Environmental issues

[JohnToo]

At work, as part of a drive to eliminate plastic waste, we have removed the drinks machines that dispensed drinks in one-off plastic cups. Instead, we each bring in our own china mug or reusable Costa flask. Thing is, we each wash our own cup separately at the end of the day using our own (considerable) quantity of hot water. Then we dry them with paper towels, which because they are now wet apparently have to go in the general waste not the recycling.

How does one go about assessing whether this a net environmental gain or not?

[LowlifeDes]

Raw data and sums.

[ransos]

I think my initial response is that often, there is no such thing as a "net environmental gain". Instead, it is a case of deciding on your environmental priorities and assessing against those criteria: what is it that your employer is trying to achieve?
In the example you've provided, it's likely that the net carbon impact of washing and drying (with disposable towels) reusable cups is greater than the carbon impact of disposing of a plastic cup. On the other hand, the change effectively addresses the specific issue of plastic waste. A more detailed analysis would need to consider the production of energy, origin of materials, method of disposal, and locations and transport that relate. In my experience, Life Cycle Assessment is fraught with difficulties, and is often too sensitive to its inputs to be of much use.
As an aside, the issue with paper towels is that they're unsuitable for recycling because they are "end of life", being made from paper fibres that wouldn't stand another trip through the paper mill. Using this material for towels is probably a pretty good idea, as there's not a lot else that can be done with it. Something that would need to be accounted for in your LCA...

[Rutabaga]

How about invoking a cooperative spirit and agreeing a rota by which one person washes everything up at the end of each day, and either leaves the mugs to air dry or dries them using a teatowel that gets taken home and laundered?

[JohnToo]

How about invoking a cooperative spirit and agreeing a rota by which one person washes everything up at the end of each day, and either leaves the mugs to air dry or dries them using a teatowel that gets taken home and laundered?

At my base location, there are usually no more than twenty of us in on any given day. We have a collective pool of crockery and a dishwasher - last one home puts it on, first one in unloads - and it works quite well.

At my company’s head office, where I go once a week, and is the location I was talking about, there are two thousand people (in a building, rumour has it, originally built for 800), dozens of tea/coffee stations, no fixed desks (at least in theory), minimum storage space, and a buildings team who are paranoid about the whole building descending into anarchy. Establishing sensible cooperative practices in a building that size is an uphill task.

[Greg]

Dishwasher! Whoever's last out presses 'go', job done.

[Regulator]

How about invoking a cooperative spirit and agreeing a rota by which one person washes everything up at the end of each day, and either leaves the mugs to air dry or dries them using a teatowel that gets taken home and laundered?

Or, as we have in the office given the number of people/cups involved, the business buys reusable mugs and installs a dishwasher. There is no real need to use either disposable cups or paper towels.

Even if the business were using tea towels, there’s no reason why the business can’t su-ply and get them cleaned.

[JohnToo]

Another environmental issue.

To what extent is population growth part of the problem?

We can all agree that the first thing those of us in the West ought to do is to reduce our own per-capita consumption. But it doesn’t have to be either/or, and it does seem plausible that reducing population growth would help too.

Of course, arguments that China and Africa should stop having so many children are usually as much about racism and imperialism as about the environment. But does that invalidate the environmental argument?

[ransos]

At my base location, there are usually no more than twenty of us in on any given day. We have a collective pool of crockery and a dishwasher - last one home puts it on, first one in unloads - and it works quite well.

At my company’s head office, where I go once a week, and is the location I was talking about, there are two thousand people (in a building, rumour has it, originally built for 800), dozens of tea/coffee stations, no fixed desks (at least in theory), minimum storage space, and a buildings team who are paranoid about the whole building descending into anarchy. Establishing sensible cooperative practices in a building that size is an uphill task.

You've pretty much described the office I used to work in, and the office I now work in. The FM people call it "agile working", the rest of us call it "a complete pain in the arse". On the other hand, moving lots of smaller teams into a large, central building has significantly reduced our energy consumption, and has increased the percentage of people walking or cycling to work.

[ransos]

Another environmental issue.

To what extent is population growth part of the problem?

We can all agree that the first thing those of us in the West ought to do is to reduce our own per-capita consumption. But it doesn’t have to be either/or, and it does seem plausible that reducing population growth would help too.

Of course, arguments that China and Africa should stop having so many children are usually as much about racism and imperialism as about the environment. But does that invalidate the environmental argument?

The global population birth rate has been declining for around forty years, IIRC, with some startling declines in poorer countries. The effect of declining birth rates and improved life expectancy is that the fastest growing age-group is the over-60s. This going to present some very serious challenges in the coming decades.

[Regulator]

The global population birth rate has been declining for around forty years, IIRC, with some startling declines in poorer countries. The effect of declining birth rates and improved life expectancy is that the fastest growing age-group is the over-60s. This going to present some very serious challenges in the coming decades.

You are correct... and the reasons behind the declining fertility in developing countries are quite interesting to look as well.

Some changes are down to 'positives', such as better access to education (and in particular better access to education for women), access to better health care (including significant improvements in basic neonatal and paediatric care, such as immunisation) and overall reductions in absolute poverty levels.

Some of the changes are, unfortunately, down to 'negatives' - you will often see declines in fertility in areas where there are conflicts (Syria and Yemen are two examples).

Some interesting reading (if you have some time to spare)

[Joan]

Raw data and sums.

You need to know what question you are asking. eg: What practice has the lowest carbon footprint? or Which has the smallest effect on landfill? or Which uses the least non-renewable resources? or Which uses the least energy? etc.

It's not necessarily what you'd expect, the difference between cloth nappies and disposables can be quite narrow on some criterion. If you were comparing the energy consumption polystyrene cups vs ceramic mugs, you would have to use the mug 1006 times to break even. I know I would have broken it before that

[LowlifeDes]

Yes, like so much in life, things can be counterintuitive.

[Hill Wimp]

Take your reusable mug home each night and wash it with the family wash then take it back to work the next day and repeat.

[ransos]

Take your reusable mug home each night and wash it with the family wash then take it back to work the next day and repeat.

Yeah, but transporting the mug home and back requires extra energy, which could be fuel or food, depending on the mode used.