Tag: product

Making Manufacturers Take It Back

  • Craig Lorch, co-owner of Total Reclaim in Seattle. His company is certified to recycle electronic waste under Washington's e-waste law. (Photo by Liam Moriarty)

It used to be that when a company
sold you a widget, they got your
money, you got the widget, and
that was the end of it. Now, that
way of doing business is changing.
Liam Moriarty reports that in Europe, and in the
US, businesses are being required
to take responsibility for their
products in new ways:

Transcript

It used to be that when a company
sold you a widget, they got your
money, you got the widget, and
that was the end of it. Now, that
way of doing business is changing.
Liam Moriarty reports that in Europe, and in the
US, businesses are being required
to take responsibility for their
products in new ways:

(sound of recycling machine)

In a huge industrial building in Seattle, forklift-loads of TVs and computer monitors are heaved onto conveyor belts. Workers go at them with screwguns and hammers.

“They’re pulling the plastic covers off of devices, they’re pulling the picture tubes out of them. They’re basically dismantling it to component parts.”

Craig Lorch is co-owner here at Total Reclaim. His company is certified to recycle electronic waste under Washington’s e-waste law.

The law requires that these old machines don’t end up being dumped, where their toxic chemicals can poison humans and the environment.

Recycling old electronics has been happening for years. John Friedrick explains what’s new about Washington’s e-waste law.

“It’s a producer responsibility law, which takes the burden of all of this off of the taxpayer.”

Friedrick runs the state-wide recycling program that’s fully paid for by electronics manufacturers. It started just a year ago, and already it’s collected more than 38 million pounds of e-junk, costing producers nearly 10 million dollars. Basically, it requires electronics companies to cover the end-of-life costs of the products they sell.

That concept – called extended producer responsibility – is new in the US. When Washington’s e-waste law was passed three years ago, it was the first to put full responsibility on manufacturers. But this isn’t a new idea in Europe.

Klaus Koegler is with the European Commission’s Directorate General for the Environment in Brussels. He tells me about a keystone of EU environmental policy – what’s called the “Polluter Pays” principle.

“That simply means whoever causes damage to the environment is responsible, also in financial terms, to repair it or to minimize it right from the beginning.”

Koegler says that gives regulators the muscle for a range of laws. One example: any car sold in the EU has to be 85% recyclable. Koegler says that creates an incentive.

“If you are responsible for the recycling, that means you will try to design a car to make your life as a recycler as easy as possible.”

And a product that’s easy and cheap to recycle is likely to be easier on the planet, too. Europeans also see making manufacturers take back and recycle their old products as a way to reclaim resources. For instance, nickel and other metals are becoming more scarce and expensive.

“So in keeping the waste here, recycling it here, and recovering these metals, we are protecting the environment. At the same time, we are helping to secure supply for our industries.”

So, the EU is moving toward setting even more ambitious goals for recycling. In the US, Wisconsin recently became the 20th state to pass a take-back law for electronics. States are also extending producer responsibility to other products – including batteries, fluorescent lamps and paint.

Now, the electronics industry is pushing back. Two major industry groups have filed a lawsuit against the e-waste law in New York City. They say it’s unconstitutional. Environmental activists see the suit as an attack on the whole concept of producer responsibility.

But Rick Goss with the Information Technology Industry Council insists it’s not.

“We support producer responsibility. We understand and recognize, that as manufacturers, we have a role to play in offering our consumers options and solutions for used products here. But we don’t have the only role to play.”

Still, the suit makes constitutional arguments that could be used to challenge the right of states to impose recycling requirements on manufacturers.

For The Environment Report, I’m Liam Moriarty.

Related Links

Trying to Speed Up Green Tech

  • The US Patent Office is working through 25,000 green tech patents. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

It takes time for green technology
to develop. The US Patent office
has one idea to speed things up,
but Shawn Allee reports
that probably won’t solve the problem:

Transcript

It takes time for green technology
to develop. The US Patent office
has one idea to speed things up,
but Shawn Allee reports
that probably won’t solve the problem:

The US Patent Office is working through 25,000 green tech patents for things like better solar panels.

The office wants to give preferential treatment to 3,000 green tech patent applications. That could save a year of waiting time for approval.

But not everyone thinks a Patent Office backlog is the problem.

Stuart Soffer is a patent analyst in Silicon Valley. He says green tech just takes time and money.

“It really takes an investment, infrastructure and R and D. We can make a little wind mill that will generate power in your back yard, but scaling that to power cities is a different problem.”

Soffer says sometimes, patent delays are companies’ fault, not the government’s. So, speeding things up at the Patent Office might not get green tech in the marketplace any faster.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

A Good Guide for Shopping

  • The Good Guide website's turkey rating page. (Image by Jessi Ziegler)

There’s a new way for consumers to find
out more about the products they buy.
Samara Freemark has the story
of a new online guide that lets you look
up how good products are for you and for
the environment:

Transcript

There’s a new way for consumers to find
out more about the products they buy.
Samara Freemark has the story
of a new online guide that lets you look
up how good products are for you and for
the environment:

The website is called the Good Guide, and it lets consumers get a pretty in-depth look at more than 60,000 foods and household products. The site ranks products by their impacts on health, the environment, and society.

The Good Guide is the brainchild of Dara O’Rourke. He’s a professor of environmental policy at the University of California at Berkley. O’Rourke says consumers don’t have easy access to the information they need to make smart buying decisions.

“What we’re trying to do is bring the best available science, put it in an easy accessible and free format, then get it to people whenever and wherever they make a decision about a product or a company.”

That’s where the Good Guide iphone application comes in. Shoppers can scan barcodes at the store to get instant product information.

That application, and the site, can be found at goodguide.com

For The Environment Report, I’m Samara Freemark.

Related Links

Should We Recycle Everything?

  • Right now, San Francisco is at 72% recycling. They also just passed legislation to make composting mandatory. (Photo source: Tewy at Wikimedia Commons)

Recycling has become the law in
San Francisco. Residents who fail
to recycle and compost will face
warnings and, eventually, a fine.
It’s part of the city’s goal to
eliminate waste altogether. But,
as Amy Standen reports, recycling
and composting can only take us
so far:

Transcript

Recycling has become the law in
San Francisco. Residents who fail
to recycle and compost will face
warnings and, eventually, a fine.
It’s part of the city’s goal to
eliminate waste altogether. But,
as Amy Standen reports, recycling
and composting can only take us
so far:

(conversation in Chinese)

Janis Peng is a foot soldier in San Francisco’s war against garbage. Today, she’s going door to door in a San Francisco Chinatown apartment complex, trying to convince the mostly elderly residents to make better use of their city-provided compost bin.

In fact, Peng is part of a city-wide effort to eliminate waste altogether. In 1989, California passed a law, which was considered radically ambitious at the time. They wanted to divert away from landfills 50% of the state’s garbage by the year 2000.

For San Francisco, that wasn’t enough.

“We got to 50%, and we said, ‘well we’re here now, what are we going to do next?’”

That’s Jared Blumenthal. He’s head of San Francisco’s Department of the Environment. Today, he’s in the backseat of a Toyota Prius. He’s on his way to a recycling press conference.

“So in 2003, we set the goal of 75% by 2010 and to zero waste by 2020.”

Right now, San Francisco’s at 72% recycling. City officials say that mandatory recycling will bring that number up even higher. But can any city ever get to zero waste?

(sound of trucks and machinery)

“It’s almost 9:45 in the morning and some of the trucks that went out this morning are coming in with their first loads.”

Robert Reed is a spokesman for Sunset Scavenger Company, in San Francisco. Here at Pier 96, dozens of workers stand by conveyor belts, sorting out the contents of an entire city’s worth of blue bins.

“All these materials go to different places, the glass goes to a glass plant, the paper goes to a paper mill.”

Sunset Scavenger sells these commodities to buyers here and in Asia. That generates revenue that helps fund the program. But recycling is expensive, in part because some products – like many plastics – cost far more to recycle than they’re worth.

“We’re dealing with clear plastic and opaque plastic and medium plastics. And many of these containers have three types of plastics.”

Aluminum and glass can be yanked off the conveyor belts with magnets and other machinery. But plastic has to be hand sorted.

Mark Murray is executive director of Californians Against Waste, a Sacramento non-profit group.

“We have seven different types of plastic resins and manufacturers invent new ones every day. And I know it might make us feel good to put those number sevens into the recycling bin, the scrap value is insufficient. It’s not sustainable recycling.”

Murray says he hears all the time from residents who want to eliminate waste all together.

“They recycle everything, but they can’t get their city to take a certain type of number 6 or 7 plastic in their program. And they’re mad at the city. But it’s not just about recycling everything we get. That’s not gonna solve the problem.”

That’s because some things may never make sense to recycle. Like ballpoint pens and plastic razors.

Murray say that maybe if the costs for those items included what cities pay to take them apart for recycling or to dump them in the landfill, maybe people would use less of them, bringing us a little closer to the holy grail of zero waste.

For The Environment Report, I’m Amy Standen.

Related Links

Interview: The Price of Cheap Goods

  • Ellen Ruppel Shell writes that we spend about 80% more in a discount environment. (Source: Urban at Wikimedia Commons)

In this recession, we are looking at money
differently. A bargain – getting things cheap –
has been the all-consuming goal. Ellen Ruppel Shell has written a new book entitled
‘Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture.’ The
Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked with
her:

Transcript

[Please note: the following transcript is for a shorter version of the interview. If you would like a complete transcript, please contact us.]

In this recession, we are looking at money
differently. A bargain – getting things cheap –
has been the all-consuming goal. Ellen Ruppel Shell has written a new book entitled
‘Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture.’ The
Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked with
her:

Lester Graham: Your book tells the story of how we came to value cheap, but, you know, my dad used to say, ‘cheap things aren’t good and good things aren’t cheap.’

Ellen Ruppel Shell: I think that retailers and multinationals have gone really far to make us not think like that. Your father insisted on value. You know, there’s an old Russian saying, ‘I’m too poor to be cheap.’ You know, this is something that people used to take for granted – we used to know that we got what we paid for. Now, how did this common wisdom get forgotten?

Graham: Most of the products we get, we throw away – because they are so cheap.
We don’t have to worry about the cost of repairing them, because we can simply replace them with something brand-new.

Shell: Absolutely, and, of course, that disposability has been marketed to us as a big advantage. And I’ve also gotten that comment from folks, ‘Well, you know, who cares? I’ll just throw it away. I don’t want something that lasts a long time. I want something new all the time.’ Our relationship with objects has really become distorted – I mean, the very idea that you would buy shoes knowing, almost as you leave the store, that they’re not going to last. And, studies show, that if you believe that, you don’t take care of them. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. You assume they’re going to fall apart.

Graham: Your book makes it sound as though we’re in a spiral, downward, in pursuit of cheap goods. Why do you make that argument?

Shell: Well, I think it’s a spiral we might, now, have the opportunity to pull ourselves out of. But, yes, I do think it’s a spiral – the idea that prices have to go lower and lower. And the reason for this, of course, is that since the 1970s, incomes in the United States have been essentially flat, controlling for inflation. And even going down somewhat, for most Americans. At the same time, three-quarters of our income goes to pay for fixed costs – those things we can’t live without – healthcare, education. So, what have these low priced goods done for us? Well, I argue, not a lot. It’s made tee-shirts, and shorts, and other things, maybe cheaper than ever before, but we have sacrificed – in terms of our wages, our job security, and our stability as an economy – as a consequence of these increasingly low prices, this incredible – what we used to call ‘predatory’ – pricing.

Graham: Many of us feel we can only afford ‘cheap.’ What are you suggesting we do?

Shell: My goal in writing this book was to get consumers to re-think why they shop in the first place. We spend about 80% more in a discount environment. And, then, we’re getting what we think are these amazing deals. And this triggers in our brain this kind of game-playing behavior – we want to make all these, you know, we want to win. Do we go to buy things that are going enhance our life and add value to our life? Or, is it a game-playing exercise? And I think most of us would say, rationally, well you know, look, ‘I go to purchase things that are going to enhance my life.’ And, if that’s the case, I think that you will actually spend less money, you will buy fewer things, and you’ll think harder about why you’re buying those things, and you’ll get precisely what you want at the price that’s going to work for you.

Graham: Ellen Ruppel Shell is the author of the book ‘Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture.’ Thanks very much for your time.

Shell: Thank you. It’s been fun.

Related Links

Using Your Phone to Pick Products

  • Good Guide allows you to look up products while you're in the store and see how they're rated in terms of safety, environmental impact, and social concerns (Photo courtesy of Good Guide)

Companies that make things like cosmetics, household cleaners, and toys are not required to list every ingredient that’s in their products. Now, some shoppers are dialing up that information on their cell phones. Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

Companies that make things like cosmetics, household cleaners, and toys are not required to list every ingredient that’s in their products. Now, some shoppers are dialing up that information on their cell phones. Mark Brush has more:

There’s a new app for the iPhone that can give you information about products. It’s called Good Guide.

And you basically take a picture of a barcode – on say a bottle of shampoo – and then Good Guide gives you a score.

The guide can rate products on their environmental footprint – how socially responsible the company is – or how safe it is.

Other phones can access the same information using text messages.

Dara O’Rourke is the founder of Good Guide. He says he started the company after he discovered a sunscreen that he put on his daughter contained a potential carcinogen.

“And that really initially, actually kind of upset me, that this product that I’m bringing into my house and putting on my young daughter has chemicals that have been banned in Europe, banned in Australia, banned in many industrialized countries, but still are in products on our store shelves.”

O’Rourke says if consumers are interested, they can access the research and the life-cycle studies behind each product’s overall score.

For The Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Coal Ash Controversy

  • A broken dam caused this cement-like sludge to spill into the Emory River in East Tennessee. The coal ash sludge could dry out, putting toxic dust into the air. (Photo by Matt Shafer Powell)

This past December a sludge of coal ash broke out of an impoundment at a power plant in
Tennessee. It destroyed homes. It devastated a section of river. And it set off a firestorm
about the problem of coal ash disposal. Now two US Senators and a bunch of environmental
groups are calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate coal ash. Tamara
Keith has the story:

Transcript

This past December a sludge of coal ash broke out of an impoundment at a power plant in
Tennessee. It destroyed homes. It devastated a section of river. And it set off a firestorm
about the problem of coal ash disposal. Now two US Senators and a bunch of environmental
groups are calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate coal ash. Tamara
Keith has the story:

Coal ash is byproduct produced by coal burning power plants and it’s stored at more than 500
sites around the country.

Anti-coal activist Dave Cooper signed onto a letter this week with more than 100
environmental groups telling the EPA it’s time to get involved.

“What we want is for the EPA to regulate coal ash as a hazardous waste.”

But Dave Goss with the American Coal Ash Association says safe storage is an issue, but a
lot of the ash is actually recycled into things like concrete and wallboard.

“If you stigmatize it by giving it some sort of a classification such as hazardous, that’s going
to have a dramatic impact on the ability to re-use the materials.”

The EPA has been studying this issue for years, and hasn’t responded to the latest calls for
regulation.

For The Environment Report, I’m Tamara Keith.

Related Links

Interview: ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’

  • (Photo provided by Dr. Ellis Jones)

A lot of people want to know what
they can do to be more environmentally friendly.
Ellis Jones says you make a vote on environmental
issues every time you pull out your wallet.
Jones is a sociologist at the University of
California Davis. And he’s written a pocket-sized
booklet called ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’
that grades companies that make the things we buy.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked to
him about the guide:

Transcript

A lot of people want to know what
they can do to be more environmentally friendly.
Ellis Jones says you make a vote on environmental
issues every time you pull out your wallet.
Jones is a sociologist at the University of
California Davis. And he’s written a pocket-sized
booklet called ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’
that grades companies that make the things we buy.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked to
him about the guide:

Ellis Jones: “I think that people will use this guide to make sure that the companies that
are doing good work get their dollars. And the companies that are not doing good work,
they don’t get their dollars until they improve.”

Lester Graham: “I chose three topics. One of them is gasoline. No one gets an A+? But
you did give an A to Sunoco and you gave an F to Exxon-Mobile. Can you tell me really
quickly what went into those grades?”

Jones: “It includes everything from how polluting their petroleum refineries are, what
their human rights records are when they deal with communities abroad, how they deal
with consumers, what their advertising is like and how they do or don’t ‘greenwash’ – to
really give a sense of, you know, the difference between the good guys and the bad guys
in gasoline.”

Graham: “I also looked at bread, and you gave an A+ to local bakeries.”

Jones: “Supporting a local bakery is really about as good as it gets. Far above and
beyond what you can get supporting even the most organic bread company.”

Graham: “The third thing I looked at was water, because bottled water is such an issue
these days. The A+ was given to tap water, which, in most communities, is as good as
anything you can buy in a bottle.”

Jones: “The most powerful difference a consumer can make is actually avoiding the
product all together. So, anything to really minimize the impact because this industry
itself is inherently problematic.”

Graham: “Just casually flipping through looking at who rated an F in your guide, often it
seemed like it was the most recognizable name. Kraft, Nabisco, Libby’s. Those kinds of
companies. Why is it these really large corporations tended to do so poorly in your
guide?”

Jones: “Well, you know, I think this really points out a kind of inherent problem within
our current economic system. And that is that the way to get ahead in the system is to
grow larger, to gobble up smaller companies, to basically out-compete the other
companies around you by cutting costs wherever you can by using larger economies of
scale. And the process that gets lost in the system is the impact on the people and the
planet.”

Graham: “I’m wondering how this changes your view of things when you go shopping
now.”

Jones: “Well, let me tell you, I really have put in as much research as a human being can
into this. And I am still filled with questions. These questions are out there and we need
to keep companies accountable and the government accountable to be able to provide us
with good data so we can make smart decisions as consumers.

Graham: “So your guide doesn’t let us off the hook, we still have to do some of our own
homework.”

Jones: (laughs) “Exactly. We have to actually make do with the information that we
have now, make the best choices available, and then as new information comes in, then
we’re responsible to make even better choices. But in that process we have to build in
quite a bit of forgiveness, because one thing this book is not about being perfect or pure
in the world. It really is about trying to make the best choice at any given time in any
given place.”

Related Links

New Law for Lead in Toys

  • A lead detector finds over 5000 parts per million of lead in this toy. (Photo by Lisa Ann Pinkerton)

A new federal law is forcing
toy manufacturers to get the lead out
of children’s products. Consumer
advocates are cheering the tougher
guidelines. Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

A new federal law is forcing
toy manufacturers to get the lead out
of children’s products. Consumer
advocates are cheering the tougher
guidelines. Julie Grant reports:

Consumer advocate Ed Mierzwinski says despite what
you’d assume, toys have not been tested for safety.

Mierzwinski is with the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
He says, until now, the government agency in charge – the
Consumer Products Safety Commission – hasn’t been able
to do that.

“It was a rudderless ship. It had no leadership. It had no
money. It had one person testing toys. A guy named bob.
And in 2007 the whole thing just came to a crisis.”

Mierzwinski says 30-million toys were recalled last year.

This new law requires all children’s products meet tougher
new standards for toxic materials. It also gives the
Consumer Product Safety Commission more money, staff,
and authority.

But the law doesn’t take effect until February – so toys for
sale this holiday season could still be a problem.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

D.I.Y. Cleaning Products

  • Reporter Karen Kelly's daughter making safer cleaning products at home (Photo by Karen Kelly)

Most people probably don’t enjoy
cleaning. But we’ve all got to do it.
And if you’ve ever looked at the household
cleaner aisle in the grocery store, you
know there can be some pretty strong
chemicals involved. Karen Kelly reports
on a cheaper, chemical-free alternative:

Transcript

Most people probably don’t enjoy
cleaning. But we’ve all got to do it.
And if you’ve ever looked at the household
cleaner aisle in the grocery store, you
know there can be some pretty strong
chemicals involved. Karen Kelly reports
on a cheaper, chemical-free alternative:

(sound of store)

I’ve just arrived at my neighborhood grocery store with a plan: to find what I
need to make my own household cleaners.

I head over to the cleaning aisle and pull out a list of ingredients I got off the
internet.

I see borax and
washing soda on the shelf.
They`re both made from naturally-occuring minerals and cost about five bucks
each for a 4 to 5 pound box.
I look around for soap flakes – to make my own dish soap – and find a big bar I
can grate myself.

The only thing missing is castile soap. It’s a biodegradable soap used in a lot of
these recipes.
I’ll grab that next at the natural foods store.

To be honest, I never paid that much attention to the ingredients in household
cleaner – until I used something with dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride on
my bathtub. It comes with warnings.

I rinsed it and took a bath. My 4-year-old also took a bath.
And we both ended up with a very itchy skin rash.

That convinced me. I had to find a safer way to clean the tub that, number one,
worked. And number two, wasn’t too expensive.

Which pretty much meant I’d have to make it myself.

We decided to start with the all-purpose cleaner.

Karen Kelly: “Okay. We need borax, which we have, castile soap, hot water.”

Child: “We have that! We can just turn on the sink and make hot water!”

Kelly: “And vinegar.”

Child: “We have, do we have vinegar?”

Kelly: “Yes.”
Child: “And Mom, we have hot water.”

We mix up a recipe I found on the David Suzuki Foundation’s website.

(sound of stirring and banging)

They’ve got a whole bunch of do-it-yourself recipes for bathtub scrubbers,
laundry soap, furniture polish, you name it.

Lindsay Coulter is the person who devised these concoctions.
She says a lot of people forget that you don’t need fancy products to get your
house clean.

“You know, if you talk to your grandmothers or your great-aunts, you’ll find that
they too used things like washing soda, baking soda, white vinegar, and a basic
castile soap. Things like vinegar – it’s acidic and helps lift grease and
deodorizes. A lot of the things you’re cooking with anyways, so you probably
already have it in your kitchen. And the benefit? Just peace of mind that you
know what goes into it.”

But does it work? It’s time to find out.

(sound of spraying)

We spray. We wipe. The bathroom sink shines.

Next, we try the bath tub scrubber. It’s a mix of castile soap, vinegar – which is
a natural disinfectant – baking soda, and water.

(sound of cleaning the tub)

The tub looks great, actually. And you know what? This is a lot cheaper.

Brand name all-purpose cleaning sprays are about 4 bucks a bottle where I live.
It cost me just a dollar – and about 5 minutes – to fill that same bottle with my
own mix.

So it’s cheap, it’s easy to make, and, best of all, I don’t have to worry about chemical reaction after a soak
in the tub.

For The Environment Report, I’m Karen Kelly.

Child: “Is it recording? Okay.”

Related Links