Category Archives: Thought Provoking

Are We Our Own Worst Enemy in Fighting Plastic Waste?

The “Green” plastics industry can be very puzzling. When I first came to this industry, I felt great that I could be involved in something that’s good for the world. Save the world!

But then, one starts to question if the world even wants to be saved – bizarre. This industry includes bioplastics, composting, recyclers, oxo-degradables, PLA, Biodegradables, brand owners, manufacturers and of course our wonderful legislative leaders – each with differing perspectives and objectives. I’m fortunate to be involved with a company that provides multiple options, so I don’t have a single horse in this race. But I’m certainly happy not to be betting on a few of these ponies.

Nevertheless, there is no single technology available that can address all the problems or appease everyone, but there are solutions that do take a very responsible approach to the problem of plastic waste, depending on realistic methods of disposal. And this is where we run into a problem.

The recyclers do not want anything to contaminate the recycling stream. Understandable, it’s a viable industry, but the infrastructure is not capable of handling a significant enough percentage of the plastic output. I strongly support increasing our capacity to recycle. Yet, we have just as much, if not more, ability to harness landfill methane capturing (LFG) for clean, cheap energy. And due to the fact that the majority of this plastic is heading that way (landfill), we need to focus resources on supporting this effort. We can’t dismiss the greater value for the sake of a fledgling industry, it doesn’t make sense.

California (legislatures), you’re the mother ship for the quagmire that prevents innovation. California, for some very curious reason, supports solutions that are absolutely incapable of being a viable option for plastic waste. There are more practical options that address “plastic pollution” without compromising efforts to reuse. Limiting manufactures to one technology that supports only compost-ability, especially when this is such an inferior option in the big scheme of plastic usage and waste, is mind-boggling and counterproductive.

We have a raging river of plastic being produced every year, over 30 MILLLION TONS, the very large majority of this material is heading to a landfill – it needs to be managed. Many companies don’t want to get in the game, too much fluid legislation and regulation – shocker. Many adopt solutions that placate the cause of the day, despite their full knowledge that it is fundamentally flawed.

We need to get our heads out of our proverbial asses and start addressing the bigger problem, the larger percentages. There are amazing technologies out there, but there is no doubt that we are getting in our own way of making incredible progress. This is a young and rapidly evolving industry; the progress being made to address the fundamental problem we face is phenomenal. Instead of hindering ourselves with knee-jerk legislation and bans; perhaps we allow our ingrained ability to rise to the occasion with innovation. Technologies that have misrepresented their performance should not stand as the be-all to end-all to what we can achieve, it’s premature and shortsighted.

The question we need to ask ourselves is not who will win the race, but what race are we trying to win?

The plastics race is a close one, but PLA shows a clear advantage and recycling continues to drag behind.

Plastic Recycling: Green or “GREEN”?

Recycling is all about the environment, conserving our resources and greening our planet.

Isn’t it?

With the recent onslaught of laws angled at restricting the types of materials allowed to be recycled, one could start to wonder. After all, technically all these materials can be recycled. Are they implying that we should not encourage recyclers to find outlets for new materials? As companies are pushing for new materials that are more sensitive to our fragile environment, recyclers are pushing for laws that prevent recycling these materials, because they want to “protect” their profits and use of traditional plastics?

Are you kidding me?

Sounds a bit more like the green they are pursuing is the money in someones pocket. Even NC Representative Brawley’s site positions “These companies are developing new and innovative technologies to recycle plastic, including the development of new types of degradable and biodegradable plastic materials designed to decompose in landfills or when they are exposed to soil, water, and other natural elements over time. This has great benefits for our environment.” and then at the same time, acknowledges that despite the environmental benefits, we should protect petroleum based plastic recycling. I hear dollar signs $$$..

I may be out in left field, but wouldn’t it make sense to send all materials that have the potential to be recycled to the recyclers and encourage them to find new and innovative ways to recycle those materials? Why are we OK with only recycling a few select materials?

With the latest reports on recycling rates in the US, it definitely seems our recycling infrastructure has a terminal illness; traditional medicines are not working to solve this illness. PET bottle collection rates are stagnant, HDPE recycling rates have dropped and there is no plan in sight to fix this. Even NAPCOR recognized this in their recent statement “without additional collection efforts or NEW STREAMS OF MATERIALS, the increased capacity will only serve to drive prices to unsustainable levels” and from Scott Saunders of KW Plastics Recycling “unfortunately, the recycling rate is going to stay where it is unless some NEW IDEA pushes recyclers forward.”

How about this NEW IDEA to provide NEW STREAMS OF MATERIAL:

Let’s place all clean materials (paper, plastic, metal, wood) in our blue bin and use the subsidies paid to recyclers to find out how to effectively recycle. and if that seems too radical check out this new idea that is already 5 times more effective than recycling: 35% success rate for waste management

I find myself placing plastics and other recyclable material that are not “on the recyclable list” in my blue bin in hopes that my little bit of rebellion will encourage recyclers to find ways to utilize these materials. I’d love to hear your thoughts and ideas on this subject.

Destination: Garbage Island

I’ve heard stories over the years about “islands”, out in the middle of the oceans, which are created completely from discarded plastic. It’s hard to believe that such a place would exist. I recently watched the documentary, “Garbage Island”, by Vice. This documentary proved there is no such island, at least not in the terms of plastic patches so thick you could walk on them.

What is actually out there; 1,000 miles from any landmass, is much worse than a simple growing patch of used up plastic. There are vortexes, holding in tons of broken down plastic particles from the plastic that doesn’t sink (LDPE, HDPE). This plastic floats along the currents of the ocean, breaking down year after year from the sun and the salt water, ultimately finding its home in and around the slower currents of the gyres.

It would be relatively easy to scoop up all the large items of trash and clean up our oceans, but the small, usually microscopic, size pieces of plastic particles would be nearly impossible to clean up. All marine life has to live in an environment that is ultimately becoming toxic. They ingest the plastic particles and, in turn, we ingest the seafood.

How do we limit the amount of plastic that is ending up in our oceans? This isn’t a problem only confined to the United States, this is a worldwide problem. It’s not enough to just know where our plastic products are ending up, i.e. being recycled, landfill, etc. We should also be more aware of what types of plastics are being used and how their end of life is affecting our environment.

ENSO Plastics Restore is leading edge technology that gives plastic material biodegradability in landfills; and ENSO’s Renew resin will make plastic marine degradable. This is a solution that can solve the plastic pollution problem in our oceans. A solution that needs to addressed; because once the plastic is out of our hands, it’s up to nature to take care of the rest.

Are You Confused About What to Recycle?

When is the last time you asked yourself or someone else if something was recyclable? It a common question and one that gets many different answers depending on what packaging or material you are asking the question about.

Most recycling programs will have information readily available to the public on what they will accept in the recycle bins. This list however is quite small and becomes apparent that what recyclers are looking for is the cream of the crop. If you are anything like me you put everything in the recycle bin and hope that it will motivate recyclers to start taking more material.

People in general want to do the right thing and truthfully speaking it’s a great feeling to know we are doing our part to help recycle when we do make the effort to recycle. I suppose someday recycling will become a mainstream religion – to a very few it already is. I often wonder what recycling would look like if people got paid for their recyclable materials? After all for decades aluminum cans provided a source of additional funds to many and this resulted in very high recycling rates for aluminum cans. It would sure make it a little more worth the effort to sort through and place materials in the proper bin.

The April 1^st, 2013 issue of Plastics News had a great Viewpoint article by Don Loepp which addressed this very issue as a discussion point from the March Plastics Recycling Conference in New Orleans.

http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20130321/BLOG01/130329974/plastics-recycling-are-you-still-confused#

If we are going to have recycling be a big part of the environmental solution to the growing global plastic pollution issue we are going to have to get aggressive about our recycling efforts and recyclers will need to be a stakeholder in the bigger environmental mission as much as they are with the business focus of recycling. All materials have the potential to be recycled, let involve state and federal programs to bring innovation to the market so that recyclers can accept all materials and have markets to sell those materials.

We’d love to hear what you think?

Plastics recycling: Are you still confused?

Biodegradable Plastic – Compostable Not So Fast Says Stanford Daily

There was a recent press release issued by Media Juice titled “Biodegradable Plastic – Compostable Not So Fast Says Stanford Daily.” The press release reviews a study performed by students at Stanford University regarding compostable utensils and their performance in “real world” environments.

The study points out that what the company markets as a compostable PLA material and the “Compostable” certifications that organizations (such as BPI Biodegradable Products Institute) issue on the material is not necessary a reflection of what happens in real world environments.

This brings up a great point and discussion topic and one ENSO has pushed for the past five years and that is that we are mistaken in our approach to promoting, marketing or pushing materials that will go away in any real world environment in a specific timeframe. Even the much touted and pushed material of PLA is not a rapidly compostable as is promoted in marketing materials. Sure, we can create test environments which are highly controlled and manipulated that will maximize biodegradation and provide results that look and sound great, but the variety that nature brings in the real world can mean a huge difference in the amount of time needed for a product to biodegrade, from months to even years. This does not change the fact of whether a product is biodegradable, just simply that to dictate exactly when it will biodegrade is a bit misleading to the consumer.

So yes – labs can show specific time frames for biodegradation, but what happens when that same material ends up in real world environments? 9 times out of 10, it doesn’t perform as promised. So, what does this mean? How can a material tested and certified by industry organizations such as BPI not perform when introduced into real world natural environments? After all legislators are passing laws based on such certifications.

We would love to hear your thoughts on the subject.

http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/biodegradable-plastic-compostable-not-so-fast-says-stanford-daily-225526.htm

http://forkprintproject.wordpress.com/

http://www.news.pitt.edu/news/Landis_polymers_LCA

http://new.ensoplastics.com/theblog/?p=1143

Talking Green with the “Go Green Guy” Jeff Davis

ENSO Plastics recently had the opportunity to talk about some green topics with the “Go Green Guy”, Jeff Davis from Go Green America TV . As someone who is out there trying to educate and encourage people to live, and go green, we wanted to reach out to Jeff and see what his thoughts were on some topics that are relevant right now in our industry and field. ENSO Plastics shares a common goal with people like Jeff in that we want people to make the best decisions when it comes to environmental choices. We started off by just learning a little bit more about how Jeff got started in the “Go Green” movement:

Q: There are a lot of different reasons people get into the “Green Movement”, what motivated you to start your program,”Go Green America TV“?

Jeff: I was interested in finding some information for myself and my family. When I started searching for info on Green Living it just seemed so overwhelming. I thought there must be a better way to spread the word. So I started tweeting and blogging and before you know it “Go Green America TV” was born.

Q: That’s really great that something that started off as a personal goal turned into a much larger scale project of educating and providing information to others as to how they can go green as well. Now that your there, what is your goal with Go Green America? If there was something you could specifically achieve or a moment that would occur where you would sit back and say, “Man I’ve done it!”, what would that moment be or look like?

Jeff: My ultimate goal is to get “Go Green America TV” on television where I could reach millions. Daily I get interesting feedback from readers about how they enjoy what I am doing, for me that is it, knowing that I can effect people just by sharing what I learn, passing along information in such a way that it may just change they way people live their lives. I am not sure what the defining moment would be, but the little moments along the way will keep me going.

Q: Well we hope that you can achieve that goal! In regards to being on TV or how you run your program right now, you bring a lot of information to the table with your site and TV Channel, what is the biggest hurdle in trying to educate the public about green topics? What is the best way to go about getting the information to people?

Jeff: I think the biggest hurdle is finding an approach that people will actually take the time to listen to. There is so much Green washing out there that people are a little put off by the whole Green Living movement. I try to experience it with them, learn together and not be too much in your face. I want people to know that even the littlest things that we all do, make a difference.

I feel the best way to reach people is with video and I am in the process of finally getting that aspect of GGATV going.

Q: It is tough with the amount of Green Washing that has occurred, to keep people in the game and not be put off. One item of interest is plastic, and plastic usage is always a big deal, in packaging and with recycling, what is your overall impression of the environmental impact of plastics?

Jeff: It (plastic) has been a part of our lives for such a long time now it is difficult to just get rid of it. Recycling seems to be a key component in dealing with plastic but I still feel that the ultimate goal would be to reduce it’s use as much as possible. The trash factor, the landfill factor, the non biodegradable factor they all are a part of it, but sometimes we forget that plastics are petroleum based, love to see petroleum use cut when ever possible.

Q: There are a lot of factors involved in plastics, and specifically with plastic right now there is a lot of attention on plastic bags, specifically single use plastic bags, what is your take on it, what is the real solution, or is there one?

Jeff: I like the ban myself. I am not sure if it is the solution but I like it. Of all the single use items out there the plastic bag is the most widely used, the one that seems to get attention because it is easy to educate people on using reusable bags. People do tend to reuse plastic bags, but just for trash and they still end up in the trash can, they are one of the least likely items to be recycled.

Q: I agree with you in that I am also not sure it is the solution. It will be some time before we learn what kind of positive or negative impact the bag bans have. When you talk about ideas like using reusable bags, do you think we are we doing enough as people to go green? Even you personally do you feel there is always more and more you can do to be green but find difficulty in achieving all those goals?

Jeff: Are we doing enough? As long as we can get everyone to at least be conscious of there actions, hopefully it will be a cause and effect where they will make changes on there own. I think education is key, the more we understand why to live Green, the more people will make an effort. I myself know that I could always do more and I am striving to do so. It is a journey one step at a time, we just need to get as many people to start that journey as possible and the small steps will really make a difference

Q: On a global level there is a push to “Go Green”, even the Olympics this time around is trying to be as green as possible, and there is a lot of pressure for companies and brands to have “Green Initiatives”. From a global perspective what countries are really taking a lead with this, is the US in the lead?

Jeff: Globally I think that we are beginners when it comes to the environment. We’ve been the Global leaders in convenience, which is not a good thing. We have for the most part, become an unhealthy and somewhat lazy society. From what I can tell, England and many other European countries as well as Australia and Canada could teach us a lot about being environmentally responsible. I do think that we are finally catching on and hopefully catching up. We are finally educating people and a big part of that is just doing what we are doing right here, talking about it, sharing information, explaining why it is important.

We dropped the ball when Jimmy Carter tried to kick start the country down the right path and it wasn’t even called Green Living then. Solar panels, bio fuels, electric vehicles, we pushed them all aside and now we have to play catch up. I think we can do it!

I think we can too, and I think you have touched on something very important here. What really catches my attention here is when you said earlier, “the more we understand why to live Green, the more people will make an effort”. A lot of the time when I see a how to live green topic, blog or video it is simply that. It is at a high consumer level and sometimes it is effective and sometimes it is not. If though, we started focusing more on the “why” along with the “how” then I think more people would understand the importance of what it really means to “live” or “Go Green”.

Q: Thanks for your time Jeff, and we look forward to hearing from you in the future!

Jeff: It was a pleasure, thank you for taking the opportunity!

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

To learn more about Jeff Davis and his “Go Green America TV” make sure you visit his site, gogreenamericatv.com and follow Jeff on twitter !

Bag Bans – Is That Really The Big Issue?

I recently read a short, but insightful, article surrounding the issues of bag bans. The bag industry claims that banning bags will result in job loss, negative effects to local economies, hidden taxes, and lower environmental impact compared to paper, etc. These are important issues to consider, but they really don’t address the real issue of lightweight plastic bags – litter. The crux of the bag bans are associated with littering of bags whether intentional or not. I think we have all seen these bags floating in the streets, in bushes and trees, and worse, marine environments. The bag littler looks ugly and in worse case scenarios it kills wildlife!

I think the real issue with bag bans is that we are not identifying the main problem, litter.

Yes, it is true that plastic bags are more environmentally friendly when comparing the carbon footprint, but in the whole scheme of things, should we really be pushing lightweight plastic bags over alternative bag solutions like reusable bags or heavy gauge plastics bags? When is the last time you’ve seen a cotton reusable bag hanging in a tree? You don’t! They are much too heavy and they would end up going to the landfill, just like most of the other plastic packaging that comes with products we purchase.

Who is to blame for this problem? Can we change human behavior? What can be done to improve processes so that bags are not the problem? If there was a value to bags, like aluminum cans, would this result in a different outcome? A recent study titled: “Plastic Film and Bag Recycling Collection: National Reach Study” found that over 91% of U.S. residents have access to bag recycling facilities, but consumers are not utilizing them. Is bag recycling just too inconvenient? Not profitable enough for the recyclers? These are all questions we have asked to try to solve this problem, but perhaps there is a bigger question that we should be asking ourselves: Are there applications that we should not utilize plastic in?

If we zoom out of the minutia and look at the overall problem, human behavior is at the cause of all of these issues. But, maybe we can’t change human behavior. Maybe there are some plastic applications, such as bags, that we as humans should say, “let’s just get rid of them, because we aren’t able to solve the problem -other than to ban them”?

This blog is not going to solve the problem or answer the question “to ban or not to ban”, but to bring up the questions that we should be asking ourselves. Maybe we should be ok with banning certain applications of plastics, if they are resulting in damage to our environment. But, that doesn’t mean that we need to get rid of all plastics! After all, plastics do have a lower carbon footprint than the alternatives -and it is the material that 25 years ago the environmentalists wanted choose instead of paper. Who knows the absolute right answer? If we do now walk away from plastic bags, it would not be the first time our US society has come full circle in their overall opinion…

Methane Gasses: Least Expensive Form of Clean Energy?

Did you know that using the methane gasses generated from landfill sites are the least expensive form of clean energy we currently have available to us? It’s true, our waste when biodegraded anaerobically produce methane which is a flammable gas. Landfills are packed very tight and therefore do not allow oxygen to be used in the biodegradation process. This results in anaerobic microbes having an environment which allows them to thrive and break down the organic matter within the landfill cell. This also happens in Anaerobic Digesters where the by-product of the anaerobic biodegradation process produces the biogas Methane (CH4).

It is true that Methane gas is a potent greenhouse gas. It is also flammable and dangerous and as such it needs to be collected and converted into gases that are less impacting on the environment and/or to create clean energy. In the past many landfills would flare, or burn the methane to convert it to CO2 but over the years more and more landfills and businesses are recognizing that methane from landfills and anaerobic digestion can be used to create clean energy.

We are a long way from being a zero waste society and until we are we will have to deal with our waste. That waste if placed into anaerobic environments can generate methane which has a value that can offset our need for other fossil fuels.

Due to the stringent level of regulations the United States has the highest percentage of landfills with LFG (Landfill Gas) collection systems relative to any other country practicing landfilling. Nearly 60% of the worldwide capture of methane occurs in the U.S. even though the U.S. only generates 24% of the worldwide methane. From the perspective of the largest sources of methane emissions, landfills are the third largest. I provide these numbers to show that globally collecting and converting methane from landfills can provide the incentive to lower GHG (Greenhouse Gas) emissions. It should be noted that progress in lowering GHG emissions is best achieved by a concerted, integrated approach that employs all available technologies and methods, including reuse, recycling, composting, waste-to-energy, and landfilling with capture of LFG.

So here’s the question: What if all plastics were both recyclable and biodegradable, and would biodegrade in landfill environments?

If we do the math on the 31 billion plastic water bottles sent to a landfill instead of were recycled in 2006. It would result in enough energy to power a 100w light bulb for over 900,000 hours.

To calculate how much energy can be created from a plastic bottle enhanced with the ENSO additive take the weight of the bottle multiply it by % carbon, multiply by 1.33 (molecular weight of CH4 16 / molecular weight of carbon 12 – this converts the carbon to methane), then multiply by 22.4 (L/g – ideal gas law).

(bottle wt * bottle carbon %) * (methane mass 16 / carbon mass 12) * 22.4 L/g = vol. methane per bottle

(19.2 gram * 62.5%) * (1.33) * 22.4 = vol. of methane per bottle

(12) * (1.33) * 22.4 = 357.50 L * (1 m3/100 L) = .3575 m3

Once we know the volume of methane per bottle we need to convert that into how much energy can be created per volume of methane. The Thermal energy content of methane is approximately 26.73 – 32.7 kj/m3 therefore about (26.73 + 32.7) / 2 = 29.715 kJ/m3

.3575 m3 * 29.715 kJ/m3 = 10.623 kJ

1kJ/second = 1kW and considering a 100W light bulb:

10.623 kJ = 10.623 kW seconds * (1000 W/1 kW) * (1 hr/3600 s) = 2.95 W hr

To light a 100W light bulb for 1 hour would require 33.88 bottles:

100 W * (1/2.95 W hr) = 33.88

31 billion bottles = 31,000,000,000 bottles * (1 hr/33.88 bottles) = 914,759 hrs

Bacteria Strain that Biodegrades Polyethylene

Most people understand standard plastics to be resistant to the biodegradation process, but did you know that research from back in 2005 isolated a microbial strain called Brevibacillus borstelensis that is capable of utilizing polyethylene as the sole carbon and energy source?

So what does all that mean and how did they do this?

Soil taken from a polyolefin waste disposal site was used to isolate the bacteria strain that had adapted to its environment and energy source to be able to secrete the enzymes needed to utilize the carbon within the polyethylene chemical chain. From the research there were a few BIG discoveries with one being that Brevibacillus borstelensis was able to use the carbon found in polyethylene as the sole source of energy. This is important because we typically find that microbes will develop where there are easily accessible sources of energy. This is the reason traditional plastics take so long to biodegrade, the carbon is too difficult to utilize by microbes resulting in plastics lasting for hundreds of years in the environment. We now know of a microbe that is indifferent in using the carbon from polyethylene plastic or from other sources.

This research has opened the door to better understanding the adaptive nature of those microscopic creatures we share the planet with. Although we can’t see them, they outnumber the human inhabitants by a factor of many trillions of them to each one of us. They have also had millions of years more time on the earth than us humans have, and are instrumental in the cleaning process of creating a healthy viable planet. There is a lot we can and will continue to learn about the tiniest creatures we call microbes.

To read the full paper: Biodegradation of polyethylene by the thermophilic bacterium Brevibacillus borstelensis

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02553.x/full

BioPlastics Dirty Little Secret

So you know all about bioplastics, Right? You know they are difficult to process, often cause more detriment to the environment than traditional plastics, have limited shelf stability and can be very expensive. But what you may not have known is…..

Nearly every plastic on the market today is a bioplastic! In todays market, when one uses the term “bioplastic” they typically beleive they are refering to a plastic that is sourced from plant materials. What most don’t realize (and many try to avoid admitting) is that most all plastics are made from plant materials!

When I was in elementary school, I had an amazing 4th grade teacher. Of the many things she taught me, one was that fossil fuels were the remains of dinasour bones. Little did my teacher realize the error of her ways. Fossil fuel is primarily comprised of ancient algae (YEP, PLANTS!). So any product made from fossil fuels, is made of……

Plants.

Now, don’t get me wrong; I am not advocating the use of fossil fuels. Quite to the contrary, it is imperitive that we get away from the use of the ancient plants as quickly as possible. These plants have sequestered carbon for millions of years. Carbon that if released into our atmosphere could cause irrepairable damage.

What I am advocating is to educate properly, get rid of the fluff and marketing and call things as they are. The source is not the issue, it is the environmental impact of the source that is the issue. Perhaps we need to identify plastics as “sustainable” or “not sustainable” and leave it at that. Because you either are or your not, it’s that simple.