ailbhe: (trike)
Huh. At some point last night, someone lifted the trike off the parking space in the road and left it outside my next-door-neighbour's front door, blocking access to that house. I have no idea why, because moving the trike doesn't create enough space to park a car - though I suppose it could be related to the incredibly loud motorbike I heard revving up at length this morning.

I wish we could buy some sort of parking permit so that motorised vehicle owners wouldn't resent our parking in front of our house so much... But we can't. So idiots will just move it out of their way because of the perception that roads are for cars and cars alone. It's not even a matter of who pays for it, because a resident's parking permit is free. Bah.

However, a very nice man moved it back off the footpath and into the road, because I went out to see where it was and he was there; he'd already moved it *along* the footpath so that it wasn't blocking the doorway any more.

Oh well. Perhaps in future we'll park it near a drain cover and chain it to that.

Ecover :(

Jul. 17th, 2006 12:31 pm
ailbhe: (summer)
A while ago I filled in a little form on a website:


I was disappointed to find that Ecover dishwasher tablets are individually plastic-wrapped. I have no local facility to recycle these wrappings. It also appears that Ecover do not sell a dishwashing liquid nor loose powder. Can I mail my little plastic packets back to Ecover for recycling?

Thanks,


Today I received a response:


Thank you for your email. Whilst the PP wrappers are 100% recyclable, unfortunately no local councils to my knowledge, will accept this type of plastic for recycling at present. There are companies that recycle this type of plastic but they will only do so for huge quantities. We need to use a PP wrapper to keep moisture away from the tablets and we are looking at alternative packaging methods that would solve this recycling problem. Unfortunately we do not have the facilities to store plastic that customer send back as we only have a small office in the UK. I’m sorry to have to disappoint you.

Kind regards


So the stuff is recyclable but that makes not a blind bit of difference - it has to go into landfill. Phooey.

(In other news, it is once again Too Darn Hot, and we have a stack of stuff outside the door as well as listed on Freecycle; it WILL go into landfill if it's still here on Wednesday night and I feel terribly, terribly guilty about it. Why the hell do we have so much stuff? Most of it we didn't even buy ourselves!)
ailbhe: (working)

It's early, isn't it? but UNICEF have sent me their Christmas catalogue, so I've started thinking about it.

Christmas gifts - and birthday gifts - bother me. And cards, they bother me too. Because I love to receive them, at least, most of them - but greetings cards are usually a pointless, heavy-handedly humorous, eco-unfriendly way of syaing "I didn't forget! I care!" which, you know, ought to mean I use e-cards instead, but I loathe e-cards.

Gifts bother me because everyone I know already has enough stuff, and I have too much stuff, but we all want more stuff, and we don't need any of it. I don't actually know anyone on my must-give-gifts list who would be genuinely pleased to receive "10 geese for a farmer in Uganda" or whatever.

Thus the compromise: UNICEF. The cards aren't hideous and don't try to be amusing. The sources are moderate-to-good on the eco-meter. The cause is, without having done any research, fine. And the gifts... well, they're generic gifts. Candles and bags and stationery and toys and silk ties. Gifts for people who already have all the stuff they really want, because their income allows that, but still like more stuff as gifts, especially if it's nice stuff. And the UNICEF stuff is nice stuff.

The only time I tried to give a gift that wasn't clutter-junk, it wasn't used. Ho hum.

ailbhe: (Default)

There's yet another study showing that cloth nappies are no better for the environment than disposables. And yet again, the sample size for cloth nappies is about a tenth the size of the disposable users. Alarmingly, within that sample, they only used terry nappy users, which was a tenth of that again - so while they used 2,000 disposable users, they used only 32 terry nappy users for most of the survey.

They keep talking about "the energy used to wash and dry the nappies" but I know no-one who habitually tumble-dries cloth nappies, especially terries, because it takes too bloody long. Most people line-dry them whereever possible, and many people hang them in the house on radiators or similar during the winter.

They mention the energy used transporting the cotton to manufacture the cloth nappies, but not the energy used to drive the petrol-guzzling car to the shop every week or fortnight to buy new disposables.

The study only covered first-child environment costs, ignoring the fact that cloth nappies can be reused by second or subsequent children.

It assumed washing at 90 degrees C which isn't reocmmended by any of the re-usable nappies I've seen; 60C is the usual. And it assumed that you soak your nappies in a strong bleach solution prior to washing them. That's a bit crazy. Most people dry-pail because it's less hassle.

And there was no mention of the lock-away core in the centre of disposables, the bit that gives off that weird sickly smell when it's wet, the bit that gives nappy rash to Linnea as soon as she uses a disposable.

Unless they were only studying eco-friendly disposables, the biodegradable ones, because they are actually not half bad and I can see how they'd be environmentally comparable to cloth nappies regularly bleached and washed at 90 degrees and tumble-dried. We use them ourselves with no qualms whatsoever.

I could also rant about the habit many folks have of encasing their plastic-coated raw-sewage-containing disposable nappies in scented plastic nappy bags before putting the nappy bag in a plastic bin-liner and sending the whole lot to landfill. But I won't. I'll just, you know, mention it. Because cloth nappy users send all the sewage to the sewage treatment systems. Not plastic-encased in a landfill.

March 2025

S M T W T F S
       1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags