Elizabeth
Johns Hopkins University
Project Green Challenge: Day Four, Greener Challenge
Ten Products:
-
Gum
Granola Bars
Soup
Batteries
Apples
Laundry Detergent
Toothpaste
Febreze
Peanut Butter
Camera Memory Card
Sustainability for Each Product:
1. Orbit Gum- Overall, I think my gum is bad for the environment. The packaging
for the gum is very environmentally inefficient. The box comes wrapped in
plastic, and each individual piece is wrapped in paper. This packaging uses a
lot of resources and creates a lot of waste. Furthermore, my gum includes
ingredients such as glycerol, mannitol, and artificial flavors that are not
naturally occurring. An environmentally friendly alternative to Orbit would
be Glee Gum. Glee is made with chicle and is sweetened with fair trade cane
sugar. It does not contain artificial flavors, colors, sweeteners, or
preservatives, and is Non-GMO Project Verified. Furthermore, Glee is
packaged in biodegradable, recycled cardboard and resealable, recyclable
pouches.
2. Cascadian Farm Organic Granola Bars- The granola bars are good for the
environment. They are organic, meaning that their ingredients were grown
using sustainable farming practices and without synthetic pesticides and
chemical fertilizers, and the bars do not contain artificial flavors or
preservatives. Additionally, the box that the bars came in is 100% recycled
Paperboard, which means that no additional resources were needed to make
the box.
3. Amy’s Organic Lentil Soup- Overall, Amy’s Soup is good for the environment.
Amy’s is made with USDA certified organic ingredients, meaning that they
were grown without synthetic pesticides, and using sustainable techniques.
Additionally, since the soup is organic, it does not contain any GMOs. Finally,
the can tells consumers that the container is recyclable and reminds them to
recycle which is great if someone was unsure about whether or not they
could recycle the can.
4. Energizer Batteries- Energizer batteries are bad for the environment. They
are not rechargeable, which means that they must be disposed of whenever
they run out of power. This creates waste, which is particularly harmful for
the environment since they contain dangerous chemicals such nickel and
cadmium. These chemicals can leak into rivers, streams, and soil.
Additionally, the batteries were packaged in plastic, which creates waste. A
more environmentally conscious alternative to conventional batteries are
rechargeable lithium ion batteries which do not have to be disposed of after a
single use.
5. Apples- My apples are good for the environment. They are organic and were
purchased at a farmers’ market. Since they are organic, they were grown
sustainably and without artificial fertilizers. Because I bought them at a
farmers’ market they did not need to be transported a long distance and used
little fuel for transportation. Finally, the only waste an apple creates is the
core, which is biodegradable.
6. The Co-operative Non-biological liquid sachets laundry detergent- Overall, this
product was average for the environment. It contained biodegradable
surfactants, was made from vegetable soap, and was approved by the Cruelty
Free International Humane Household Products Standard. However, the
detergent also contained phosphonate, optical brightener, and perfume, none
of which are found in nature. A more sustainable alternative to my current
laundry detergent would be cleaner from a brand such as Green Shield. Green
Shield is USDA certified organic, and does not contain synthetic
preservatives, perfumes, dyes, or GMOs.
7. Colgate Toothpaste- Colgate is not good for the environment. It comes in a
plastic tube and the paperboard box it comes in is not made from recycled
materials. Additionally, it contains ingredients that are not naturally
occurring such as sodium monofluorophosphate and dicalcium phosphate
dihydrate. Instead, I could buy organic toothpaste such as Miessence
toothpaste. Miesssence is made from USDA certified organic ingredients,
produced with zero emissions manufacturing, and comes in biodegradable
packaging.
8. Febreze- Febreze is not good for the environment. Environmental Working
Group found that Febreze contains 89 air contaminants that pollute the air
when the product is manufactured and used. These chemicals can also build
up in soil when the bottle is disposed of, which pollutes soil and water.
Finally, the Febreze comes in a non-recyclable bottle, which creates
unnecessary waste. An eco-friendly alternative would be a plant-based or
organic air freshener such as California Scents that uses organic, naturally
derived fragrance oils. California Scents comes in a recycled aluminum
canister and has a biodegradable fiber pad inside which further reduces its
environmental impact. Additionally, I could opt for completely natural air
fresheners such as flowers or cat litter to minimize my environmental
impact.
9. Open Nature Peanut Butter- My peanut butter is good for the environment,
but could be improved upon. The only ingredients in my peanut butter are
peanuts and salt, meaning that it does not contain any preservatives or
artificial flavors. The peanuts were grown in the United States, which means
they needed less transportation resources than if the peanuts were imported.
However, the peanuts are not organic, so I do not know if they were grown
with GMOs or unsustainable farming methods such as artificial pesticides.
Furthermore, the packaging was not made with recycled goods. The
packaging would be better for the environment if it was made with recycled
plastic or if it was made from glass which is easier to recycle than plastic.
10. Camera Memory Card- My memory card is average for the environment. I
ordered a new memory card for my digital camera from Amazon.
Unfortunately the card had to be shipped from Kentucky to Washington D.C.
which used needless energy resources that wouldn’t have been used if I had
purchased it directly in D.C. The packaging was also inefficient. In addition to
the actual packaging for the card, it came in an envelope from Amazon that
also contained plastic bubble wrap. This packaging created unnecessary
waste. Although there were some environmental downsides to my camera
card, it is still better for the environment than traditional cameras that create
much more waste since they require film. Processing film also releases toxic
chemicals into the environment, which digital imaging avoids. To minimize
my environmental impact from the camera card, I should have purchased
one from a nearby store and looked for a card that used minimal packaging
made from recycled plastic.