You may have heard a lot about being ‘environmentally friendly’ or of the advantages of recycling, or even about the poor ozone layer. But do those phrases leave you cold? Do you wonder whether the ‘environment’ is one issue or several? Well sit back as I try to make clear for you something that is really important, but that can be difficult to research without being bamboozled:
The Ozone Layer
People of a certain age will know that the ozone layer was in peril in the late 80s and early 90s. This was due to a particular gas used in aerosols and some refrigerators and similar electrical appliances that damaged this layer of the atmosphere. The ozone layer protects all living things from the harmful effects of the sun’s light. The gases that were the cause were CFCs. The sun’s light that was being let through was those rays in the ultraviolet.
What do I need to do?
The Ozone layer problems are largely historical and are not related to global warming or the need for recycling. If you have an old fridge or freezer (or even if it’s reasonably new) make sure it is disposed off legally and recycled!
Recycling
Recycling is important because there are finite amounts of some materials. For example, on Earth there is only a limited amount of each type of metal and metal cannot be created from anything else. Recycling is the only sensible way to manage these genuinely limited resources. So when you recycle a drinks can, a battery, tin foil or a tuna can, you are helping to stop the human race from running out of these metals. Recycling batteries is especially important as they contain mercury which is a rare metal and also extremely poisonous. The metal in domestic appliances is largely recycled these days as a result of the EU’s WEEE rules.
Plastic recycling is similar to metal recycling in that plastic is made of a material that there is a limited amount of (oil). When we run out of oil (even if that is centuries from now), we will not be able to make all the plastics that currently rely on fossil oil (that is, oil derived from long dead trees as opposed to oil that can be extracted from recently alive plants such as sunflower oil etc.) Another reason to recycle plastic is because of something that happens to the chemicals when they are made into plastic: they are made almost completely impervious to rotting.
Paper recycling is nowhere near so clear cut. The best argument is actually one about global warming, so I have left that to that section.
The main thing to note is that the main reasons for recycling are not related to global warming. There are serious environmental reasons to recycle, but the majority of them are not to do with global warming.
Global Warming
This is the daddy of the environmental causes. For this reason, like evolution in biology, it is often attacked by people who want to attack environmentalists generally.
Carbon Dioxide (or CO2 to use its chemical symbol) and some other gases have an effect on the atmosphere which helps it to absorb more of the sun’s energy. This has the effect of causing the atmosphere generally to warm up. There are other effects of a change to the chemical make-up of the air, but they are reasonably subtle and not worth mentioning in this initial guide.
The trouble with heating the atmosphere is that it causes ice in some parts of the world to melt. And when it melts, the colour of these areas changes from light to dark. This may sound like a small thing but it has the unfortunate effect of stopping sunlight from being reflected back out into space, further heating the Earth.
The main thing when considering how to manage global warming (more properly, global climate change) is what causes an increase in the overall amount of CO2. The easy answer is burning things, but that is not always the case. If you plant a tree, it absorbs an amount of atmospheric carbon. When you burn that tree, you release some of that carbon back into the air. But what you have not done is contributed much to climate change. The real problem is when carbon that has been buried for a long period of time is released. That is mostly carbon trapped in coal and fossil oil and gas.
There are arguments about the benefit of using the bus or train over your car, and there are some odd results of different activities, but the principle is simple — if you can be more efficient when using electricity or your car, you will be helping.
The odd results are things like local vs. foreign farming. Some research has found that even with the fuel burning required in shipping a fruit product from Africa to England, there are fewer emissions attributable to the African product because of the greater mechanisation of English farms. It is difficult to legislate for that sort of effect, but it’s best not to worry about that sort of thing.
Some people will also point out that the climate is not usually stable and that it may not be human activity that is causing the changes in climate we can all now see. While that may be true to some extent, very little harm is done by trying to reduce our use of limited resources such as fossil fuels. So why not be more efficient anyway?!
I mentioned earlier that paper recycling could be considered a global warming mitigating environmentally friendly activity. I said this because when paper goes into landfill, it will decompose in a way that causes the greenhouse gas, methane, to be released. Unfortunately for the environment, methane is actually even more effective at trapping the sun’s energy than carbon dioxide. The same thing happens when food waste is binned, so do consider whether there is some way you can compost.
Conclusion
Next time someone says that they are doing something environmentally friendly, I hope this has helped you understand how that activity is environmentally friendly; I hope, too, that it has helped you understand that there is a difference between the environmental causes.
If you would like to learn more, or take part in discussion, take a look at the Green Living Grog
Like this entry? Share it with others:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
#1 by Colin Vane on July 8th, 2010 - 4:20 pm
Most of the UK seems to lag behind countries such as the Netherlands. For example, my own local authority recycles plastic drinks bottles, but no other plastics. But drinks bottles, depending on the type of drink can be PET or polyethylene or possibly a number of other materials. When I contacted the local authority to ask if they would take all PET or polyethylene containers or any other materials, their reply simply reiterated the “drinks bottles only” maxim and made no reference at all to my question about specific materials.
I appreciate that without clear material labelling, identification is difficult for anyone not trained as a materials technologist. Moreover, some materials contain differing amounts of plasticers that may make them unsuitable for recycling. To make matters worse, many packaging materials are laminates of different materials. For example, should coffee packaging go in the plastics bin or the aluminium bin?
I believe that we need clearer material labelling and then a greater commitment from local authorities to treat the separate materials appropriately. I will probably be accused of promoting a nanny and/or big brother state, but I fear that without legislation and sanctions, too little will be done too late.
#2 by Gav on July 8th, 2010 - 5:18 pm
I agree. For especially simple products (plastic containers for milkshake, for example) carry Resin Identification Codes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resin_identification_code) which can be used to decide whether an item can be recycled. I admit, I compare this code to the code on the nearest plastic bottle and put it in the recycling bin if it matches. I should probably check whether that’s correct.
But as Councils seem incapable or unwilling to clarify, central government legislation in this respect seems proportionate!