Category Archives: Plastic news

This Valentine’s Day Give Your Sweetheart a redleaf

This Valentine’s Day, instead of chocolate and diamonds, give your sweethearts something they’ll really love: redleaf water in their new BIO BOTTLE. The BIO BOTTLE is a first of its kind: a recyclable and biodegradable bottle developed by ENSO Bottles.

“We’re thrilled to have redleaf water using ENSO biodegradable bottles. Working together with redleaf is going to have a huge impact on helping the environment. It is only natural that a genuine display of commitment and corporate responsibility has magnetized the redleaf brand”

Earth-conscious consumers have long embraced redleaf’s unique high oxygen, mineral rich water to quench thirst and refresh their body. redleaf‘s passion to improve the environment is reflected in the design of its facility that boasts no water waste during bottling.

“redleaf’s mission is to provide our Ultra-Premium Canadian water in guilt-free BIO BOTTLES – and now that has become a reality!” said redleaf COO Dave Hillis. By embracing biodegradable technology from ENSO, redleaf is giving consumers the opportunity to take responsibility for a healthier earth.

redleaf’s BIO BOTTLE is a step in the right direction to further reduce the impact that empty water bottles have on the environment. Now consumers can recycle like they always have, but if an empty BIO BOTTLE ends up in a landfill it will biodegrade naturally, like any other organic matter.

redleaf is sweeping across the Mountain West Region of the U.S. and can be found in major grocery stores such as Fry’s, Albertsons, and Bashas’ as well as several prestigious American athletic events, including Los Angeles Angels and Oakland Athletics Spring Training.

About ENSO Bottles

ENSO Bottles, based in Phoenix, Arizona, is an environmental company dedicated to creating “Bottles for a Healthier Earth.” ENSO bottles are designed to be recycled or if thrown away, biodegrade naturally. Learn more about reducing plastic pollution and improving our environment at ensobottles.com.

About redleaf water

redleaf is North America’s only ultra-premium bottled water. It starts with great water from a naturally renewable source in the Canadian Rockies and is made better through a state-of-the-art purification and bottling process. It is the industry’s most advanced way for making great tasting, healthy water. For more information, visit redleafwater.com.

ENSO has joined the IBWA (International Bottled Water Association)

The IBWA is highly recognized throughout the world as the most influential body in the world of bottled water. Last month, ENSO joined forces with this highly recognized association to assist in educating the water bottle industry of biodegradable additive use and the safety of using the ENSO additive as a next step forward in the industry towards environmentally responsible plastics. Continue reading →

BPI Releases Biodegradation Test Results of Aquamantra Bottles

On Feb 01, 2011 the Biodegradable Products Institute released its biodegradation test results of Aquamantra’s ENSO Biodegradable PET Bottle. BPI which is an industry organization for compostable plastics had the biodegradation tests performed by the highly recognized NSF laboratory. Lab Worker - Testing biodegradation

NSF conducted the biodegradation test of Aquamantra’s biodegradable PET bottle, using ASTM D 5511 Standard Test Method. The ASTM D5511 is a standard test method for determining anaerobic biodegradation of plastic materials under high-solids anaerobic-digestion conditions”.

This ASTM Test Method calculates the amount of carbon dioxide and methane produced during the testing period. The cumulative amount of carbon dioxide and methane evolved from each vessel is calculated and compared to the amount of CO2 and CH4 evolved from blank specimens to determine percent degradation.

After 60 days, the Aquamantra ENSO bottle achieved an overall biodegradation total of 4.47% or 10% of the positive control. As part of the normal biodegradation process with this test method, the biodegradation process drops significantly for both the cellulose and plastic material, shown by the gas generation curve plateauing. Using the test results from this test of 4.47% biodegradation over 60 days and providing an environment with a steady innoculum the test material would fully biodegrade in approximately 3.7 years.

The Aquamantra ENSO bottle utilizes less than half of a percent of active biodegradable ingredients. In other words, the bottle BPI purchased in the market and used for testing was 99.5% PET and .05% biodegradable additive material. Comparing the biodegradation of the Polyethylene material (.37%) the results clearly indicate that biodegradation by microbial assimilation of the ENSO bottle is happening at a rate 8x more than the organic additive within the bottle. By moving the ENSO plastic into a new batch of innoculum biodegradation would continue to happen. There is no indication or scientific reason to imply otherwise.

There were a few notes to keep in mind about this test. The key to performing an effective ASTM D 5511 is in the proper preparation of the innoculum. Many labs are challenged when it comes to preparing a functional innoculum for this test. This is evident when the biodegradation rate of the cellulose material does not reach 70%. In the case of this particular test the cellulose material reached a maximum of 44.31%. Cellulose is a basic material that is normally biodegraded very rapidly and is used as a baseline to validate biodegradation. As stated by NSF, because there was clear biodegradation of the cellulose the the test results are acceptable even though the ASTM D 5511 required minimum of 70% was not obtained.

As a final point; with beginning with a healthy innoculum, biodegradation would have been improved for both the cellulose and ENSO biodegradable bottle; thus resulting in an improved biodegradation timeframe. We recognize that the slower performing innoculum may in someways perform closer to a true landfill environment.

To view the NSF ASTM D 5511 test results please click here.

Mesa man makes eco-friendly plastic bottles

Danny Clark’s idea was simple: If he could make plastic water bottles biodegradable, it would reduce the impact on landfills, curb roadside litter and reduce the amount of plastic garbage that eventually washes into the oceans.

Danny Clark, President - ENSO Bottles But the Mesa, Ariz., man’s venture has run into opposition from a large and unexpected source: the $400 billion recycling industry, which fears that making plastic bottles biodegradable will reduce the stream of plastic refuse used to make everything from carpet to clothing to new bottles. In addition, the industry fears that changing the makeup of plastic bottles could make it more difficult to recycle them.

With plastic-bottle sales already slowing and only a small amount being recycled, the industry is meeting threats to its profits head-on, actively campaigning against attempts by companies like Clark’s to make bottles biodegradable.

Billions of plastic bottles, which take millions of barrels of oil to produce, appear on supermarket shelves every year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Only about 28% of bottles manufactured in the U.S. end up being recycled, the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers said.

The other 72% wind up in landfills or as litter. Environmentalists point to a phenomenon known as the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch,” a floating island of discarded plastic debris that is twice the size of Texas and held together by swirling ocean currents, as an example of the proliferation of plastic pollution.

Clark, who said he is trying to leave “a legacy that we’ve done something positive in the environment,” was inspired to quit his job as a communications engineer to form a team of microbiologists and polymer chemists to develop his bottle technology three years ago.

“Bottles are a big issue. It’s talked about, and it’s pretty visible,” Clark said.

He launched his start-up, Enso Bottles, in 2008 and says he has come up with a truly biodegradable and recyclable polyethylene terephthalate, or PET, plastic bottle.

PET is used to make a wide range of products, particularly packaging containers for consumer goods, such as water and soda bottles. Traditional plastic PET bottles can take hundreds of years to break into smaller pieces, but those pieces never actually decompose.

Clark’s company produces an additive used in the plastic-manufacturing process and says on its website that independent testing data show bottles start to biodegrade in as little as 250 days in a controlled environment or as long as five years in the elements. In addition, Clark’s data show that the additive doesn’t diminish the quality or effectiveness of the plastic, he says.

Clark said that technologies allowing plastics to biodegrade have been around for several decades but had not been applied to PET bottles.

Recycling-industry experts have concerns about Enso’s biodegradable efforts, saying they are not convinced the technology works, but they also worry that if it does, it will damage their business.

Dennis Sabourin of the National Association for PET Container Resources said the association is not in favor of anything that disrupts that recycled-product stream.

“We want to make sure it does not affect the raw material,” Sabourin said. “Does it affect the service life of products that are being made today with (PET bottles)?”

More than a year ago, the association sent out a news release to all PET manufacturers asking them to refrain from using biodegradable additives. The experts say biodegradable products are more difficult and costly to recycle than PET bottles.

David Cornell of the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers said Enso has tried to convince them that the biodegradable additive will not hurt their business, but the recycling industry still fears it poses a threat.

“So far, we haven’t seen that it does degrade or is not hostile to recycling. If it doesn’t degrade, then who wants it? If it does degrade, what does it do to recycling?”

Cornell credits Enso for trying to solve a problem and said that, unlike some other companies, Enso has tried to work with the industry and communicate about product tests.

“They’re working on it. I will give them credit,” Cornell said.

by Angelique Soenarie
The Arizona Republic

View article on USA Today
View article on Arizona Republic

Debunking the Myths of the Paper vs. Plastic Debate, Part II

Photo by eco-wisdom

Last week, we weighed in on the Paper vs. Plastic Debate, and examined the pros and cons of each where waste, energy, and resources are concerned. This week, we’ll take a look at how the contenders fare when it comes to pollution and recycling.

Pondering Pollution

Myth #3: Plastic is man-made and chemical-based, so it’s better to choose paper.

When it comes to pollution, plastic has become the chosen whipping boy, but in fact, craft paper production requires huge amounts of chemicals, that end up in our rivers each year, and are released into the air contributing to air pollution. Plastic production generates about 60% fewer greenhouse gases than turning wood pulp into paper bags.

Let’s consider PLA. It’s been touted as a panacea for the plastic problem, because it’s compostable, and comes from a renewable resource. But upon closer examination, unless the corn crop is grown organically, it still requires fossil fuel-based fertilizers and chemicals that cause other environmental problems and does not reduce our dependency on oil. In fact, one study found that the production of corn- and other bio-based plastics actually use more fossil fuels than a standard PET plastic. PLA isn’t as eco-friendly as it seems.

When it comes to waste and pollution, the frontrunner so far is the bag made from biodegradable plastic.

Reconsidering Recycling

Myth #4: It’s easier to recycle paper, so it’s the more sustainable choice.

Photo by greennature.com

In reality, it is more efficient to recycle plastic, requiring about 91% less energy pound for pound than paper, but the sad truth is that the recycling track record for either bag isn’t good. Only about 10-15% of paper bags, and just 1-3% of plastic bags are recycled; although paper bags have a higher recycle rate than plastic, every new paper bag is made from virgin pulp instead of recycled fibers for better strength, while many plastic bags are made from once-recycled plastic polymers.

PLA and other bio-plastics get another strike when it comes to recyclability. They cannot be recycled with regular plastics, but so often are, creating an expensive problem of having to sort them from the rest of the plastics.

Plastics that are biodegradable in the landfill and under natural conditions, like ENSO’s products, are recyclable with conventional plastics, and do not contaminate the recycling stream.

The Bottom Line

Choosing paper or plastic is still a tough decision because biodegradable plastics are not yet mainstream. The biodegradable disposable bag is the best solution because it can be recycled if that’s an option, or thrown into the landfill where it will biodegrade in a relatively short amount of time. In addition, the industry is moving toward renewable sources, like algae, for plastic production, improving biodegradable plastics even further. For now, bring your reusable bags, or choose a plastic bag and reuse it or recycle it, and keep up with latest developments on the biodegradable plastics front.

Plastic Disclosure Project Will Make Companies’ Progress Public

Photo courtesy of bormioliroccoplastics.com

In September 2010, the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) announced the launch of the Plastic Disclosure Project to publicly track and report businesses’ plastic use.

The concept is very familiar to the already implemented Carbon Disclosure Project, an online database where thousands of international organizations annually disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and climate change strategies.

The Plastic Disclosure Project would survey companies on the types and quantities of plastic used in their operations and distribution processes as well as their overarching goals and management plans when it comes to their use of plastic. CGI’s goal is that the results of these surveys be used not only by the companies themselves, but also managers and investors at other firms and businesses when considering how to save money, whether efficiency could be improved with new packaging designs, and if material restrictions are necessary.

When enough of this information reliably gathered and made public, the hope is that it will be utilized in all the major financial and policy-making decisions at companies, leading to reduced negative environmental, waste and health impacts around the world.

CGI has already secured $5 trillion in investments for the Plastic Disclosure Project, with the survey managed by Project Kaisei and Kaisei’s partners, The Association for Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Asia, and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Doug Woodring, co-founder and director of Project Kaisei, points out that the severity of the harm plastic has done to us and our environment we are only now coming to understand. “Global consumption of plastic has outstripped our infrastructure in waste management,” Woodring says.

Photo courtesy of designmind.frogdesign.com

The first survey is scheduled for the first half of 2011, and Credit Suisse, a financial services company that advises businesses around the world, has already agreed to include plastic-related strategies and issues in their analysis of the environmental and social impacts of portfolio companies. Additionally, questionnaires will be circulated on behalf of the investors to a global list of corporates, especially in sectors which are identified as having significant plastic footprints.

It’s crucial that businesses take major steps toward more responsible manufacturing and management of plastics, since their actions and decisions so often drive those of consumers. Traditional plastics are hazardous to the environment and humans’ health because they have such a long lifespan; they break down into ever smaller pieces but never fully return to natural elements. The organization Rise Above Plastics says, “With the exception of a small amount that has been incinerated, virtually every piece of plastic that has even been produced still exists in some shape or form.”

The solution to the plastic pollution issue involves effectively using and reusing no more than we absolutely need and reducing the amount of non-biodegradable plastic that ends up in the environment. Companies who commit to the Plastic Disclosure Project will be leading an example to other companies and the public that simple actions like supporting biodegradable packaging, for example, ENSO Bottles, can add up to make a huge, positive change.

For more information on CGI, visit the organization online here.

Debunking the Myths of the Paper vs. Plastic Debate, Part I

Image by Aeropause

Standing at the grocery store checkout, realizing you forgot your reusable shopping bags, or if you did remember them, you don’t have enough, you’re faced with the decision: paper or plastic? First, you’re momentarily overcome with pangs of guilt; second, the inner dialogue commences. You’re a deer in the headlights, frozen, afraid to make a move.

There’s a lot of confusion surrounding the Great Bag Debate, much of it perpetuated by misinformation, common assumptions, and a whole lot of greenwashing. For years, it was thought that the better choice for the environment was paper, but it turns out that paper and plastic bags are just about equal in pros and cons. They both use resources, cause pollution, and generate many tons of waste that more often than not, ends up in the landfill.

To further complicate the conundrum, there is more than just paper and plastic to consider these days; plastic alternatives, including corn-based PLA, and landfill biodegradable plastics are commonly being used in packaging. As eco-conscious consumers, which bag do we choose, and how can feel good about our choice?

The Resources and Energy Pitfall

Myth #1: Paper is made from a renewable resource, so it must have a lower impact.

The first part of this statement is true, but in fact, paper production deals a double blow when it comes to climate change and environmental impact. First, forests are cut down, removing trees that absorb greenhouse gases and convert it into oxygen (not to mention the other impacts on wildlife and ecosystems in general); in 1999, more than 14 million trees were cut down to produce the 10 billion paper bags consumed in the U.S. alone. Second, manufacturing paper from pulp takes a tremendous amount of energy, and because paper is relatively heavy, it takes a lot of fuel to transport the finished product.

How does this compare with the plastics? Of course, there are impacts associated with the extraction of petroleum (just look at the Gulf), but it turns out that the actual production of plastic bags releases about 92% fewer emissions into the atmosphere than paper bag production, and requires about Plastic bags also weigh significantly less than paper, requiring less fuel to get them from point A to point B.

What About Waste

Myth #2: Paper breaks down in the landfill faster than plastic, so it must be the better choice.

Image by greenismyfavoritecolor.net

It turns out that under standard landfill conditions, paper does not degrade any faster than plastic. Even newspaper can take years to break down; newspapers excavated from one New York landfill were mostly intact after 50 years, and another in Arizona was still readable after 35 years. Indeed, the largest percentage of solid waste in U.S. landfills comes from paper and paperboard products, about 31%.

On the other hand, the new generation of plastics somewhat complicate this debate. PLA, or corn-based, plastics commonly used in disposable cutlery, packaging, and plastic grocery bags is compostable, but only among the perfect conditions found in a commercial composting facility, NOT in the landfill where most plastic ends up, or even in the backyard compost pile.

Biodegradable plastics, like ENSO’s products, however, do break down in the anaerobic landfill environment in a short amount of time (an average of five years), leaving behind only methane, carbon dioxide, and biomass. The use of an additive in standard plastic production also makes it a cost-effective solution. In terms of the plastic waste problem, the biodegradables currently hold the most promise.

Next week, in Part II, we’ll take a look at the aspects of pollution and recycling, and see how the contenders hold up.

Putting Biodegradable Plastics and Methane to Work for Us

When organic material and ENSO Bottles are broken down by microbes in landfills, the decomposition process results in the creation of many gases, including methane, which can be very harmful to humans, animals and the environment if not handled properly. But methane also has the potential to be very beneficial to society if a nationwide system could be put in place to give it a practical use, such as supplying our homes with electricity.

Maybe you’ve heard the term “landfill gas.” Methane and landfill gas are not one and the same, although methane does account for roughly 40 to 60 percent of landfill gas on average; the remaining percentage is a mix of carbon dioxide and small amounts of various other elements.

Methane has its pros and cons. At room temperature and standard pressure, it’s non-toxic and odorless; however, it can be highly flammable as well as an asphyxiant, meaning it displaces all the oxygen in an enclosed space and could cause a person in the room to suffocate. Methane is also known to accelerate the breakdown of the ozone layer and contribute to global warming. And according to the Environmental Protection Agency, it can remain in the atmosphere for nine to 15 years.

But municipalities that have the means to safely harness the gases coming off landfills can put methane to work for them in a positive way. When you compare methane to the other hydrocarbon fuels, also known as fossil fuels (for example, coal and petroleum), methane produces less carbon dioxide when burned, leading many to argue it’s a greener alternative when it comes to heating homes, powering stoves or running our cars. Methane can also be converted to electricity right on-site at a landfill, providing cities with a relatively convenient and cost-effective way to add power to its electrical grid.

This is how it works: Garbage arrives at a landfill, where it’s compounded and left to decompose (1). As the microbes eat away at organic matter and other biodegradable objects, ENSO Bottles included, the process creates landfill gases (2) that enter underground pipes (3). The pipes transport these gases (4) to a facility where any and all harmful contaminants, such as mercury or sulfur, can be filtered out and neutralized. After the methane is isolated, it can be pumped into an engine (5), which powers a generator, which creates electricity (6). Cities that employ this method can add the power generated by their landfills right into their power supply grid. What city wouldn’t want such an efficient system in place?

According to the EPA, of the approximately 2,300 currently operating (or recently closed) municipal solid waste landfills in the U.S., more than 490 have wised up and utilize landfill gas energy projects — that’s up from the 395 programs that were in place at the end of 2005. And, the EPA has identified at least 515 additional landfills that would be good candidates, which would be capable of producing enough electricity to power more than 665,000 additional homes in the U.S.

Ideally, we would live in a culture of zero waste, where every product manufactured is reused, recycled or reclaimed, but the reality is, landfills are very much a part of our society and won’t be going away any time soon. So one thing we can focus on right now is supporting biodegradable products, such as the plastic bottles ENSO makes, as well as projects that reclaim energy from landfill methane in order to ensure that what we toss out as garbage will live on to heat our homes, power our vehicles and make our waste management system just that much greener.

The Ocean’s Plastic Garbage – A Serious Environmental Hazard

Our world’s oceans are home to five growing plastic gyres – vortexes of swirling ocean currents filled with degrading plastic that pose a serious threat to marine life.

Captain Charles Moore, noted author and oceanographer, has spent years conducting ocean and coastal samplings documenting plastic fragments along the 40,000 miles of the North Pacific Ocean. Captain Moore was the first to discover the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, otherwise known as the Pacific Gyre, which lies in the northern Pacific near Hawaii. This is the largest of the known gyres – roughly 12,400 square miles in size and growing – and filled with swirling fragmented colorful plastic debris.

Plastic in the ocean takes roughly 600 years to degrade fully. Marine life like sharks, dolphins, whales and numerous species of fish mistake these colorful remnants of our castoff trash as food, often suffering starvation due to the trash being indigestible. Oddly, it’s only the colored plastic they go for, though the clear plastic is also hazardous. Plastic water bottles are regularly found tangled in ocean coral, littering the ocean floor.

Plastic garbage doesn’t just stay in the ocean. Storms periodically break gyres up, pushing waves of trash onto beaches around the globe. Hawaii’s Kamilo Beach is frequently known as Plastic Beach due to its continually being overrun with plastic trash brought in by the ocean’s waves.

This plastic comes in all sizes and forms – discarded toothbrushes, combs, cups and, of course, plastic water bottles. Plastic trash discarded in Asia and Europe makes its way to the ocean, gets caught in the Indian Ocean gyre, then gets pushed back again to litter the once pristine shoreline.

We use 2 million plastic beverage bottles every 5 minutes in the U.S.

“No one is (looking) at it as a global phenomena and at the root causes (to) try to make it stop,” said Cecilia Nord, Vice President – Floor Care Sustainability and Environmental Affairs of Swedish-based Electrolux.

“We need to make it stop,” she said.

“Only we humans make waste that Nature can’t digest,” says Moore.

ENSO Bottles realizes that what’s needed is a shift in thinking as well as action. By creating their innovative biodegradable plastic bottle with the ENSO additive, these PET-based bottles break down, rather than contribute to the world’s plastic pollution. It’s part of ENSO’s commitment “to act as environmental stewards.”

With plastic trash increasing the world over, and the devastating effect this has on marine life, it’s crucial for consumers to become responsible stewards who take on recycling to a level not seen before is needed.

Individuals doing their part can make the difference.

The Impacts of Plant-based Plastics

Photo by Shira Golding

Corn-based and other plant-derived plastics are all the rage these days, and are marketed as the ideal way to treat our plastic addiction. They’re made from a renewable resource, lessening our dependency on fossil fuels, and they are compostable, reducing the amount of plastic waste lingering in our landfills—what could be bad about that?

Not so fast. The issue is a bit more complex than it seems on the surface, and it turns out that these plastics still have big environmental impacts, just in different ways.

Cool, My Cutlery is Compostable!

But wait. It won’t break down in my home compost pile, or in a landfill, you say? Plant-based, or Polylactic Acid Polyesters (PLA), plastics require the near-perfect conditions found in a commercial composting facility: consistent high temperatures, ideal humidity, etc. in order to break down. Very few consumers have access to these facilities; even fewer are lucky enough to have curbside composting pickup. This means that the majority of the plastics will end up in the landfill, where contrary to popular belief, they do not biodegrade.

Recycling Rewind

Well, then I can recycle it right? Wrong. PLAs are not recyclable and contaminate the recycling stream. Removing non-recyclables from the batch is a costly and time-consuming affair, and many of these costs are passed on to the consumer. Even worse, some facilities don’t bother to sort contaminated bins, and the whole load ends up in the landfill.

Oil Free, Guilt Free

But, they’re made from a renewable resource. At least I can feel good about that! Or can you? One of the strongest sellingpoints for many consumers lies in the fact that PLAs are plant-based rather than petroleum-based, and that’s a valid argument. But, consider how the majority of crops sourced to manufacture the PLA polymer are grown. Crops like corn, beets, potatoes, and other starchy plants are grown on a huge scale, are doused with tons of petro-chemicals, i.e. fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides in order to maximize production.

Processing the plant material to make the polymer also requires energy from fossil fuels. So, unless crops grown organically, the processing plant is using clean energy from the sun or wind, the process to make PLA relies pretty heavily on petroleum.

Wanted: Farmland For Food Production

But that’s not all. Perhaps the biggest, and most controversial, impact of growing plastics is the fact that it is taking up perfectly good farmland to grow food that is not being used…for food. Scientists predict that we haven’t seen anything yet when it comes to the global food shortage, so growing plants that could be used to feed people but using them to make packaging and fuel (that’s another argument altogether) doesn’t seem like a sustainable solution.

As we continue to lose arable lands to commercial development to support the burgeoning population, cut down the rainforest to grow corn and graze cattle, it makes less and less sense to use farmland to grow plastic. Some might argue that much of our cropland is used to cultivate livestock feed to grow animals that only a small percentage of the population eats, so it’s already an inefficient system, and this is a valid point. But, it doesn’t mean that we should add insult to injury and use food as a source for plastic, it only means that the whole system needs an overhaul.

Biodegradable Plastics to the Rescue!

ENSO Bottles

So what’s an eco-conscious consumer to do? It’s not very practical (or even possible at this point) to ditch plastic altogether, so what’s the alternative?

Enter biodegradable plastics. Products made with ENSO’s leading edge technology render any conventional plastic biodegradable in a landfill setting, where most plastic ends up.

ENSO’s biodegradable bottles and other products offer a sustainable solution to the growing plastic waste problem. They disappear under natural conditions, thanks to the work of microbes that quickly and completely break them down, leaving behind only organic compounds and new soil. They’re also recyclable. To move away from dependency on petroleum to source plastic, ENSO is always working with an eye toward the future, to consider other sources like algae, and improve existing technology.

At the end of the day, the take home lesson is this: Know what you are buying, and understand the impacts of the full process of how it was made, and what happens after it’s disposed of, because green products aren’t always what they’re cracked up to be.