www.everythingsgonegreen.co.uk

I just flicked the TV on before going to work and caught a story on BBC1’s “Breakfast” news show highlighting the fact that we will all be getting more junk mail in the UK.

Apparently Royal Mail’s management have agreed to pay conditions with the postal workers’ union just so long as Britain’s postmen start shoving more junk through our letter boxes.

The deal is said to be quite lucrative for Royal Mail and for the union, which had previously agreed that postal workers should only deliver three items of junk to an address per week, this is quite a compromise.

On the BBC Breakfast show the presenters questioned two guests; one a proponent of “direct marketing” and the other a representative of the group Waste Watch. (Sorry I don’t have any more detail, I missed the names and the introductions)

What we saw was a scruffy talk about junk mail with a lack of clarity on exactly which form of junk mail was being discussed with the direct marketing representative spearheading a charm offensive on behalf of junk mail.

Junk mail, by my definition, is any brochure or advertising that comes through my door unsolicited. What Royal Mail seem to be advocating, and making money from, is “unaddressed mail”. This “unaddressed mail” includes those envelopes addressed to “the owner” or “the occupier”.

With those two terms, junk mail and “unaddressed mail” cleared up nicely the people on the sofas then proceeded to discuss the generic term “junk mail” which allowed the direct marketing guy to positively present his figures. I suspect he was talking about “unaddressed mail” but was allowed, pretty much unchecked, to spin the facts as applying to junk mail/direct marketing in general and not purely “unaddressed mail”.
“Mr. Direct Mmarketing” said that 80% of direct marketing was opened and read by recipients. He also added that direct marketing is not a waste of time because the process generates around £130 billion of business a year. In addition he said that less than 2% of household waste is direct marketing/junk mail. He also repeated the soundbite, a couple of times, that the perception that “junk mail is bad” is “a complete myth”.

In response the representative of Waste Watch said that only 1% of junk mail was acted upon.

The direct marketing guy relished the opportunity to market his industry virtually unopposed and massaged the figures to his own advantage. £130 billion is a lot of business but how much of that business is won by direct marketing via “unaddressed mail”? How much is won by door-to-door direct marketing? How much business and revenue is generated by junk flyers?

I was a little surprised at the smug fact that less than 2% of household waste is junk mail/direct marketing. Was this by weight or by item? I decided to have a quick look in my recycling box that sits in the kitchen. OK, the food waste goes into a bucket and onto the compost so I didn’t count that.

Granted, there was more general recyclable material by weight and bulk, especially considering there are steel cans, aluminium beer cans, cardboard boxes, cardboard tubes etc but the item count?

• Junk mail – 20
• Recycling – 30

That’s probably about a week or two’s worth of recycling on show and the junk mail is all direct marketing and no “unaddressed mail”.

So, in terms of “unaddressed mail” my own personal figure tallies up with the marketing guy – less than 2% of my household waste is “unaddressed mail”, infact, this week, it’s 0%, but hardly a fair representative figure.

In terms of weight of junk mail, again, it’s probably very light and may well be about 2% of my recycling.

But as a proportion of my waste it’s 40%.

Hold on – there’s a BIG flaw in my manipulation of the figures here – it’s only a week or so’s worth of rubbish AND it’s only my recycling.

Yes, I have only thrown away ONE item of rubbish this last week – a pasta packet, that’s it.

So, back to the BBC breakfast story; who is right and who is wrong? Who lost and who won?

Well, the direct marketing guy probably won the charm offensive, he marketed his own corner really well and was given free reign to use some great figures and say twice, “it’s a myth” that junk mail is bad. And yes, my own example of rubbish is from a green guy who wastes very little anyway – of course “the average household” may well waste SO MUCH MORE and the junk will be an even tinier percentage of their household waste.

But as time goes on and we become less wasteful, the guy from Waste Watch is right. If only 1% of the junk mail message gets through then 99% of the paper, print, energy and manpower is wasted on going straight back into the bin/recycling. It may make the commercial world go around but 99% waste is not sustainable from an environmental perspective.

So, if you guys & girls out there have any figures to demonstrate the direct marketing claims one way or another then please feel free to let us know

Personally I think it’s a big shame that Royal Mail are keen to promote more waste for the sake of money. Read the Royal Mail door-to-door opt-out page. It’s almost laughable that they’re trying to get you to reconsider before you even send your details in;

Opting out means no one at the address will receive unaddressed mail items – is this acceptable to everyone living at the property?

Yes. The cat doesn’t need double glazing or a conservatory or a kebab or a pizza or a valuation on the property or timeshare or a haircut…

The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has been running a consultation for the regulation of inorganic phosphates in domestic laundry and cleaning products (DLCPs) since October 2009. The closing date of the consultation is 21^st January 2010.

The consultation by DEFRA’s Water Quality Division seeks to gather comments on the banning of inorganic phosphates for forthcoming regulation.

In their own words, DEFRA states that:

Many rivers do not meet EU standards for phosphorous content. Phosphorous reduces the oxygen content of water and harms aquatic life. A ban will help to reduce inorganic phosphate pollution and mean the water industry has to use less energy and chemicals to remove phosphorous from sewage effluent.

So, by banning inorganic phosphates:

1. Britain’s rivers will be cleaner as the water quality improves, meeting EU targets at the same time.
2. Our aquatic life will no longer be harmed and
3. By not adding additional chemicals to DCLPs the water companies will not need to purchase and use further chemicals in order to treat waste water to remove the chemicals that were added to it elsewhere in the first place!

Banning inorganic phosphates from DCLPs looks like a win-win-win situation from here. Not only do we clean up our rivers & environment and help our wildlife but we also make huge efficiencies by banning inorganic phosphates. With the water industry using “less energy and chemicals to remove phosphorous from sewage effluent” you would expect their costs to decrease; they would be more energy-efficient, they would have less overhead in having to not purchase and use additional chemicals and their treatment methodologies would be simplified with less processes.

In addition the water industry would be taking another step toward their corporate social responsibility which is good for their conscience and good for their public image. Efficient, clean and green; what could be better?

The only losers in this equation would be the manufacturers of inorganic phosphates but with demand for phosphates increasing, particularly due to the increase in world population and the demand for meat & crops, phosphates will continue to be used in artificial fertilisers. However, as phosphates are a finite resource prices have increased massively, so discontinuing their use is an economic benefit for manufacturers of DLCPs.

The alternatives are plant-based environmentally-friendly products such as the excellent Ecover range of cleaning products (such as their lemon & aloe vera washing-up liquid or non-biological washing powder) which have minimal impact upon the environment.

So, if you have any thoughts on banning inorganic phosphates from domestic laundry and cleaning products then head over to theNetregs “Detergent regulations consultation”, read the details of the consultation and tell them your thoughts on the matter before the 21^st January 2010.

The deadline of 1^st January 2015 for the complete “ban” (with it being an offence to market DLCPs with more than 0.4% inorganic phosphates) has been set up to allow the industries concerned time to change their products and packaging, although with the speed at which they can launch products, this seems far too generous (five years to remove inorganic phosphates and “redesign” the packaging?!)

For further reading about see the Wikipedia entry for phosphates or the excellent SNB phosphate recovery website.

The idea behind the bottle bank arcade machine is that making things fun makes them more usable…

Any opinions on the fact that it’s sponsored by VW?

I’m currently staying in Germany, the land of recycling, where they’ve had recycling machines for years, so it’s nice to see that we’re catching up in England and the county of Lancashire has now its first reverse vending machine.

Blackpool and The Fylde College has installed Lancashire’s first Reverse Vending Recycling Machine at their new University Centre. Students and staff are being encouraged to recycle more bottles & cans. Every can or bottle that is placed in the machine is a unit worth 5 pence and vouchers are issued to spend in the new Grads Café Canteen in the Central Hub.

The innovative reverse vending machine not only compacts and saves recyclable materials but also monitors and records the types of units deposited, allowing the data to be viewed online so that the college can review the success of the vending initiative.

Ruth Paisley, Vice Principal of Resources & Planning at Blackpool & The Fylde College commented:

“We’re really pleased to be leading the way environmentally with innovative new ideas and a commitment to reducing our impact on the environment.

“We were one of few projects committed to achieving a post-construction BREEAM ‘Excellent’ merit, meaning we have stuck to our plans and not compromised on environmental impact in order to cut costs.

“I’m sure the ReVend machine will also give students and staff even more of an incentive to recycle their waste.”

It would be great to see this initiative extended to other schools & colleges and even better to see reverse vending machines in every high street in Britain, so let’s hope this is the first of many. If you’re interested in reverse vending machines then pay a visit to the Reverse Vending Corporation.

I was only away for 9 days and I came home to find a ton of junk mail on my doormat.

Apart from a couple of magazine subscriptions, the usual bills and letters (including welcome mail from Ecotricity and Triodos Bank) the majority of what I received was junk.

So, apart from just 11 legitimate pieces of mail the rest was:

• 4 flyers ( in the local newspaper – 2 for national companies)
• 3 collection bags from charities.
• 2 Estate Agents’ flyers.
• 6 fast food flyers.
• 5 National company flyers.
• 1 Speculative Insurance invitation.
• 10 other items of random junk

So legitimate mail was outnumbered by roughly 2:1 OK, I can sign up to the Mail Preference Service but it doesn’t stop the junk in the local rag or the stuff that leaflet droppers are paid to deliver. Ah well, more stuff for the recycle bin and the compost bin then.

The first time I saw the Eden Project was probably in or just after the first year after it opened, 2001. Once a quarry, or more accurately, a china clay pit, this big hole in the ground has been radically transformed into the incredible place that is the Eden Project with its trademark biodomes.

Back then it was just being populated; the domes were there with their own environments but the “pit” was a sparsely-planted. Now it has grown to maturity and what a splendid place the Eden Project is.

Apart from the biodomes there’s a couple of new features. There wasn’t a bridge there last time, nor the ice-skating rink (although the building might have been there) and then there’s The Core, a really interesting building, looking like the shell of a horse chestnut and housing some great interactive features for the kids & the adults too.

Then there’s WEEE man. Made out of all manner of rubbish, WEEE man is a giant sculpture comprising everything from washing machine drums to computer mice, a microwave oven, an old Flymo mower… WEEE man was built to promote understanding of the European Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive.

So what do we now do with waste electrical/electronic equipment? We reduce, reuse, recycle and make great big towering scultptures out of it.

The biodomes (or biomes) are as I remember them. I visited the warm temperate dome first and explored olive groves, cork trees & vineyards of the Mediterranean, South African finebos and California. This is a fun biome, full of plants & sculptures, and a few British birds flitting around.

My favourite though I saved ’til last. I took off my gore-tex alpine jacket, fleece & merino fleece (yes, it was a cold day in southwest England) and strolled into the tropical biome. Wow. It was hot & humid and totally awesome. It really was like being in another world in there and I stayed in this particular biome for a good couple of hours.

The tropical biome is by far the biggest dome and houses a rainforest. It’s hot in there and damp, there are banana plants, spices, palms, sugar cane, rice, rubber, bamboo… you name it, this is an incredible space. When it’s quiet and the kids behave it’s really idyllic in there.

But most of all the Eden Project is totally educational. It gives you an insight into faraway places, the plants, the lives of the people and their livelihoods. I’m inspired to go see a real rainforest now.

If you pay for your day ticket and sign up for “gift aid” (giving away the tax to the charity, the Eden Project is a charity BTW) then they will give you a year’s entry for free. The snowdrops are out and the daffodils are starting to spring forth, so I might try and pop back when spring is in full flow and then again in the summertime.

If you haven’t been, go see the Eden Project, it’s highly recommended for the kids and for the grown-ups

It’s quite incredible that the recycling industry seems to have collapsed.

A story on the UK TV news brought the matter to my attention with a company in the North East of the country having to rent vast warehouse space to store the unused and unwanted paper & cardboard they collected for recycling.

I then stumbled across another story in The Guardian saying pretty much the same thing but half a world away.

Putting all the pieces together, this is the scenario:

1. The global financial crisis causes a collapse in banks, industrial sectors and businesses.
2. Workers at all levels are made unemployed, job opportunities are scarce and consumer confidence plummets.
3. Having no jobs, no money and no confidence consumer spending falls dramatically.
4. The products that consumers once hungered for are not being sold. With no demand, production stops.
5. Without production of consumer goods, recycled materials are no longer need for the products and the packaging.
6. The bottom falls out of the recycling market

China, the 21st century’s “workshop of the world”, has been able to produce cheap goods for western consumers and the need for raw materials in the manufacture of these products created a huge market for recyclables. China was apparently the world’s largest importer of waste materials and the UK sent a third of its recyclable waste there.

Plummeting consumption and reduced demand has forced many companies in China out of business and thus the market for recyclable materials has dried up with cost per tonne for waste also dropping.

So China, without a market for consumers, is no longer a market for our waste and hence we’re sitting on some of it. Who’d have thought that it would be naked consumerism behind the drive for recycling? It’s quite ironic really.

What’s also incredible is that even this green industry, recycling, doesn’t appear to be sustainable. It appears that there needs to be a serious rethink of the whole chain.

1. Firstly, if there is going to be a market for recyclable waste, it needs to be closer to home.
2. Secondly, there should be a drive to use more recyclable material in current production even at reduced levels.
3. Most importantly, we need to have less material finding its way into the system in the first place.

OK, the list is in the correct order in context of the subject, but invert it and we get REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE. Perfect.

Only a reduction and sustained drop in consumption of materials will prevent this happening again. Let’s start with trying to educate people who buy a plastic bottle of drink every day that it’s a complete waste!

I was watching the local news on TV late last year and was fascinated by the story of a Hampshire couple who paid for their honeymoon by recycling. They collected recyclable litter for 3 months and fed it into a machine at their local store, receiving points that they converted into 36,000 airmiles for return flights to the USA in business class seats!

Now apart from the fact that they were “cutting cans in half” to cheat the machine, it is a totally commendable effort. To think that they spent their free time picking up litter must have transformed Petersfield, Hampshire, into a rubbish-free oasis, even if only for 3 months.

Interested in how they actually turned their litter into “cash” I had a quick investigation to understand the process. It seems that their Tesco store in Petersfield has an automated recycling point provided by Norwegian recycling solutions provider Tomra. The Tomra Automatic Recycling Centre (ARC) accepts recyclable material and issues Tesco clubcard points which can be turned into airmiles. On page 4 of Tomra’s Autumn/Winter recycling news bulletin Return (2Mb PDF) there’s a link to a list of Tesco locations where you can find Tomra’s automated recycling machines.

It’s a shame there’s not an ARC at the local Tesco store some 2.3 miles away at “The Meadows”, as I would be inclined to use it myself to earn points for food. A cash alternative would be preferable, but I’m sure Tesco would prefer the customer loyalty afforded by the exclusivity of having the ARC in the first place.

So many people want to keep Britain tidy, but it has become an uphill struggle with the demise of people’s attitudes, a growing disregard for tidyness as globalisation redistributes people with less care for Britain’s streets, cash-strapped councils and their lazy litter picking teams. Let’s hope that ARCs and the reverse vending trend is the incentive for ordinary people to clear up their litter.

After joining our local Freecycle group in June last year we finally rolled our sleeves up to start the new year and freecycled.

Rather than shedding some of the useful items we still have kicking around we took the plunge and liberated an old lawnmower. Our own mower is a modern piece of orange plastic and it isn’t particularly good, so we leapt at the chance to recycle a piece of old English engineering.

What we effectively rescued from the landfill is a Qualcast Superlite Panther, a lawnmower that we can only guess to be around 30 or 40 years old. It’s one of those old cylinder style hand mowers so it only needs a push in order to work. No electricity, no petrol. How green is that?

Sure it’s a bit rusty and more than a little dusty, but it seems to be in good working order. Only when the -10 temperatures have gone and we’re into the spring will we know for definite, but all in all “it’s a lot less bover than a hover”.

Now all we have to do is Freecycle the bright orange Flymo.