"We can either have plastic toy sharks or real sharks, not both."

The above quote sounds almost like the tagline for this blog, doesn't it? In fact, it is from a letter to the Monterey Bay Aquarium written by Erica Etelson, a friend of one of my Green Sangha friends. Erica visited the aquarium with her family a few months ago and was disappointed by all the plastic and other petroleum-based items for sale in the gift shop, as well as food packaging in the cafe.

Now, we're used to seeing gift shops at zoos and museums. It's one of the ways these places bring in cash to fund their educational work. However, the mission of the Monterey Bay Aquarium is special. Their purpose is to educate the public about the health of our oceans. They are the folks who publish the Seafood Watch sustainable seafood guides each year. And through their Center for the Future of the Oceans, they "champion policies that conserve and restore threatened marine wildlife on the California coast and in the northern Pacific, including the southern sea otter, sharks, tunas and sea turtles." So to Erica, it was ironic that they would offer for sale so many items that are actually contributing to the sickness of marine eco-systems.

My Green Sangha group saw the irony in the situation too when we read Erica's letter and the response she received, and so as a group action we all handwrote our own letters to the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Below I have reprinted the full exchange: Erica's initial letter, the response from the gift shop manager, and Erica's follow-up letter. Included is the contact info for the aquarium gift shop manager if after reading this exchange you feel inspired to send your own message.

----- Original Message -----
From: Erica Etelson
To: jpackard@mbayaq.org ; jhekkers@mbayaq.org ; caslanian@mbayaq.org ; msutton@mbayaq.org
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 3:14 PM
Subject: ocean-friendly concessions


Dear M-Bay Aquarium Friends:

My family recently enjoyed its first trip to the aquarium and were particularly impressed with your efforts to educate guests about sustainable seafood--efforts that were in evidence on the menus of several of the local seafood restaurants. The flush toilets are great too!

But I have to tell you how dismayed I was by the volume of petroleum-based items for sale in your gift shop and cafe. Plastic toys, synthetic clothing, plastic beverage bottles and food containers--how ironic it was to see a display of books all on the theme of averting climate catastrophe right next to a rack of fleece jackets made in Guatemala.

You folks surely know better than I do how much damage plastic debris and the burning of fossil fuels do to the health of the oceans. We can either have plastic toy sharks or real sharks, not both.

I'm actually writing a book about how to transition to greener lifestyle choices so, if you're interested, I'd be happy to go into further details about some of the problems I observed and can even come down again and do a more complete audit. I know how devoted you are to your mission of protecting marine species and so I hope you will take my comments in the spirit of promoting our mutual goals. If the aquarium blazed the trail on greening its operations, surely other museums and aquariums would follow, not to mention the thousands of visitors who would receive a firsthand education.

Sincerely,

Erica Etelson
Berkeley, CA

----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew Fischer afischer@mbayaq.org
To: Erica Etelson
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 3:58 PM
Subject: Monterey Bay Aquarium Guest Feedback Response


Dear Ms. Etelson

My name is Andrew Fischer , General Manager of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Gift and Bookstore. I received your comment regarding us offering products that are manufactured in other countries and therefore may contradict the message of conservation, and I wanted to get back to you with a response.

I personally appreciate feedback from guests like you. We can only improve our operation with comments such as these.

The concerns you raised regarding the origin of our products is a challenge for my team on many levels as we strive to provide our 1.8 Million visitors a special selection of quality items at an affordable price.

Our buying team is addressing the concerns that you noted by reevaluating each category in our stores. What we face is that in many areas (such as giftware, key chains, mugs, magnets, apparel, plush, and many toys) there are no options to purchase at the quantity, quality, and selection as what overseas production offers.

In fact, almost all of the books we offer on the topic of environmental concerns are printed on non-recycled paper and in other countries. If we chose to offer only domestically printed book publications, our selection would be minimal at best.

My staff and I are prepared to make a major shift in our business practices in certain categories, but it will be a challenge to do this overnight. We are working with our vendors on sourcing products from within North America , but as of this moment, we are limited.

We will be looking to offer a consistent message by presenting a permanent Think Green section of the Main Gift and Bookstore. This will officially start on Earth Day (April 22nd). The items will include many of the books you noted, as well as organic cotton shirts, actual trees that you can plant, recycled pencils and glass, as well as other aquarium themed recycled items. We will add to this department over the coming months.

We are also very proud to be the exclusive location to offer an Organic Plush Penguin (made with Soy and the fiber from the Kapok seed). This hypoallergenic Penguin is however manufactured in Indonesia . The Penguin is a great example of the challenges I noted above. No US manufacturer of quality plush exists, let alone one that would go to this length to produce an earth friendly product.

The Monterey Bay Aquarium’s mission is to inspire conservation of the oceans, as well as to educate on environmental and ecological concerns. The Gift and Bookstore helps contribute funds to achieve this mission, and should follow the path set-forth by the dedicated staff and founders. It is my job to find options, and to take the right direction to better match this mission.

I thank you for your focus on this very important area of our operation.

If you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at 831-645-4945 or via my e-mail at afischer@mbayaq.org

I have also sent a copy of this response to Ed Prohaska , our Chief Financial Officer and Vice President of Enterprise Development.

Sincerely yours,

Andrew Fischer
General Manager of Merchandising
Monterey Bay Aquarium
831-648-4945 P
831-648-4989 F
afischer@mbayaq.org

----- Original Message -----
From: Erica Etelson
To: Andrew Fischer
Cc: eprohaska@mbayaq.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Monterey Bay Aquarium Guest Feedback Response


Dear Andrew,

Thanks for your response. I do understand the challenge you're facing and am glad to hear of the initiation of the Think Green section. But I still want to challenge the assumption that the aquarium's mission includes providing your visitors with affordable products. I think that's Wal-Mart's mission. The aquarium's mission, on the other hand, is to promote the protection of marine life by educating the public about the dire environmental threats to the oceans. I don't see how encouraging your visitors to buy petroleum-based products manufactured by exploited workers in countries with lax environmental standards and shipped across the globe is anything other than a direct contradiction of your mission.

Part of environmental education includes challenging consumers to forego their entitlement to products that have cheap price tags but come with hidden environmental costs. It is far better to buy nothing than to buy a product whose manufacture damaged the environment. I imagine that the bookstore provides the aquarium with needed revenue but I would guess that that portion of the budget could be made up for by a fundraising campaign that highlights the aquarium's downsizing of the bookstore to a small, 100% eco-friendly selection of items. I think donors would step up to bat to help the aquarium avoid the hypocrisy of selling plastic fish and other items that often wind up as ocean debris that kill real fish.

I'd also encourage you to inventory the items sold in your cafe, most of which are non-organic and many of which are excessively packaged in plastic. There is absolutely no need for plastic water bottles or beverages of any kind. Nutritious, organic food and drinks should be sold on washable or at least bio-degradable plates and cups. Chips can be purchased in bulk and sold by the handful or by weight to avoid the packaging of single-serving snacks. There's a lot to look at here, and I hope you'll take the bull by the horns.

Thanks,
Erica Etelson

Besides being a kindred spirit, Erica Etelson is a terrific writer whose articles have appeared in the SF Chronicle. The world needs more people like her.
 

 

Junk floating in the ocean

By now, most readers of this blog have read about the swirling plastic soup in the North Pacific Gyre and learned about the harm to marine life as well as the bioaccumulation of toxic chemicals that are attracted to these tiny plastic pieces. This coming Sunday, June 1, a couple of intrepid adventurers will sail their own Junk out into the Pacific carrying a large plastic bottle filled with messages from students and individuals across the nation. The bottle of messages will eventually be delivered to state and federal legislators.

The Junk is actually a raft made with 15,000 plastic bottles. The journey is part of an educational effort called Message in a Bottle, and the adventurers are some of the same members of the Algalita Marine Research Foundation (AMRF) who made the trip out to the North Pacific Gyre this past winter and brought back samples of the plastic foating out there.

If you enjoyed following the blog of the Alguita on its voyage this winter, you might want to subscribe to the Junk's blog this time around. And also consider making a donation to support the work of the AMRF and including your own message in the bottle.

I feel very privileged this week to be able to support the campaigns of No Impact Man yesterday and AMRF today because it was through information from these two sources that my own awareness of the problems of plastic came into being and Fake Plastic Fish was born nearly a year ago. We've come so far, and yet there is still so far to go.
 

 

Dear Santa Sabina,

The following is a letter that I am sending off tonight to the Santa Sabina Retreat Center, where I spent this past weekend, and about 12 previous weekends since 2000, sitting in silence. I share this letter here only to demonstrate that we can have a voice, write our letters and make our calls, and do it all in a spirit of sharing and love rather than confrontation or hostility. I love Santa Sabina. I truly do. Here's the letter:

Dear Santa Sabina Center:

As a participant in Jon Bernie’s meditation retreat this past weekend, I write this letter in a spirit of gratitude for the beautiful space that you provide for rest and silence. This note is meant to thank you and also to offer some suggestions.

I’ve been attending Jon Bernie’s retreats at Santa Sabina ever since the very first one in 2000. Every time I come back, I feel like I’m returning to a loving home. From the care taken for the lovely gardens to the wholesome meals to the little bits of poetry and flowers placed in unexpected places, Santa Sabina helps retreatants feel safe and nurtured during our stay.

Given this attention to detail, then, it is a bit ironic to find certain personal care products, such as antibacterial soaps (Soft Soap antibacterial liquid hand soap) and synthetic air fresheners (Oust Air Sanitizer and Glade Neutralizer) offered for guests’ use. And since Santa Sabina is all about caring for the health of the planet and the creatures that dwell here, I assume that these products are offered without knowledge of the harm that they are currently causing to our environment.

First, Oust Air Sanitizer contains an additional active ingredient called Triethylene Glycol, which can be a strong allergen and hazard for asthma sufferers. In fact, the label on the can states: “Asthma and allergy sufferers: Consult your physician before using this product in your home.” It contains a further warning: “Before spraying, remove birds. After using, ventilate normally prior to returning birds to treated areas.” I discovered cans of this Oust Air Sanitizer on the backs of several toilets for retreatants to spray after using the facilities. And whereas I don’t personally suffer from allergies or asthma, I would be very careful what I sprayed into the air that all of us share.

In addition to that particular chemical in the Oust spray, there are other chemicals in synthetic air fresheners (like Glade) which are hazardous to humans and wildlife. I’ve enclosed a couple of pieces of information with this letter. The first is a press release on a study of air fresheners by the Natural Resources Defense Council. One of the issues with air fresheners is that companies who make them are not required to list all of their ingredients on the label of the can. What NRDC found in their study is that most commercial air fresheners contain chemicals called phthalates, which are reproductive toxins.

Phthalates are generally found in any product that simply lists “fragrance” as an ingredient on the label. Air fresheners and soaps that do not contain phthalates will be more specific about their ingredients. For example, the air freshener I use at home is Ecco Mist by Ecco Bella which contains only essential oils, emulsifier and water and comes in a recyclable aluminum can. Another option is Citrus Magic (Ingredients: 100% Pure & Natural, specially formulated citrus fragrance oils from oranges, lemons, limes, tangerines and grapefruits.)

I’ve also enclosed the Environmental Working Group’s report, “Down The Drain,” which discusses the problems caused by washing chemicals such as phthalates and Triclosan, the active ingredient in antibacterial soaps, down the drain and into the San Francisco Bay. Triclosan is a thyroid disruptor and is also thought to contribute to the problem of resistant bacteria. There are many natural soaps that do not contain Triclosan or synthetic fragrances or colors.

I would be happy to help you find environmentally-preferable soaps and air fresheners. And if cost is an issue, perhaps spending a bit more for natural soap and giving up the air freshener entirely might be an option. The bathrooms have windows that can be opened for air freshening. Might the sprays be unnecessary?

Thanks so much for your time. I love Santa Sabina and only wish for it to be as gentle on the earth as is possible. Please let me know what I can do to help.

Sincerely,

Beth Terry

This is what I meant yesterday by "perfectly imperfect." But one of our practice instructions is to move towards that which is difficult. I think it was good for me to sit with the seeming irony of this natural, beautiful place and the moderately hazardous chemicals in its midst. My mind kept crying out, "I don't understand! I don't understand!" Sitting with confusion instead of fighting it can open us into compassion. For ourselves and the rest of this crazy world.
 

 

Environmental Children's Books, Part 2: Teach Them To Recycle and Bring Their Own Bag

Here are the next two environmental kids' books, as promised.

Michael Recycleby Ellie Bethel, illustrated by Alexandra Colombo. Green Bean may think that my Michael is a super hero for encouraging his firm to stop buying bottled water. But this big picture book is about a new super hero, Michael Recycle, who flies into trashy towns in his green cape and colander hat and, in Suess-like rhyme, teaches everyone to recycle and garden and collect rainwater. Then, when the town is sparkling again, they throw a big old party to celebrate. In fact, instead of buying streamers,

They covered the town
In green toilet paper
Then rolled it back up
To use again later.

You may think that's yucky
But these folks don't agree
In Abberdoo-Rimey
Recycling is key!

While the pictures in this book are fantastic fun and the Go Green Tips at the end are useful, I would have liked to have seen more emphasis on waste reduction and reuse before recycling.

They recycled their paper,
Their plastic and cans,
And even old junk
Like used pots and pans!

I'm not crazy about the word "junk" used to describe stuff that we may not need to keep for ourselves anymore. And recycling pots and pans? Doesn't Michael know about Freecycle? He is, after all, a super hero. But maybe I've become more hardcore than the average bear. And from what I see on the streets of Oakland, it's challenging enough to get kids to put their trash in a garbage can, much less recycle it. This book is a good start for getting the environmental message across.

I'll be donating it to the Oakland library this weekend, per Burbanmom's Giving Challenge.

Oh, and yesterday, when reviewing the two animal books, I forgot to talk about the production of the books themselves. One was printed in Mexico and the other in Singapore. Michael Recycle was printed in Korea. And, for a book about recycling, I was surprised that it's not itself printed on recycled paper. Or if it is, that fact was not mentioned anywhere in the book or press materials I received. Hmm... sort of like the seminar on "greening your law firm" that Michael and I attended where bottled water and plastic-wrapped sandwiches were served while the panelists talked about eliminating plastic bottles from the workplace. There are the ideals that we espouse, but if they don't translate into concrete changes, what good are they?

Okay, enough soap box. Michael Recycle is a really cute book and I think it would be a good addition to any school library.

The next book, which coincidentally organicneedle mentioned in a comment on my post yesterday, is My Bag and Me!by Karen Farmer, illustrated by Gary Grant. It doesn't say what ages it's geared toward, but the heavy cardboard pages and pictures of the little boy suggest to me (a non-parent) that it's for small children. This book encourages kids not only to recycle, but to refuse disposable bags in the first place:

Let's take a trip
to our favorite store,
where My Bag and Me say,
"Paper and plastic no more!"

The secret to My Bag And Me is the hidden pull-out tray in the back that contains a child-sized resuable bag they can take to the store with them. I love the idea of this, not to mention the cuteness. But I'm less enthusiastic about the materials.

The reusable bag is made of Dupont Tyvek, the type of plastic that many large postal envelopes are made from. The cover of the book states, "This book and the reusable Tyvek bag are 100% recyclable!" What you don't realize until you read the fine print (if you read the fine print) is that Tyvek is only recyclable by mailing it back to Dupont. I devoted a whole post to Tyvek in October of last. It's worthwhile to read if you haven't already.

And notice that the book is advertised as "recyclable" rather than being made from recycled materials. So I contacted the PR rep who sent it to me and asked about the materials used as well as the decision to have it printed in China. These were her responses:

1) On using Tyvek to make the bag: Natural fibers, like cotton or hemp, were too bulky. The book would have been enormous and very heavy, not to mention the extra amount of paper needed to create the tray cavity. There is a marking on the bottom of the bag with an 800 number for recycling Tyvek information. Our hope, however, is that these bags will have a very long life as a shopping bag.

2) On the shiny coating on the cardboard pages: The coating is a plastic film, otherwise known as PP lamination. PP, or Polypropylene lamination is non-toxic and the same goes for the glue, ink and paper used in these books. The paper is made of C1S ( coated paper, one side), and Natura board.

3) On having the book manufactured in China: Cost was the deciding factor for printing in China. We would never have been able to produce this book here, and sell it at the cover price of $10.95. The manufacturer is ICTI audited which gives credibility and they can issue a letter guaranteeing that the materials used are non-toxic and certificates for the materials themselves.

Organicneedle wrote a bit about this book back in March, and then she came up with a list of ways to make your own reusable bags for kids out of reused materials or natural fabrics. Anyway, it's a cute idea, perhaps not executed in the manner hardcore environuts like me would prefer, but useful nonetheless for getting kids accustomed to bringing their own bags.

I offer this book as another freebie to a Fake Plastic Fish reader. It's not really appropriate for donating to the library because of the bag that needs to be removed and used. So please leave a comment and let me know if you'd like it. Or email me directly at beth[at]fakeplasticfish[dot]com and let me know.

And finally, here's an ACTION ALERT for anyone concerned about keeping commercial advertising/product placements out of kids' books. Harper Collins has announced its plans to publish a series of books for young girls called MacKenzie Blue, in which, according to this New York Times article, "...product placement is very much a part of the plan. Tina Wells, chief executive of Buzz Marketing Group, which advises consumer product companies on how to sell to teenagers and preteenagers, will herself be the author of titles in the series filled with references to brands. She plans to offer the companies that make them the chance to sponsor the books."

To read about the campaign and to protest the publication of these books, please visit Commercial Alert and take action.
 

 

Environmental Children's Books, Part 1: A Polar Bear, A Hippo, And A 130-Year Old Tortoise

I've received 4 environmental children's books in the past month from publishers who would like me to review them on Fake Plastic Fish. Not that I know anything about children. I mean, I was one once, but I don't have or live with any now... unless you count Terrible Person and the two unruly kitty cats in our house. But I do enjoy picture books, and my brother, in fact, is a children's book illustrator, so why not? I'll talk about the first 2 tonight and the next 2 tomorrow.

Knut: How One Little Polar Bear Captivated The World, by Juliana, Isabella, and Craig Hatkoff and Dr. Gerald R. Uhlich. If you haven't heard the story of Knut, he's the little polar bear from the Berlin Zoo who was rejected by his mother at birth and raised by a human zookeeper until he was old enough to live in an enclosure and perform for an adoring public. I don't think I'm supposed to tell it that way, though. Knut's become a symbol for the global warming cause. Reading his story might help children to develop compassion for animals they wouldn't encounter in daily life and perhaps the desire to do something to protect them. In fact, the back of the book lists a few steps people can take, like riding a bike instead of driving and turning out lights when leaving a room.

I was actually moved while reading the book on BART tonight. Thomas Dorflein's (the zookeeper's) bond with the bear and desire to protect him reminded me of the feelings of protectiveness and care I myself felt the first time I saw the photo of the dead sea bird with its stomach full of plastic, the first time an animal moved me to act. And I thought, this bear is so cute, of course children will love him and be moved to care about our environment for his sake.

But when I got home, I did a little research and found out the rest of Knut's story, which is not all cute, fuzzy feelings. The title of the book is actually rather ironic because it turns out that Knut has not only captivated us, but humans have captivated and damaged him. The book ends with Knut still young and cuddly, and it speculates that one day the polar bear will grow so big that he could accidentally harm Thomas. When that time comes, they will have to separate. But it will be okay because "Adult polar bears spend most of their time alone, so Knut won't be lonely if it happens that Thomas can no longer be with him every day."

Turns out that that's not what happens when captive polar bears who have been made a spectacle for cheering audiences day after day are left alone. Not this one anyway. According to Markus Roebke, one of Knut's keepers, in this article in the Daily Mail, "He is addicted to the whole show, the human adulation. It is not healthy. He actually cries out or whimpers if he sees that there is not a spectator outside his enclosure ready to ooh and aah at him. When the zoo had to shut because of black ice everywhere he howled until staff members stood before him and calmed him down."

The Independent quotes German zoologist Peter Arras's description of Knut as a "psychopath." And a commenter in The Atlantic says, "Now that his youthful charms are fading with his white coat, he still demands constant attention from humans. They stare at him, or he screams in misery. Anyone could have guessed that the lack of same-species companionship and endless train of adoring tourists would eventually damage him, but the zoo kept him on display because apparently cuteness trumps morality." That particular writer goes on to actually suggest euthanasia as the only solution to Knut's pain.

The children's book tells a very cute and inspiring story of a man who bottle-fed and cared for a rejected bear and, I'm sure, loved him with all his heart. But the current reality is not so cute. So what do we do? Be grateful for the web, for one thing. Because, while books are static, the Internet is not. And after reading books to children, we can also do a little research and then decide how much of the cold, hard reality we want to share with them.

What would you tell your kids?

The second book, by the same authors, is a much nicer story. Owen & Mzee: The Language of Friendship, by Isabella and Craig Hatkoff and Dr. Paula Kahumbu, tells the story of a baby hippo, dubbed Owen, that was orphaned during a tsunami in Kenya and rescued to the Haller Park animal sanctuary, where he bonded with, of all creatures, a 130-year old tortoise called Mzee! Why would a baby hippo bond with a wrinkly old reptile? (Okay, I can hear the jokes coming already, so just stop it!) There seems to be some suggestion that the markings on the back of the tortoise's shell resemble a hippo face. I'm not sure I buy that theory.

Still, the story of the bond between these two very different creatures is heartwarming, and actually seems to be true! The hippo would follow the tortoise around, nipping at its heels, and following its lead in which plants to eat and how to behave. They developed a kind of strange language of sounds to communicate with each other that neither hippos nor tortoises normally make.

But following Mzee, Owen seemed to be growing into a tortoise shaped like a hippo, rather than an actual adult hippo. He would only eat the same plants Mzee ate, which were not really hippo food. And he'd had no contact with other hippos, since his rescuers were worried that introducing him to another hippo clan could be dangerous for him. So, by the end of the story in the book, they've found a female orphaned hippo that they hope will become his friend, along with Mzee and another tortoise.

Once again, the great thing about the web is that you can find out what happens next! According to the Haller Park blog, Owen and Cleo, the new hippo, bonded and became friends. But in March 2007, Mzee had to be moved away from them because Cleo was too rough and the staff were afraid she would hurt him. Oops. Maybe I should have given you a spoiler warning. But these are kids' books, and just because you know what happens, doesn't mean you have to spoil the ending for your kids!

Anyway, reading these two books lead me to think about my own relationship with certain non-human beings and the ways that I care for them and also exploit their cuteness for my own personal gain. Right here on this blog! Maybe that's just part of human nature. To marvel at how animals of completely different species can bond with one another without the slightest clue what it's actually like to be that other creature. We have to be so careful, don't we?

So... the FREEBIE! If you would like this hardback copy of Owen & Mzee, please request it in a comment. Or email me privately at beth[at]fakeplasticfish[dot]com. I'll choose the lucky recipient at random some time next week. I can't give you the polar bear book because it's already promised to Michael, who I predict is destined to be either eaten by or reincarnated as one of them, assuming they haven't become extinct.

But tomorrow, I'll be offering another free book. So stay tuned. You might like that one better.
 

 

Rethinking Plastics with Wells Fargo's Green Team

The photo shows a sample of water from the North Pacific Gyre, specifically Sample #23 taken at latitude 34°30.87North, longitude 158°50.93West by the researchers on the Oceanographic Research Vessel Alguita this winter. And that thumb at the bottom of the photo is mine.

Anna Cummins, part of the Alguita crew, sent me the sample to use for Rethinking Plastics presentations. When it arrived last week, I sat down for a minute and wept. Can you see the mixture of plastic and plankton? This is what we are dealing with. This is the bottom of the food chain. It's probably toxic and can probably never be cleaned up.

Here's a map showing exactly where the sample came from:


Friday morning, I took my sample with me, along with a Power Point presentation, Synthetic Sea DVD, and other items for "show and tell," to Wells Fargo Bank to co-present my very first Green Sangha Rethinking Plastics program with Solvig Palm-Nicholls. Wells Fargo has a "Green Team" that works to find ways to be more environmentally friendly in the office. We were invited by Wells Fargo employee and Fake Plastic Fish reader, Tanya (of the yummy salmon recipe), to come and present our information to the group. Not only did we have a room full of interested employees, but also several people who dialed in and logged on to NetMeeting to take part in the presentation remotely.

Here's a PDF version of the Rethinking Plastics presentation we did for Wells Fargo. We started a little late due to technical difficulties, so the first part, a short history of the invention of plastics, was skipped. We made a few other changes to customize the slide show for Wells Fargo, like removing some slides that deal with the Green Sangha practice of awareness. These slides will be included in future presentations if appropriate.

We also planned to show the 9-minute DVD, Synthetic Sea. Unfortunately, Wells Fargo's DVD player would not work. Fortunately, we were able to access this low resolution web version and play it instead. Not as beautiful, but it got the point across.

Do you work for or belong to an organization in the Bay Area that would benefit from a Rethinking Plastics presentation? Please let me know. Now that I've gotten the first one under my belt, I'm looking forward to doing more! In fact, I'm scheduled to do a presentation at a high school in a few weeks. Wish me luck on that one. Teenagers scare the crap out of me.

And in related news, another FPF reader, Alice, sent me this link to a recent BBC series on the plastic problems in the North Pacific Gyre as well as the Midway Atoll. It's well worth watching!
 

 

A Bittersweet Symphony called D2W

Back in September, I wrote about the plastic AT&T Yellow Pages bag that showed up on my doorstep unsolicited. Here's the update. I called the Yellow Pages, found out to whom I should write, and sent this letter (PDF file).

Not long afterwards, I actually received a telephone call from Jim Troup, the head of environmental issues for AT&T Yellow Pages. We had a long conversation about plastic bags, Yellow Pages recycling, and different types of degradable bags the company has tried. He told me he is researching alternatives to the plastic bags, and that they actually did an experiment up in Redding, California, with a bag made of a plastic called D2W. He called this plastic "chemo-degradable" rather than "bio-degradable" and said that AT&T was still looking for something fully biodegradable and would let me know when they'd made a decision.

Weeks went by, and I forgot about D2W plastic, until I received a comment and email from blogger Jessica at Bwlchyrhyd asking about this very product. So I figured I'd better look into it. D2W is a plastic made by a British company called Symphony Environmental Limited. It breaks down due to additives in the plastic that are added during the "extrusion stage of manufacture, when polymer granules are heated and melted to form packaging films." The web site calls these additives "metal salts." The metal salts cause the plastic polymers to break down to such a degree that eventually, micro-organisms can take over and finish the job biologically. The end product is "some H2O, some CO2, and a small amount of biomass." Here is a more detailed description of the degradation process.

Sounds great, right? Not so fast, pardner. Let's look at all the pieces of this description logically in light of what we know about all the problems of plastic.

First, what exactly are the "metal salts" that are added to the plastic, and can they leach out of the plastic while it's degrading? I contacted Symphony to find out the answer to this question and received this Word Document, Technical Paper “Heavy metals” and essential trace elements, which states that "the commonly used transition metal compounds in commercial oxo-biodegradable plastics are manganese, iron, cobalt and nickel." The paper goes on to explain why we should not be concerned about "heavy metals" being added to the plastic. Not being a chemist myself, I sent the paper to Solvig, a chemistry teacher I know, who wrote me the following:

The metal compounds are used to catalyze the breakdown of the plastic in the presence of light, heat and oxygen. Catalyst tends to be active in trace (extremely low) concentrations, but I don’t know if that is so in this particular product. If on the other hand there is a high concentration of nickel in the product, we will end up with high concentrations of nickel in the compost.

How would the nickel be taken up from the soil? The amount of nickel taken up by plants has little to do with its concentration in the soil. The accumulation of nickel in various parts of the plant remains constant whatever the concentration of nickel of the soil. [However,] the uptake of nickel from the soil by other organisms such as bacteria or other critters is not discussed.

They finish by saying: If you added degradable polyethylene film as mulching to the soil it would take 500 years to increase the nickel content of the soil by 1ppm. However, they don’t explain what they mean by that. How much biodegradable plastic are they talking about??? Just one little container, or a composting plant’s worth.

In an ideal world all the biodegradable plastic would be broken down in a composting plant, and the amount of nickel and cobalt released would depend on the amount of plastic in relation to the amount of other food and garden waste it is mixed with.

My feeling is that there is no danger of poisoning people when this stuff is broken down, but I don’t know since I don’t know what the concentration of metal is. Let’s stick with the precautionary principle and avoid single use items whether biodegradable or not.

So that's question #1: Will the metals present in the plastic prove toxic to us in the long run? At this point, I don't think we know. So many other additives in plastic, like phthalates and Bisphenol-A were once thought safe and are now being found to leach into our water and food.

Second, the web site description says that the metal salts are added during the "extrusion stage of manufacture, when polymer granules are heated and melted to form packaging films." Let's remember that D2W film is still being made from ordinary petroleum-based plastic granules, the same pellets commonly called "nurdles" that are being found in our oceans and taken up into the food chain. These raw plastic pellets do not contain any additive to help them break down. If they blow off a ship into the ocean, which they often do, they will remain there basically forever, attracting pollutants like PCB and DDE and concentrating them even as they enter the bodies of fish and other marine animals.

Any plastic film made from petroleum-based plastic contributes to the pollution of our oceans simply through the transportation of the raw material to the manufacturer. To state my opinion less formally, if we can't find some way to keep these little buggers from blowing about and washing down storm drains, we oughtn't be making things out of them.

Third, it takes energy and materials to create any disposable products, including products that biodegrade. Symphony's answer to the question of reusable bags (PDF) is this:

Long-term re-usable shopping bags are not the answer. They are much thicker and more expensive, and a large number of them would be required for the weekly shopping of an average family. They are not hygienic unless cleaned after each use. Whilst sometimes called “Bags for Life” they have a limited life, depending on the treatment they receive, and become a very durable form of litter when discarded.

Shoppers do not always go to the shop from home, where the re-usable bags would normally be kept, and consumers are unlikely to have a re-usable bag with them when buying on impulse items such as clothing, groceries, CDs, magazines, stationery etc.

However, for those who believe in long-term re-usable bags, they can be made from extended-life oxo-biodegradable plastic and will last for five or more years.

I disagree that long-term use reusable bags are not the answer. And the comment about reusable bags not being hygienic is just plain ridiculous. We are so germ-phobic that we can't have our produce touch material that's been previously used? Do we not realize that fruits and vegetables are plants that grow in dirt fertilized by manure?

I believe that reusable bags should be the number one alternative for carrying home purchases and perhaps some type of degradable bag could be a distant second for those who forget to bring their bags to the store and are willing to pay for a disposable one. I think we ought to be charging fees for one-time use bags and containers in the first place, which would help to remind folks to bring their bags with them.

What do you think?
 

 

Two very different Hawaii trips

This weekend, Anna C. of the blog BYOTalk and I will both be in Hawaii. I'll be in Waikiki kicking back for a few days visiting my parents and getting my blowdryer fixed. No big deal. I'll continue to blog while I'm away, and I'll be back on Tuesday.

Anna, on the other hand, will be joining the crew of the Alguita oceanographic research vessel in Hilo for a month-long trip to the North Pacific Gyre to study marine debris concentrations. This is the area of the "Pacific Garbage Patch," which I'm sure most of you have heard about by now. (If not, please read the article, Plastic Ocean.)

This will be the 8th voyage for the Alguita, and this time the crew plans to "venture further west than ever before, investigating possible concentrations North of Hawaii, and just East of the International Date Line. It may be that the areas of the North Pacific Gyre with the highest concentrations of marine debris have yet to be seen or studied."

That quote was taken from the expedition's blog, http://orvalguita.blogspot.com, which will be updated with posts and images during the coming month. I've posted a link to it on my sidebar, and I encourage those who are interested to track the progress of this voyage to find out just what plastic is doing to our oceans.

I have to admit, I'm really envious of Anna and the crew. I'd love to be going out there to see for myself. But in a phone conversation a few days ago, Anna told me that the seas are predicted to be very rough and the trip challenging. I'll look forward to experiencing the journey vicariously through the blog, and I hope you will too.
 

 

Week 29 Results: 2.6 oz. of plastic. Making a change.

This past Friday, I attended a planning meeting for Green Sangha's 2008 Rethinking Plastics campaign. At that meeting, one of the members showed us some video footage of what happens to the plastic recycling that we put into our curbside bins. I knew that most of our plastic was shipped to China, but until seeing this heartbreaking video, I didn't think much more about it. Please watch this short clip from Britain's Sky News and then see how you feel about recycling plastic:



(If the embedded video doesn't play in this window, or all you get is a commercial, try this link instead.)

Yes, this story focuses on Britain's plastic waste. But in the U.S., we also ship most of our plastic to China, causing health problems and pollution in our attempts to be "green."

Since I started this project, I have tallied all of my plastic waste, recycling those items that are accepted in Oakland, SF, or Daly City, and holding onto the rest. From now on, I'm going to hold onto ALL of it, recyclable or not. If plastic recycling is such a dirty business, we ought to be taking care of it here at home instead of shipping it off to poorer countries with lower environmental standards.

My new commitment to hold onto all my plastic is similar to that of a new blogger who is collecting and tallying his waste, Dave Chameides at 365daysoftrash.com. He has vowed not to throw ANYTHING away for a year but to tally it all and figure out what it is and what can be done with it. He says, "Any waste that I generate that can be recycled, will also be saved. Recycling is better than 'throwing away' but it still takes energy and creates waste so I think accounting for recycling will be an important factor." Perhaps the video above is another reason to hold onto all of it.

So, that said, here is the tally for this week, the first of 2008:



Non-recyclable items used this week but purchased before the plastic project began:

• 1 Safeway ice bag. This ice was sitting in our freezer for months and months, and we finally used it up chilling a bottle of New Year's Eve champagne.


• 1 cap from a bottle of Safeway rubbing alcohol. See below.

Recyclable plastic bought before the plastic project began (although as mentioned above, they will not be recycled):

• 1 bottle of Safeway rubbing alcohol (#2 plastic). Is it possible to find rubbing alcohol in glass or is it only available in plastic these days? And do we need it? The only thing I was using it for lately was in a homemade ant spray recipe. I could probably substitute vodka or grain alcohol. I can sterilize a needle for removing splinters with a match. My mom used to clean oral thermometers with alcohol, but I just use soap. Cuts and bruises can be cleaned with soap and water. Alcohol seems like a staple of home medicine cabinets, but do we actually need it?

New plastic waste.

• 2 Refresh Endura single-use eye drop containers (#4 plastic). Are my eyes getting better? I haven't been using as many containers of drops because I've just been lazy about putting them in at night. And so far, no traumatic cornea mornings. I'm just seeing how far I can press my luck, I think.


• 2 plastic ties and 1 plastic tag from a bamboo scratching post purchased for the kitties. More on this item in a post later this week.


• 1 plastic bag from inside a box of crackers. These were brought to our New Year's Eve party by a friend, and I ate some.


• 1 Wallace & Gromit cheese wrapper. Very cute. Also brought to the party by a friend. Of course I had some.


• 1 plastic cork from a bottle of Boissonneau Chateau Moulin de Ferrand Bordeaux Blanc. This was the last bottle!


• 1 cap from a glass bottle of Straus organic nonfat milk.

I want to welcome the new readers who have found their way over to Fake Plastic Fish from the 365 Days of Trash blog. I have a lot of exciting things to write about this week, including a trip to a landfill on Wednesday.
 

 

Target, Multi-Pure, my Cupboards, and the Perils of PVC

By now, many of you have heard that after a national campaign by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice (CHEJ), Target has agreed to systematically reduce its use of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic (aka vinyl) in products and packaging it carries in its stores. If you haven't heard this news, you can read the full press release here. Blogger LifeLessPlastic wrote a letter to Target to show her support for this action, and I have done the same. It's always a good idea to let companies know when we appreciate the things they do. Here's a link to Target's online contact form if you'd like to send your own message.

Coincidentally, I had my own little PVC panic this past week when I discovered that the tubing used in my new Multi-Pure counter top water filter system, which I bought in place of the Brita we had been using, is made from virgin PVC.


As I wrote on October 29, I was already somewhat disenchanted with Multi-Pure because of the volume of plastic bubble wrap in which the unit and filter cartridge were wrapped. But it wasn't until the unit was installed and working that I actually read the fine print and discovered the more serious problem of PVC used in the product itself.

When I called Multi-Pure to address this issue, I was told that the tubing had been tested by NSF and found not to leach anything harmful into the water. However, the rep was unable to confirm whether phthalates such as DEHP, the chemicals that are the biggest worry, were included in the list of possible contaminants for which to be tested. But regardless of whether or not this particular tubing is leaching anything harmful into my water, I decided to send the unit back anyway.

So what's the big deal about PVC? And if the tubing's been tested and found not to leach, why send it back? Here's a rundown of the problems of PVC:

1. PVC is the only major plastic that contains chlorine, so it is unique in the hazards it creates. During production, PVC plants can release dioxins which harm workers and community members who live nearby. According to pvcinformation.org, residents of Louisiana, which is home to half the PVC production facilities in the USA, have been shown to have much higher concentrations of dioxins in their blood than the average U.S. citizen.


2. The plasticizers used to make PVC soft contain carcinogenic phthalates which can leach from the plastic, especially when used in children's toys and other products that may find their way into children's mouths. In fact, many hospitals have replaced the PVC tubing and IV and blood bags they use with less toxic alternatives.


3. According to ecocycle.org, because so many different additives are used to make PVC, recycling the plastic is extremely difficult, and any PVC bottles (#3 plastic) that make it into the recycling stream can contaminate and ruin a whole load of #1 bottles.


4. When incinerated, PVC forms dioxins, a highly toxic group of chemicals that build up in the food chain. When landfilled, PVC poses significant long-term environmental threats as chemical additives can leach into groundwater.


5. Greenpeace says that in a house fire, fire-retardant PVC will smolder for long periods of time rather than burn, "giving off hydrogen chloride gas long before visible signs of fire appear. Hydrogen chloride gas is a corrosive, highly toxic gas that can cause skin burns and severe long-term respiratory damage." For this reason, the International Association of Firefighters supports alternative materials to replace PVC.


6. In fact, according to Greenpeace's hierarchy of plastics, PVC is the very worst, even worse than Styrofoam! For a more in-depth analysis of the problems associated with PVC, please read Greenpeace's article, "The Poison Plastic."

Whether or not the tubing in the Multi-Pure system actually leaches pthalates into my water, I don't want to support the production of a material that is so harmful to humans and the environment in general. So this morning, I shipped the Multi-Pure unit back to the company.

And then tonight, after reading that PVC cannot be recycled, and realizing that I had included several #3 Act fluoride rinse bottles in my recycling in the last few months, I went through my cupboards and refrigerator to see if there were any other PVC culprits still lurking in the house. Sure enough, I found four of them:


#3 PVC bottles look very similar to clear #1 PETE bottles. In fact, many manufacturers have switched to #1 plastic as an alternative to PVC. The only way to tell is to look at the number on the bottom of the container. #3 means PVC. Unfortunately, it's not so easy to tell when other, unlabelled products are made from PVC. These can include children's toys, shower curtains, window blinds, flooring, pipes, house siding, insulation, roofing membranes, protective pipes for electricity and telecom cables, casings for electronics, refrigerator gaskets, power cords, carpets, furniture, the inside of screw caps, shoes and boots, purses and luggage, raincoats, T-shirts with plastisole prints, packing tape, vinyl records, the covering on ring binders, strollers, garden furniture, tarps, car interiors, and more.

So, what do we do with PVC that we already have? The National Geographic Green Guide article, "How To Handle Vinyl," recommends either disposing of it at a hazardous waste facility or sending it back to the manufacturer and letting them know that PVC is an unacceptable material for them to be using. For the four items I found tonight, I think I'll go on a research mission and see if these products are still being sold in #3 bottles. (Act fluoride rinse, by the way, is now contained in #1 PETE.) If the bottles are no longer #3 plastic, I'll just toss these current containers into my hazardous waste bag for later. But if the products are still being sold in PVC bottles, I'll send these back to the manufacturers with a nice note.

Now once again, I am without a water filter. What to do? Well, how about something I should have done a long, long time ago: testing the water to see if we even need a water filter in the first place! Last week I purchased a Culligan water test kit at Ace Hardware and did some preliminary home tests. Turns out, our chlorine and chloramine levels are much lower than I expected! I mailed a water sample away this morning to be tested for lead. If that test comes back okay, I think we'll drink our water unfiltered and save a whole lot of money and plastic. Imagine drinking water straight from the faucet again, just like we did as kids. What a nice idea.