I just learned, via the blog Fake Plastic Fish, that not long after my post about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, another journey to the North Pacific Gyre launched, this time on a vessel made in large part of plastic bottles. Read all about the educational effort buoying it here.
And enjoy this related graphic from Klas Ernflo, via Digg:
I've been thinking about bags—and, more generally, plastic—a lot lately, and not just because of BPA.
For one thing, the final phase of San Francisco's plastic-bag ban just went into effect: as of yesterday, pharmacies can no longer hand out their heretofore fave kind of sack. For another, I just read this post from Sightline Daily (via Terrapass's blog), which contends that the importance of the paper vs. plastic choice is dwarfed by the choice of what you put in the bag.
That may be true in the embodied-energy sense—embodied energy being what's required to manufacture, supply to the point of use, and disassemble or dispose of something. But the unfortunate fact is that lots of bags and other plastic items never get properly disposed of (whatever that means) and instead end up polluting our oceans. A great number of them congregate in what's known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.
Two web videos explore that floating dump in compelling ways. The first episode of "Gorilla in the Greenhouse," SustainLane's web-video series for kids, raises awareness about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and the evils of plastic pollution at the same time as it promotes eco-consciousness and action on the part of the next generation.
For the grown-up set, there's "Garbage Island," a 12-part VBS.TV series in which a group of "non-hippie environmentalists" takes a three-week boat trip to the North Pacific Gyre to find the garbage patch and analyze its waters. What surprised them (and me as well) was that the patch is not actually a visible clump the size of Texas; rather, it's a dense accumulation of debris (the size of Texas). "I came out here expecting to see a trash dump, with pieces you could pull out of the water," the narrator says. "But what I got was an even ruder awakening. Looking out, you don't see the garbage; most of the time you just see the water. But what's in the water is 1,000 times worse than a Coke bottle. It's every part of a Coke bottle busted down into a little digestible morsel."
The plastic in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch disintegrates into its component polymers, and those broken-down bits act as a sponge for persistent organic pollutants. The
horrifying realization is that the garbage patch represents much more than pollution; our castoffs
have actually changed the composition of the ocean, in not-so-nice ways. As the narrator puts it, "It's not a matter of pulling shit out [of the water]; it's preparing our systems for the change that's on its way. It's part of the ocean now. We've consigned ourselves to eating our own shit."
Pretty sobering stuff. In fact, you might want to watch the more-upbeat "Gorilla" afterward. That way you can imagine all the kiddies of today getting inspired, and then becoming savvy, and growing up to find ways to deal effectively with the change that's on its way.
Two BPA-themed e-newsletters just landed in my in-box. The Center for a New American Dream’s dispatch mentions a helpful site, the Bisphenol A Portal, which compiles news reports about the endocrine-disrupting chemical. Particularly helpful is the site’s Smart Plastics Guide (pdf), which breaks down what all those numbers on plastic containers mean and gives tips on how to avoid BPA.
The most recent e-newsletter from the Environmental Working Group’s points to the BPA cheatsheet on its Enviroblog. Interestingly, the central graphic used on that page is a water bottle made by Nalgene, which recently announced that it will phase out production of BPA-containing bottles.
Finally the mainstream media is talking about bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical found in many plastics, in light of a new brief by the National Toxicology Program that expresses concern over the substance. As the report puts it, “the possibility that bisphenol A may impact human development cannot be dismissed.”
It’s especially nice to see more light being shed on the fact that the FDA based its sketchy “BPA is safe” stance on two studies funded by the plastic industry [link], ignoring hundreds of government and academic studies that raised red flags about BPA.
In my recent post about the chemical, I expressed surprise to learn that it’s found not only in baby bottles but also in aluminum food cans and beverage cans and bottles. Turns out it’s in numerous other everyday objects, such as CDs, too. Today's Washington Post story on the issue quotes an overseer of the report as saying, “It’s everywhere.... Your cell phone is probably made out of it.”
In Canada, as the New York Times reports, the government is expected to label it toxic in the coming days. Meanwhile, big retailers there, such as Wal-Mart and Home Depot, are already pulling BPA-containing products from their shelves.
Much of the focus in recent reports is on BPA’s presence in baby bottles, sippy cups, and infant formula containers. That’s as it should be, since developing bodies are more affected by endocrine disruptors than adult bodies are.
The Washington Post story points out that BornFree, a company that makes BPA-free baby bottles, can’t keep up with demand. I don’t know about other parents, though, but I’m sticking to glass bottles. Today it’s BPA, but tomorrow...?
More bisphenol A blues: This story from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that the FDA deemed BPA to be safe at current exposure levels based on two studies ... paid for by an arm of the trade group the American Chemistry Council.
The new issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter just arrived, and one of the articles talks about bisphenol A (BPA), an endocrine disruptor that’s found in polycarbonate, which is commonly used to make plastic cutlery, sippy cups, and baby bottles. For those who don’t know what exactly endocrine disruptors are (I didn’t), they’re substances that mimic hormones (estrogen, in BPA’s case), thereby messing with the endocrine system, which regulates reproductive and developmental processes.
Scientists are divided on which particular health ills can be attributed to BPA—some believe it’s associated with increased rates of breast and prostate cancer, early-onset puberty, type 2 diabetes, and ADHD; others simply worry that it may affect the maturing brain in unspecified ways—but I say, why wait to find out? The article quotes the National Institute of Environmental Health Science’s Chris Portier as saying that “there’s sufficient evidence now to give people who want to be prudent—especially parents—a reason to avoid BPA.”
I’d vaguely heard of BPA as something to avoid in plastic water bottles (I’ve consequently said good-bye to my old Nalgenes and bought some Klean Kanteens) and baby bottles (we’re using glass ones). And it’s pretty infuriating that the substance is used in products designed to go into the mouths of kids, whose developing bodies are the most vulnerable to endocrine disruptors.
But what I didn’t know is that BPA is also found in the epoxy resin that lines food and beverage cans. “Close to 100 percent of our exposure [to BPA] occurs this way,” NIEHS’s Michael Shelby is quoted as saying.
The story suggests avoiding canned beverages and buying foods that are packaged in cartons or pouches rather than cans.
Mr. Wallet Mouth and I aren’t big on soda or any other canned beverages, but our cupboard does contain a good supply of canned foods, mostly beans, stewed tomatoes, and the odd veggie chili. So I was glad to read that there is one company, Eden Foods, using cans without the epoxy resin. According to Eden’s website, its custom-made cans have baked-on oleoresinous c-enamel lining, oleoresin being “a natural mixture of an oil and a resin extracted from various plants, such as pine or balsam fir.”
Having been recently turned on to who owns whom in the organic food sector, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Eden is an independent company, family owned and operated since 1968.
Cool, I thought to myself. I’ll start buying all my canned food from Eden. The only downside, I discovered, is that Eden offers only one product in a can: organic beans.
Clearly it’s time for other food producers to get on the oleoresinous c-enamel bandwagon, because I have a feeling that as more and more consumers get educated about BPA, this issue is going to amount to far more than a hill of beans.
The other night I ordered food from one of our favorite local Thai restaurants. When I called to place the order, I first asked what kind of containers they used: paper or plastic? (Styrofoam foodware was banned in San Francisco last year.)
I had resolved to myself that I wouldn’t place the order if plastic was used (I know that cardboard to-go containers aren’t perfect, but at least we can compost them). “Paper,” the order-taker answered. Great!
I was pretty disappointed, then, when the food arrived in a #5 plastic tub, two #6 plastic clamshell containers, and only one cardboard box (for the rice).
Now, the #5 tub is at least recyclable (though plastics recycling has problems of its own), but the #6 polystyrene clamshells are not. They’re also best avoided for health reasons. According to National Geographic’s Green Guide, styrene can leach from such containers into food. “Styrene, considered a possible human carcinogen by [the International Agency for Research on Cancer], may also disrupt hormones or affect reproduction,” it states.
And that’s not even getting into the issue of the environmental ills associated with its production and disposal.
In researching this further, I learned that my beloved Thai restaurant’s use of the #6 clamshells could actually be illegal. San Francisco’s law banning Styrofoam food containers also requires vendors to use compostable or recyclable to-go containers “unless there is no suitable product that is within 15% of the cost of non-compostable or non-recyclable alternatives.”
So, as soon as I finish this post, I’m going to write a letter to the restaurant detailing all my concerns. I’ll include a copy of San Francisco’s list of compostable foodware distributors and encourage them to make the switch from plastic to paper. Until they do, I’ll either dine in or get my veggie Panang curry elsewhere.
Change is good
