The Axes of Environmental Impact

kottke.org has an interesting link today to a life-cycle energy analysis of reusable and disposable cups. Considering the much more energy-intensive process required to create the reusable cups, and the energy impact of washing them, it turns out that you'd have to use a ceramic mug more than one thousand times before it became a more energy-efficient choice than a styrofoam cup—and that's assuming a highly energy-efficient dishwasher.

I question the conclusion, however, that "[t]he lesson of this life-cycle energy analysis is that the choice between reusable and disposable cups doesn't matter much in its overall environmental impact." Doesn't this study just illuminate the energy impact of the various kinds of cups? What about the environmental impact of having to dispose of all those paper and styrofoam cups? Does the toxicity of the dishwasher soap somehow also outweigh the space required in landfills?

I have no idea, but I do wonder.

Posted by Lori in environmental issues at 12:09 PM on April 13, 2007

Comments (3)

This reminds me a bit about the cloth vs. disposable diaper debate. An acquaintance suggested that where you live is a determinant in environmental impact. If you live on the East coast where water is more plentiful, cloth would be the better option environmentally. If you live in the Southwest, disposable is better. (Although we didn't follow this recommendation.)

Lori:

Good point. We went with disposables because of the "ew factor" of cloth for me, plain and simple. I'm a bad environmentalist.

On a related note, a friend and I were discussing when to toilet train the other day, and she remarked that she'd heard several people in the Bay Area (where she lives) say that it was an environmental sin not to toilet train a child by age two because of the impact of all those extra disposable diapers. I hadn't really thought of it that way before. I'd already planned not to buy any more Pull-Ups once we exhaust our current supply, but the fact that I haven't pulled a wet one off the Beaner in weeks makes me think we should stop putting them on him at night even before we run out and just Freecycle the leftovers.

We'll be happy to take any leftover Pull-Ups you want to unload. We're creeping ever closer to potty-training, now that we're (I think) past the new-baby regression period.

Comments

This reminds me a bit about the cloth vs. disposable diaper debate. An acquaintance suggested that where you live is a determinant in environmental impact. If you live on the East coast where water is more plentiful, cloth would be the better option environmentally. If you live in the Southwest, disposable is better. (Although we didn't follow this recommendation.)

Posted by: juliloquy [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 13, 2007 1:37 PM

Good point. We went with disposables because of the "ew factor" of cloth for me, plain and simple. I'm a bad environmentalist.

On a related note, a friend and I were discussing when to toilet train the other day, and she remarked that she'd heard several people in the Bay Area (where she lives) say that it was an environmental sin not to toilet train a child by age two because of the impact of all those extra disposable diapers. I hadn't really thought of it that way before. I'd already planned not to buy any more Pull-Ups once we exhaust our current supply, but the fact that I haven't pulled a wet one off the Beaner in weeks makes me think we should stop putting them on him at night even before we run out and just Freecycle the leftovers.

Posted by: Lori at April 13, 2007 1:52 PM

We'll be happy to take any leftover Pull-Ups you want to unload. We're creeping ever closer to potty-training, now that we're (I think) past the new-baby regression period.

Posted by: ratphooey [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 13, 2007 3:36 PM

Comments are now closed.