rapidly), I have a need to be given plastic carrier bags to transport Mrs Dave's shopping from the trolley to the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveK Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Do you think that 'us' as a shooting forum really give a **** What a complete and utter waste of band width this thread is going to be Well don't read it then. He's just as entitled to have a rant as anyone else. And there wasn't any TXT talk either which is a bonus :o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malkiserow Posted May 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Do you think that 'us' as a shooting forum really give a **** What a complete and utter waste of band width this thread is going to be Well don't read it then. He's just as entitled to have a rant as anyone else. And there wasn't any TXT talk either which is a bonus :o This is the general section for "talk other than shooting" but it's OK for you not to be interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tulkyuk Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 (edited) OK then, I wont, "BULL****" anyway, Tulky Edited May 23, 2008 by Cranfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerman Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 quite a few interesting points in there, can i ask why you wrote it originally? cheers, BM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondougal Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 a bit on the heavy side but an interesting post none the less. In any normal business where problems exist there are usually 2 ways of looking at it, 80 20 rule..e.g focus on the top 20% of your issues that generally account for 80% of your problems (and plastic bags certainly don't fit into that category) or there are the proverbial quick wins - which I'm guessing is where the good old bags sit. If it were a simple issue then I think the appropriate boffins would work out the highest priority and then all of the powers that be would cancel all their second home expenses claims allowances and redirect the GDP of a small country to solving the problem... The reality is not that simple, the general public, on average (normal distribution and all that) don't know how complex and interrelated the natural resources of the world can get (I know for one I do not) or even comprehend the level of joined up thinking you have eloquently put above, and in many ways it is arrogant of so called intellects to expect that people should! - therefore that is why communities elect leaders, learned people to guide them to a better future, the issue I have with this and is something that is squarely in our face at the moment across the pond in the states - leaders no longer seem to have to demonstrate genuine leadership, they have to be popular, what did I hear some one call it once "pop-olitics" just look at the amount of money Hillary Clinton is in debt by due to TV advertising etc.... Anyway back to the point - Why do we expect anything less than for government policies to follow popular (if ill-informed - no matter by what source) opinion - they want to be popular. plastic bags are a quick win, especially for the poles - but it certainly isn't going to do any harm to help to reduce the use of them - as ultimately what is the goal? and once the quick wins have been won and the issue still exist the hard choices are the only ones left to make! Although I'm not 100% sure of your motives (feels a little defensive regarding company / Industry image) I do particularly agree with the constructive approach you have to addressing many of the problems that would sit in the top 20% bracket. I also particularly agree with you media comments and I think we would go along way if we could shift the emphasis from fiction to fact in what is popular media - I too would love to be famous but for at least contributing something productive, not because I was on a TV show for 15 mins 4 years ago and last night I got my (man) boobs out as I came out of a night club - but again that's what popular culture now a days rewards! Its a bit off track but I think one of the saddest things these days is when you see young children being asked what they want to be...Famous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malkiserow Posted May 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 (edited) quite a few interesting points in there, can i ask why you wrote it originally? cheers, BM. It is a draft of something I am writing about. It is for the industry, I just captured thoughts from my rant during a meeting the other day, it is far from finished but outlines where this article is going. I've never written an article before. Edited May 23, 2008 by malkiserow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushkin Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Good post - I enjoyed reading it Don't worry about Tulkytuk - he's missing his shed Pushkin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow Bear Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 To add to the pot shortly after I left school in the late 60's I was working as a lab tec at BP research. At that time they had a complete house made primarily using plastics, most recycled. When I asked why it was not widely available, as the system meant lower skills were needed to build I was told that the construction unions had blacked it so no one would use it. How true I don't know but it still rings true remembering the time. I feel shure that if it was relaunched now it would be in B&Q in days and use all the recycled thermoplastic you could find to boot. Just my 2pth on the subject. D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.