Bagasse is better than Biopolymers

Let's face it, unless something catastrophic changes in this world, all the people in the world are not going to opt to use a reusable cup, for those frequent trips to Starbucks. I most certainly did not turn down that cold draft beer when served to me in a plastic cup this past winter. So, until that catastrophe comes though, we need to seriously rethink disposable products we are using.

I have spent the past several hours looking into this whole corn based plastic dilemma and it's farcical biodegradability claim and have discovered that our picnic options can be less taxing on the landfills. Bio-polymers, or the bio-plastics like PLA made from corn, might be renewable but they are not sustainable in terms of waste or byproducts.

Bagasse on the other hand, derived from the byproducts of sugarcane use, is essentially a waste product that once cost sugar mills additional costs for disposal. This fiber, left over after the juice has been squeezed out of sugarcane stalks, is how used as a biomass. It holds promise as a fuel source since as it can produce more than enough heat energy to supply the needs of a common sugar mill. A waste product, it is also used as a locally-grown source for manufacturing cellulose ethanol.

Bagasse offers new possibilities for disposable or reusable products without the lasting reminder in the landfill. Sugarcane is renewable annually, is widely cultivated in several countries with developing economies, is a convenient way of clearing a waste product, and requires minimal processing to turn it into a usable and high strength paper product.
Paper vs. plastic was the selling point for me. Bagasse products can be found at TheGreenOffice.com , where I will also be ordering my business supplies from.

Corn to the rescue? I think not.

This is a follow up to my prior post "How Green is It"in which I ranted about the suspicious label of biodegradable on a plastic drinking cup and the disbelief I had in PLA and other corn based "fix-its".

Corn is becoming the ubiquitous fix all for our nation- from packaging to plastics to animal feed - finding far too many unnatural entry points into our product based life. Just because it is made out of corn does not mean that it is natural, nor biodegradable. Maybe I am a purist, but I do not think I am along to believe that biodegrading is what should be happen naturally, as in our compost heaps, and not in some large scale industrial composter (which has it's own very large carbon foot print). In this article, the Smithsonian looked into the misleading notion of biodegradable plastics which is a farce. . It may be a cost effective solution, (in the beginning, it cost $200 to make a pound of PLA; now it’s less than $1) but it is not a solution without it's own environmental problems. “It was a big step backward for the biodegradability movement,” as the article discusses of the advent of the biodegradable bag, “Whole communities abandoned the concept of biodegradable bags as a fraud.” While PLA is a good place to start, it presents us with it's own subset of problems. So, yes, as PLA advocates say, corn plastic is “biodegradable”, but in reality very few consumers have access to the sort of composting facilities that can make it biodegrade. Regardless of it's misleading biodegradable label, it is more often than not listed as a #7 plastic and therefore will end up in a landfill or incinerator like the majority of our nations garbage. The fact is that we need far better alternatives and processes to replace PLA.

To see the entire article, click the link below.
Corn Plastic to the Rescue

Wal-Mart and others are going green with "biodegradable" packaging made from corn. But is this really the answer to America's throwaway culture?
By Elizabeth Royte
Photographs by Brian Smale
Smithsonian magazine, August 2006

How green is it?

SP and I went away this weekend to Jay Peak Resort in Vermont. They served their drinks in plastic cups, made by a company called Greenware. These cups claim to be 100% Annually Renewable Eco-Friendly packaging. What confuses me, and I am no environmental engineer, is how does a Eco-friendly cup made entirely of plants also become a #7 plastic? What #7 means is that it is an "Other", and this is no reference to LOST, but instead, this code indicates that a package is made with more than one resin and used in a multi-layer combination. Furthermore, it can be composted? I think this little cup I brought home is going in my compost pile instead of my recycling bin because I want to see if it is true. Does this mean that I could eat the cup too? That's a bit facetious but I am a bit of a skeptic today. Before I say more, let me tell you how happy I am that it is all Made in America. That is the biggest bonus of all of this. Are companies taking this Eco-Friendly thing too far and finding loopholes to claim sustainability when in fact they are not? It's made from corn, but just as other things in my life like HFCS, just because it's manipulated out of something natural does not mean it is a good thing. The website states, "Our material expertise extends beyond traditional plastics and into environmentally sustainable or recyclable alternatives such as Polylactic Acid (PLA) and Recycled PET (RPET). PLA is made entirely from corn and is 100% compostable. RPET combines pre and post-consumer resin (like water bottles) to reduce the reliance on new material, conserving resources." What are the byproducts of manipulating corn into clear #7 plasticine drinking cups? How much fossil fuel emissions are there to turn a field of corn into a drinking cup at a mountain restaurant? What good is a compostable drinking cup when it ends up in the garbage and sent to a landfill or incinerator? And if all these cups end up being burned, what are their emissions? Now please don't get me wrong, I still love and support each and every step we are taking towards greater sustainability and reducing our impact on the earth, I just can't help but think that some of these steps are akin to a parallel promotion. The mission of Fabri-Kal does not dissuade my skepticism, "The mission of Fabri-Kal is to:

• Be a world class manufacturer of quality plastic parts and packages
• Be recognized as a leader in customer satisfaction
• Be a growing and financially sound company, providing a fair return to shareholders
• Assist employees in achieving an attractive lifestyle
• Manage operations and create products in a safe and environmentally responsible manner"

Plastics are A numero uno in their mission, not the environment, so I think my intuition may be on to something here. So Fabri-Kal, if you read this, what is your carbon footprint and what are you doing to offset it?