Thursday, May 28, 2015

Walmart and Sustainability

There is a lot of skepticism about if Walmart and sustainability can co-exist. While their lowest price strategy may seem to interfere with traditional sustainability values of true cost, it also caters to sustainability values of equity and opportunity. 

I was impressed to read that Walmart has an effective green marketing strategy, that rates suppliers based on a multitude of criteria and recognizes that most problems lie within the supply chain. While it's not perfect, it is a great start and I hope to see continued effort from the world's largest retailer.

Check out the article here


Footprint update: I accidently broke down and ate meat at a Mexican restaurant, but I have never tried enchilada mole before and it was amazing...... Other than that I have not purchased any meat at the store though. I am currently looking for a way to buy bread that does not require plastic packaging but won't go bad right away because I don't have time to buy fresh bread daily... 

U.S. Initiative to help coal workers transition to clean energy jobs

This was an exciting headline to see and article to read because it is actually the US GOVERNMENT taking action to support a transition for worker to move away from coal jobs that have many known negative health impacts. Even though this action was taken because of the already declining industry, the fact that they are moving these workers to work in renewable energy production is a great start to government support for a cleaner economy.

Learn more at:

http://www.greenbiz.com/article/new-initiative-help-coal-workers-transition-clean-economy-jobs

Thursday, May 14, 2015

Re-evaluating my Ecological Footprint Goals

For the most part, I have been fairly successful in reducing my footprint in my goal areas of water and energy consumption. Turning the wifi/cable box off is the most difficult part of the energy consumption area. 

Food consumption is where I am having a tough time. When evaluating why I am not making the progress I would like to, it came down to a few things: price, convenience, and accessible alternatives.

I have not been eating meat, which will reduce my footprint, although this has mainly been out of price.

I have not been buying at the farmers market because Saturdays have been inconvenient for me this month. However, I have consistently stuck to only organic produce.

With certain items with plastic packaging, like bread, the reason I haven't moved to another type of packaging is because of limitations. Fresh bread comes in paper bags, but does not stay good long enough for me to finish it. In this case, I have to choose to get the one that keeps the best fresh the longest so that I am not wasting.

Unfortunately, my property manager has not gotten back to me about a compost bin. I will have to take further action on this goal.

If I had the time, I would re-evaluate my goals to buy less food at a time, so that I could buy the fresh, ready-to-go products from bakeries and whatnot. I think I will try this over the summer, but right now it is not realistic. 

New goals for food: Eat everything I buy, don't let things go to waste. Buy fresh bread whenever I can. Continue to avoid plastic packaging as much as possible, and record the items that are packaged in plastics and search for alternatives.

A Credit Card that Helps the Planet

So this is a very interesting concept. Sustain:Green hopes to use customer rewards structures that are usually offered by credit card commpanies, such as cash back, but direct these funds toward purchasing certified carbon offsets. This is the first opportunity for the individual consumer to get involved in carbn offsetting, and in a convenient and free way. They are not charged for these rewards, they are simply giving them away to a good cause. Cardholders can also vote for projects they want to fund, and the card itself is biodegradable/compostable. I'm not sure this card will attract the majority of the population, but I do think that it is a great idea to bring responsibility and action for offsetting carbon to the individual consumer level.

Read more here: http://www.greenbiz.com/article/credit-card-offset-your-individual-carbon-guilt

Life Cycle Analysis of a Toothpaste Tube

It is incredible to think about the significance of a tube of toothpaste and its impact on the environment. For a product so simple, completing a life cycle impact analysis (LCA) is quite complex. The act of brushing your teeth is something that nearly everyone does: it is both socially and hygienically expected of you to do. It also requires you to use a certain amount of water. Most accessible toothpaste varieties include many chemicals, and some even contain micro-beads, which can’t always be filtered out of the water supply.  Producing and transporting this toothpaste also uses significant amounts of resources and releases pollutants. To effectively create a LCA for Aquafresh fluoride toothpaste, we would need to evaluate the life cycle from extraction, production, transportation, use and last disposal of a single tube of toothpaste. 

The ingredients used in toothpaste are mostly chemicals, and although I’m sure their life cycle is harmful, these materials were not listed in Okala’s LCA bill of materials chart. So for this product analysis, I will focus on the packaging tube itself, which also contains many chemicals. There are multiple layers of polyethylene used for its sealing properties, and opalescent polyethylene is used for a flexible base material and white color. Vapor deposited PET is included for rigidity, ability to maintain shape and moisture barrier properties (AICELLO, pg.1). Polyethylene itself is created by modifying natural gas or the catalytic cracking of crude oil into gasoline (LePoutre, pg.1). This is not a good beginning to this tube’s lifecycle. Suppliers for Aquafresh are located all throughout Europe (and I'm sure other continents as well), and the toothpaste is sold all over the world, leaving an immense transportation impact. On top of all that, it is not recyclable.


Product: A Toothpaste Tube
System boundary: Analysis of the tube alone, not the toothpaste inside of it or use of the toothpaste.
Functional unit: One tube, approximately 2 ounces in weight.
Lifespan: Approximately four months

SBOM:
Total tube weight = 2 oz. = 0.125 lbs
Composition:
PET, amorphous, primary = 1.8/lb * 0.06 = .108
Aluminum, primary = 13/lb * 0.05= .65
EVA, primary= 1.3/lb * 0.01= .013
Sealing tape= 0.18/lb *0.005= .0009
White pigment=2.8/lb*0.06=.168
Processing:
Injection molding= 0.72/lb*.725=.522
Aluminum milling= 9.9/lb*0.05=.495
Transportation:
Intercontinental air freight= 1.6/ton-mi*.125= 0.2
Disposal:
Polyethylenes in controlled landfill 0.3/lb*(.06+.01) =0.021

Total: 2.1779 LCA impact factor points

This may not seem like a large impact number, but remember this is only a 2 oz. piece of packaging. There is room for improvement in the use of recycled products, mode of transport, and extension of product life through design for disassembly and recyclability.


New design with reduced impact:
Using recycled polyethylene products would make improvements in the life cycle analysis of a tube of toothpaste. However, I’m not sure that this would make the product actually recyclable. I think that the “tube” design of toothpaste may need to be eliminated altogether. If a glass container with a recyclable or reusable dispenser, designed in a shape where the toothpaste would be funneled to the dispenser so not to be wasted, the product could be recyclable and eliminate the many plastics and processes included in the toothpaste tube. If possible, it could even be sold in a box with a free shipping label so that it could be returned for free and reused by the manufacturer. A glass jar keeps the toothpaste preserved and contained naturally, and does not need the plastics and chemicals included traditionally. 

Product: Glass toothpaste container with recyclable dispenser
Functional unit: One container, about one pound in weight.
Lifespan: About 4 months, but recyclable or reusable at end of its life.

SBOM:
Composition:
Bottled Glass, sec (clear recycled glass) =.38/lb*0.95 =0.361
HDPE, secondary (recycled hard plastic that is recyclable by some) = 1.2/lb*0.05= 0.06
Aluminum, secondary (metal spring in dispenser)= 0.55*0.0001=0.00055
Processing:
Injection molding = 0.72/lb*0.05 = 0.036
Transportation:
Ocean freighter= 0.053/ton-mi *1 = 0.053
Disposal:
Glass = recyclable
Polyethylene (HDPE) 0.3/lb*0.05= 0.015

New Total: 0.525055 =~0.525 LCA impact factor points




Works Cited:

AICELLO. "What is polyethylene laminating film (sealant laminating film)?." Suzulon L: Sealant Laminating Film. AICELLO, n.d. Web. 14 May 2015. <http://www.suzulon-l.com/PE_laminating_film.html>.

LePoutre, Priscilla. "The Manufacture of Polyethylene." Transpak Industries Ltd., n.d. Web. 14 May 2015. <http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/polymers/10J.pdf>.



Saturday, May 9, 2015

Putting a Value on Energy Efficiency

The Bullitt Center is said to be the most energy efficient commercial office building in the world. This article talks about how they are taking an interesting, first-of-it's kind approach to putting a value on their savings from energy efficiency.

Using a finance structure similar to that of a power purchase agreement for solar or othr forms of electricity, their plan is to meter the amount of energy use the building would have used as a traditional building, and then the Bullitt Center will sell back it's unused energy to Seattle's electricity company. Putting a monetary value on their energy savings could be a great incentive for other buildings and companies to improve their energy efficiency. 

Net Impact is visiting the Bullitt Center today, and I'm excited to learn more about this building!