The Eco-Over-Under : Are we making the greenest choices, or gambling with the environment?

This blog was originally published in 2009 - All environmentally-minded folks are on the lookout for ways to help slow global warming and employ the three R's in as many parts of their lives as possible. Unfortunately, in the environment as in life, things can be more complex than we originally think. Are choices like buying local or reusable products always the most ecological option? Where is the point where it's better for the environment to reuse an item like a plastic container versus a disposable one? Like in gambling, what is the eco "over-under"? When my kids' school announced an eco-lunch campaign, I was expecting, and received, information about using reusable plastic containers instead of cling wrap and sandwich bags, and a thermos or plastic bottle instead of juice boxes. I accepted that these were good ideas for reducing waste and global warming. My wife, on the other hand, has a tendency to examine all aspects of a question. "Is it really more ecologically sound to pack a lunch this way?" She asked. "Of course" I replied. "How come?" she asked, and I had to tell her, as I so often do, "I don't know." On the surface, it just seems obvious that reusable is better for the planet than disposable. But why?
I read an article in the February 25th edition of The New Yorker called "Big Foot: The Complexities of Going Green ." In it journalist Michael Specter discusses the hotly contested terrain of measuring carbon emissions. First Specter suggests that all forms of carbon consumption in our lives, like food, transportation, clothes, housing, and so on, should be given equal importance. For example, the average North American feels good about recycling, but is she equally willing to forego air travel?
Specter looks at the "localvore" movement (also known as the "hundred mile diet," where participants choose to consume only locally-produced foods) and asserts that assuming this practice is automatically more energy efficient than shipped produce is simply naïve. Local product A, grown slowly down the street on nutritionally depleted soil, with low crop yields, picked by hand, can leave a larger carbon footprint than imported product B, grown quickly overseas on densely cultivated lots, with high yields, picked efficiently by machine, he argues.
Consuming locally is beneficial, he believes, but not with all crops and not under all circumstances. For example, one study found that due to the difference in carbon use between transportation by sea (barge) and land (truck), a New York wine drinker is "greener" by consuming imported French wine than California varieties.
So in the end how do we measure the environmental impact-the eco-over-under-of reusable products versus disposable ones? Ask Pablo , a blog about "making sustainability metrics fun," calculated that a coffee or tea drinker using a stainless steel mug will have to reuse it 327 times before it has less of an environmental impact than a disposable Styrofoam cup. For years I have used a reusable steel coffee mug, and have broken, lost and replaced it a few times. Of the four mugs I have gone through over the years, I might be close to breaking even, but the whole exercise has got me thinking about other so-called "green" solutions.
If you pack your lunch with reusable containers, how many uses will it take to equal the environmental impact of using cling wrap, snack and sandwich bags? The calculation would need to take into account the energy used in manufacture and shipping of the containers, the amount of water and energy used for cleaning the reusable containers, the land-use of its place in the landfill site (where both disposable and reusable plastic eventually end up), and the number of times each container is actually used.
The point at which reusable containers really become more environmentally friendly is an elusive figure, but it would be interesting to know if it was five, fifty, or five hundred uses. While the reduction of disposable packaging in landfills is a laudable end in itself, like so many things in life, there's more to the footprint than the brand of shoe. While it's never an environmental gamble to reuse an item you already possess, buying new semi-reusable products might be a bet not worth taking. I welcome new, skeptical research that calculates to eco-over for all of our necessities, with the hope of truly living the slogan, "Think locally, Act globally."

—Roger

Compost Conundrum: Who is responsible for our organic waste?

This blog was originally published in 2009. Recent changes in the CDN/NDG Borough’s Community compost program have reawakened a long running debate within the environmental community: Is it better to have individual backyard bins, and small community bins for those without a back yard, or is it better to integrate composting into the borough’s own waste management strategy?

The Borough began the community-composting program after a pilot project by Action Communiterre and ValoEco to set up and use three-bin composters at or near collective gardens was attempted. The original project and Borough follow-up was based on the idea that local residents would contribute to and manage the composters themselves, and share the finished compost either in a collective garden or at individual homes.

The pilot ran smoothly, and the Borough wanted to replicate the program in more neighborhoods, eventually putting two three-bin composters in each of the six (now five) electoral districts, and paying the local Eco-Quartier offices a small fee to maintain and supervise the bins.

So far so good, until rats were discovered in one of the community bins last summer, then in several of the bins last fall and winter.

While getting rid of the rats is simple (remove the compost from the bin, verify that residents are not putting bread, meat, or other rodent-friendly foods into the bins, then keep the compost moist after that. To ensure that rats do not re-enter, add wire mesh to the bottom of the bins, or place on a platform of cinderblocks to keep pests away), there is time and expertise needed to completely remove rodents and keep them away.

The Borough’s solution has been to empty and close the composters, and reopen them only if residents live in large apartment buildings, sign up, have their own key to the composters, and regularly assist in the upkeep and maintenance of the bins. These extra limitations on participation are discouraging people who want to compost, but don't want to invest too much time and attention to the task.

The integration of curbside compost (also called “organics”) collection into the waste management plans of municipalities large and small has been going on for over ten years. Mid-size cities like Halifax and Peterborough and large ones like Toronto all collect compostable materials along with recyclables and garbage.

When the contract for garbage pick-up and disposal came up for renewal last year, Cote-St-Luc decided to opt out and develop its own waste management strategy , including curbside organics collection. Starting as a pilot project this year, the town hopes to have a "three-stream" (recyclables, organics, and garbage) collection up and running in the next year or so.

The benefits are many: big reductions in the solid waste stream, reduced greenhouse gasses, and nutrient-rich compost for municipal and individual use. Curbside collection can also handle materials that community bins can’t like bread, dairy products and even meat. However, as local experience has shown, the larger the group involved in organics collection, the more contaminated the compost becomes and the less likely you are to get any of it (without paying, that is).

There have been calls from individuals and groups to keep supporting individual composting and local community bins. There is no question that in the short term individual and community composting are the only game in town.

What would you prefer: The borough taking over composting, or more support for individual and collective composting? Whichever choice we make, we will need to put it on the Borough's agenda, and like Cote-St-Luc, keep plugging away until it becomes a reality.

— Roger

Links:

General Composting Intormation: http://www.compost.org/
Community Composting: http://www.ecojm.cam.org/ndetail.php?id=6