Last year a friend told me he was very excited now that he knew he could take his hard-to-recycle plastic to our local recycling company. I bit my tongue, knowing that it was probably too good to be true. At best, those plastics would end up in a landfill, but I had also heard that chemical recycling might be even worse for the environment.
Misconceptions abound when it comes to recycling, and a new technology called “chemical recycling” is being positioned as a major win for recycling hard-to-recycle plastics. No matter their intentions for the future, most chemical recycling facilities are currently turning plastics into fuel to be burned, not recycled plastics to replace virgin plastics. Perception is everything in the court of public opinion, and information matters.
When I first saw an Earthship on the Discovery Channel in the ‘90s, I immediately wanted to live in one. While I now recognize that there are some cons in addition to the pros, I am still inspired by the radical and thoughtful design toward net zero energy use and waste. And I was delighted to stay in one recently and learn more about it first-hand.
Years of backyard composting has biased me toward aerobic compost, so when I had the opportunity to tour an anaerobic digester, I jumped at the chance. I knew very little about the process other than the fact that it created a lot of methane, which was a concern of mine. Fortunately, the team at Ecotone Renewables was patient with my multiple questions on the tour.
We deal with fast fashion on a regular basis in our lives, but nowhere do we see it more than at Halloween, when pop-up shops sell cheap costumes to be used a few times and thrown away. There are more sustainable alternatives that include making, thrifting, renting, or reusing costume components. Some of these options can be better for the environment, your pocketbook, or both.
The term “recycling” is a dangerous thing because of how it inaccurately shapes our perceptions around the plastic lifecycle. Most plastic put in the recycle bin doesn’t get recycled, but even the industrial process of “chemical recycling” doesn’t necessarily create a closed-loop plastic system. Instead, it can often fuel increased health risks for those living nearby, increasing global temperatures, and demand for additional plastic.
Although we know that “Reduce” is the most important component of the Three R’s, it’s hard to advocate for reducing consumption during the biggest commercial holiday of the year. Examining our motivations during the holidays (to understand why we choose to spend our time and money the way we do) can help reduce our consumption and may help improve our mental health as well.
At least according to some, the decision of whether you buy a real or plastic tree doesn’t have as much of an environmental impact as what you choose to do with it once you have it. Getting rid of your real tree at the end of the season can be confusing, especially if it’s unclear what the most eco-friendly end-of-life decision is.
People have been asking the question for years: are real or artificial trees better for the environment. My husband says that reusing his plastic tree for years is better than cutting down a live one. I say that carbon footprint is an important factor, but not the only one. Will a Life Cycle Analysis funded by the artificial tree industry put this question to rest?
The first step in sustainable footwear decisions is reducing how much we consume. In order to do that, taking good care of our shoes is a necessity so they stay in good working order for a long time. There are also modifications we can make to ensure they are as comfortable as possible, fitting and supporting our unique feet, keeping us happy and healthy.