By Ember, Contributor
Recently, there’s been a lot of push for individual initiatives to combat climate change. This can be considered admirable and noble – but they hardly scratch the surface of the problem. These initiatives tend to overlook industries as the largest contributors to climate change, the Global North’s role in plastic pollution and they place misdirected blame on disabled people.
In a scientific paper that outlines that the Pacific Ocean is rapidly accumulating plastic, Laurent Lebreton et al. states the following findings.
“Over three-quarters of the [Great Pacific Garbage Patch] mass was carried by debris larger than five cm and at least 46 per cent was comprised of fishing nets. Microplastics accounted for eight per cent of the total mass but 94 per cent of the estimated 1.8 (1.1–3.6) trillion pieces floating in the area,” they say.
Almost half of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch’s mass is abandoned gear from industry fishing. Another 20 per cent of the mass is thought to be remnants from the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan. In comparison, Seth Borenstein, a journalist, noted the extremely small proportion of plastic waste made up of plastic straws.
“Straws on average weigh so little – about one sixty-seventh of an ounce or .42 grams – that all those billions of straws add up to only about 2,000 tons of the nearly nine million tons of plastic waste that yearly hits the waters,” Borenstein said.
Banning plastic straws seems pretty asinine when you consider a few different factors. It’s interesting how alternatives like the new Starbucks lids were created to replace the use of plastic straws, but they have been found to contain an equivalent amount or more plastic than what a plastic straw contains. Christian Britschgi, an associate editor at Reason, described the miniscule impact of the Starbucks nitro lids.
“Right now, Starbucks patrons are topping most of their cold drinks with either 3.23 grams or 3.55 grams of plastic product, depending on whether they pair their lid with a small or large straw. The new nitro lids meanwhile weigh either 3.55 or 4.11 grams, depending again on lid size,” said Britschgi.
Point blank, this “solution” is performative – it is a cheap tactic spearheaded by a corporation to make the common folk feel like they’re making a difference in regards to climate change when it really amounts to nothing.
Then why not use paper straws or reusable straws? Well, because these options are awful. Often times, banning plastic straws does not take into account how alternative straw materials can be detrimental to disabled people.
“Biodegradable [straw] options often fall apart too quickly or are easy for people with limited jaw control to bite through. Silicone straws are often not flexible – one of the most important features for people with mobility challenges. Reusable straws need to be washed, which not all people with disabilities can do easily. And metal straws, which conduct heat and cold in addition to being hard and inflexible, can pose a safety risk,” said Godoy.
Another thing to keep in mind is that biodegradable straws can also be made of soy – a common allergen – and because it isn’t food, corporations aren’t required to disclose ingredients on the packaging.
Putting the responsibility on disabled people to survive in public without plastic straws because you don’t believe stores should offer straws is venomous.
It’s not that disabled people don’t care about the environment – we absolutely do. But instead of demonizing us for existing, shouldn’t able-bodied people help create an accessible, environmentally friendly alternative to plastic straws?
Currently, I am a student studying earth and environmental science, and I’m aiming to get a minor in sustainability. I am also disabled and I realize that climate change is larger than any one of us.
However, it’s important to note that often disabled people are the ones being accused of holding the environmental movement back, while corporations are conveniently cropped out of the frame. The big picture of climate change and environmental collapse is large enough for all of us to fit inside – so please don’t forget that industries play a large part, too.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Saadia Shahid
On Feb. 27, the McMaster Students Union promoted its three-day education campaign “Compost at Mac” which highlighted several composting bins around campus. The campaign encouraged students to locate areas within the university where compost bins should be placed.
This was done in efforts to reduce the waste produced by students and also to promote composting.
Another table that I came across in the McMaster University Students Centre asked students to make pledges to limit their use of disposable items. I pledged to limit my use of plastic cutlery, but how feasible is that really?
As a student, making sustainable choices is difficult when there are plastic straws and cutlery distributed all over campus. It is hard to make the environmentally-conscious choice when those items are so easily accessible.
It is easy for the MSU to put up boards encouraging students to help combat climate change, but would it not make more sense for McMaster Hospitality Services to abolish the use of plastic cutlery and disposable items altogether? This would probably help reduce the carbon footprint of the entire university.
This may seem like a drastic change, but the ease lies in switching to more environmentally-friendly and sustainable options like steel cutlery and straws. Reusable mesh grocery bags should be also sold on campus to make it easier for students to adopt sustainable habits.
In making these changes, the MUSC eating area could be also revamped into a proper food court with steel cutlery and plates given out in La Piazza. Students can then return to these items to workers stationed at the food court.
A system like this is already implemented at plenty of malls with food courts and helps to reduce waste due to the availability of reusable cutlery. The cost may seem a little high, but it is not higher than the one we will have to pay due to the effects of climate change.
This initiative can start during Welcome Week with new students introduced to the green changes.
Speaking from a student’s point of view, these changes would make things easier for us and also be more beneficial for the Earth. An institution equipped with the funding makes a bigger difference than opposed to individual students struggling to find sustainable alternatives.
The MSU has done a lot of things that students didn’t vote for, such as starting the composting initiative. They encourage us to follow along as it is a change for the better, but they must at least make it easier for students to adopt.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
On Jan. 30, 2017, the McMaster Students Union announced plans to eliminate single-use plastic water bottles from Union Market as part of a strategy to work towards a more sustainable campus.
However in the fall of 2017, the newly elected board of directors decided to return single use bottled water to Union Market. Soon afterwards, boxed water was pulled from shelves.
Proponents of the boxed water project say that it was the first step of a plan to work towards sustainability on campus. According to others, the project was doomed from the beginning.
Former MSU president Justin Monaco-Barnes introduced boxed water as a more environmentally friendly alternative to bottled water. Monaco-Barnes was elected on a platform of sustainability, and had included the implementation of boxed water in his campaign.
Boxed water cartons are recyclable and made from well-managed forests. Furthermore, less energy is required to ship, produce and package boxed water bottles.
Prior to making the decision to phase out single use plastic water bottles, the MSU Advocacy team, led by Blake Oliver, had compiled a research report considering the sustainability, marketability, and financial considerations of implementing boxed water.
According to Monaco-Barnes, boxed water was meant to be the first step in a long-term plan to push the university to eliminate single use plastic water bottles altogether. By taking a moral stance against single use plastic water bottles, the board of directors hoped to encourage the rest of the university to follow suit.
Monaco-Barnes stated the next step in the project would have been to implement a water bottle filling station at Union Market complete with options for adding flavour and carbonation.
“By selling plastic water bottles again and undoing this ban, the MSU has effectively undone not only the work that was put into this effort, but has also undone the planned multi-staged process by removing the underlying principle,” stated Monaco-Barnes in a letter responding to the decision.
According to Jeffrey Campana, the current Union Market manager, the main issue with boxed water was the financial losses. Bottled water had been one of Union Market’s top selling items, and the switch to boxed water led to revenue losses resulting from both a lack of student interest and a lower profit margin on boxed water.
Campana was a cashier at the time that boxed water was introduced. He stated that the lack of interest in boxed water was a result of a higher cost, reluctance to purchase an unfamiliar product and an ineffective advertising campaign.
Boxed water was more expensive than the least expensive bottled water. For example, Eska was sold for $1.13 for a 500 mL bottle, while a box of water the same size cost $2.49.
Additionally, Campana noted that students were hesitant to purchase boxed water due to its unusual design. Since there were other places on campus that continued to sell bottled water, consumers were not forced to make the switch to boxed water.
Campana also stated that students were not effectively incentivized to purchase boxed water. In early January the MSU produced posters and infographics giving information about the environmental impact of bottled water. The graphics were displayed in Union Market.
However, according to both Campana and the 2016-2017 Union Market manager, a more robust and long term marketing campaign might have made boxed water sell more successfully.
The previous Union Market manager stated that she had not been properly consulted when deciding to phase out bottled water and market boxed water. The decision to transition to boxed water came as a directive from the board of directors instead of being a result of collaboration with Union Market Management.
Generally, the part time manager of Union Market is responsible for deciding what items to stock. However, since Union Market is owned and operated by the MSU, the students union president and board of directors can make decisions about what is sold.
If she had been consulted, the previous Union Market manager stated that she would have worked towards a long term advertising plan in preparation for the introduction of boxed water.
“I don't think it would have had the same results had I been a part of it like effectively,” she stated.
In addition to being more expensive for consumers, boxed was also more expensive to produce. This meant that Union Market made less money off of each unit of boxed water sold than what they made off of bottled water.
“I think it's a great product, I just would never sell it. Simply because I don't make money off of it, the MSU doesn't make money off it,” said Campana.
For Monaco-Barnes however, the overall purpose of the campaign was not to sell more boxed water. Ideally, students would switch to reusable water bottles and would therefore stop buying water from Union Market altogether.
Monaco-Barnes had anticipated that a revenue loss was likely to occur. However from his perspective, the environmental considerations outweighed the financial losses.
“Because it's such an important cause, becoming more sustainable and reducing carbon footprint, I think it's okay if it's going to take a bit of a financial hit,” said Monaco-Barnes. “That's the crux with sustainability […] if it was an easy, cheap, simple solution, everyone would be doing it," he added.
To help offset some of the financial losses from the removal of bottled water, the board of directors decided to raise the costs of other best-selling items at Union Market such as chocolate milk. In 2017, the price of chocolate milk increased from $1.86 to $2.25.
According to MSU General Manager John McGowan, prices were raised so that Union Market could continue to financially support its cost centres. However, they not raised to the point of recoupling the lost revenue from bottled water, as this would have made prices unaffordable.
According to the Union Market manager at the time, however, this price increase was not enough to make up the losses from bottled water sales.
Bottled water has since been reintroduced, meaning that Union Market is no longer facing revenue losses resulting from its absence. However, the price of chocolate milk has not been brought back down, despite being raised to help compensate the loss of bottled water.
Campana noted that the price of chocolate milk may still have increased due to inflation.
“$1.86 is miles away from being financially sound in 2019,” stated Campana.
Monaco-Barnes noted that the structure of the MSU makes continuity difficult. Due to the high rate of turnover in student government, long-term projects often do not get seen to completion.
While the overall project was ambitious, the implementation gap and lack of year to year continuity meant that the boxed water plan was short-lived.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
Jennifer Yee is the self-proclaimed love child of Stevie Nicks and Indiana Jones, an identity I realized she’s adopted wholeheartedly as we went on a little adventure around her Riverdale neighbourhood looking for community gardens and a worker-owned natural food market.
In recent years she’s delved deep into researching ways she can adopt a more sustainable and ethical lifestyle. From making her day to day tasks more green to acting as a natural ambassador and advocate, how she impacts the environment and the world around her is always on her mind.
Yee recognizes the challenges of going zero-waste, avoiding fast fashion and its negative impact on the environment and workers and changing habits and mindsets around more ethical, environmentally-friendly and sustainable practices.
Despite how easy it may be to partake in practices that save us time and money, ultimately there’s no convenience in neglecting the environment. Yee had an abundance of tips and tricks that can be implemented into daily routines for those that are up for the challenge.
Single-use plastics can easily be replaced by investing in a reusable counterpart. Grab your coffee in the morning in a travel mug and keep a reusable bottle on you. There’s a diverse selection of budget-friendly and washable produce bags for your groceries made from mesh, cotton or recycled plastic.
Sustainable food storage can be tricky to navigate, especially when packing food is made so much easier with Ziploc bags. Wrap foods in reusable beeswax wrap and consider an eco-friendly lunch bag. FUNCH is a collapsible, washable, water and tear-resistant option made from recycled material. Toss in some bamboo or metal utensils and you’re set for lunch.
Billions of tiny bits of plastics escape into our waterways from hygiene and beauty products. Avoid bath products, cleansers and toothpastes with microbeads as they do not enhance the effectiveness of the product but rather add to the plastic pollution crisis.
Washing clothing also sheds plastics in the form of microfibers. Polyester fleece garments tend to be the biggest offenders and Friends of the Earth report that one wash load could shed up to 17 million microfibers. Yee recommends placing clothing in a special bag, such as Guppy Bag, that is designed to catch microfibers as the clothing gets washed. Washing at low temperatures and a full load can also reduce shedding.
Think about the packing products come in and consider investing in companies that have recycling practices. For menstrual products, menstrual cups can be an easy-to-use and less wasteful alternative to pads and tampons. Yee recommends the Ruby Cup which also has a social mission model wherein they donate a cup with every purchase.
[spacer height="20px"]It’s also important to develop an understanding of recycling practices in your own community and on campus as they may differ. For example, coffee cups and pizza boxes with grease are not recyclable at McMaster. The university has a composting initiative, recycling program and nine electronics collection drop-off locations. Acceptable items for recycling are outlined on the university’s website.
Wasteful practices on campus also include the plethora of take-out containers thrown out on a daily basis. Avoiding take-out may be difficult with the limited space for sit-down meals but being conscious of how much food to order, the kind of container offered and bringing your own storage containers to avoid waste can go a long way.
There are plenty of local options in Hamilton that offer eco-friendly dining. The Nook was renovated with minimal waste and tries to operate as close to zero-waste as possible. Dundurn Market as well as the Mustard Seed Co-op have a focus on supporting local eating, which ultimately reduces impact on the environment.
[spacer height="20px"]While Hamilton’s food scene is increasingly paying attention to more sustainable practices, the slow fashion scene is thriving too. Hamilton’s Out of the Past and McMaster’s very own Threadwork events promote reusing clothing and reducing waste.
Yee recalls experiencing a huge learning curve while changing habits and picking up environmentally-friendly practices. A simple reminder of why she pursues her lifestyle as an environmentalist, advocate and wild keeper keeps her going.
It may be difficult, but the environment is worth taking a moment and thinking about the place we each have in the world and how we are impacting it with every move we make.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
Over the last few months, there has been a push by organizations, countries, cities and companies globally to crack down on plastic straws, products that studies show are contributing to the nearly nine million tons of plastic that infect the oceans annually.
With anti-straw advocacy afoot, Canadian restaurants including Harvey’s and Swiss Chalet have announced plans to axe or restrict single-use plastic straws. Ontario universities such as the University of Guelph and Western University are eagerly ridding their campuses of the utensils.
While corporations and organizations have largely been in favour of abandoning plastic straws, disability advocates have pushed back against these efforts, citing the importance of plastic straws for people with physical limitations.
There are also groups challenging the movement on environmental grounds, arguing that paper straws, which are being embraced as plastic straws vanish, are accelerating deforestation, the second leading cause of climate change.
When asked about McMaster’s stance on the plastic straw debate, Chris Roberts, director of McMaster Hospitality Services, said the university is also considering a plastic straw ban. However, MHS will not commit until it engages in nuanced discussions about the effects of a plastic straw ban on stakeholders including students who need them for accessibility reasons.
“It is important for us to take a strategic approach through the understanding of impacts to all stakeholders as opposed to making a reactive decision,” said Roberts.
In a statement on the MHS website, Roberts outlines limitations to a plastic straw ban and stresses the importance of consultations with the McMaster Students Union and Equity and Inclusion Office.
“We need to take into consideration all of the stakeholders in the customer base, including those who rely on straws as a result of physical limitations. We need to fully understand the broader systemic sustainability issue and how a more holistic approach may have a greater impact for our customers, community and environment,” reads part of the statement.
Stephanie Bertolo, MSU vice president (Education), says the union appreciates Robert’s commitment to considering the needs of marginalized students on campus.
"The MSU supports the university's efforts to become more environmentally sustainable but asks them to do the proper consultation to ensure their initiatives do not interfere with the accessibility of our campus,” she said.
The EIO’s stance on the issue is notably similar to the MSU’s.
“We are pleased to see that Hospitality Services is expressing mindfulness and consideration of the implications on multiple stakeholders and that there is explicit mention of plans to consult with particular marginalized communities,” said Arig al Shaibah, associate vice president at the EIO.
Unlike at Guelph and Western, where there have been vocal pro-straw-ban voices, the movement has not gained the same traction at McMaster. This is evidenced by the fact that there has not been a #StrawsSuck campaign here, at least not a visible one online.
According to Abbie Little, the coordinator of academic sustainability at the McMaster academic sustainability programs office, however, in the SUSTAIN 2S03 and 3S03 courses, discussions about plastic straws were polarized.
Mohammad Abdul Aziz, a Teaching Assistant for the 3S03 course, says there were quite a few ardent pro-ban students in his classroom.
“From my understanding, students were more than welcome to the idea of banning straws,” said Aziz. “Students believed that eco-friendly practices are not adopted in one fell swoop but need minor introductions to the consumers of multi-national corporations.”
While it looks like a straw ban will not be implemented at McMaster, Roberts did not say the university is committed to the status quo indefinitely. Only time, research and MSU and EIO consultations will tell what lies in store for the future of plastic straw users on campus.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
