Every Halloween we send thousands of tonnes of waste to the landfills, but a switch to more sustainable choices could curb the costs for our environment

With all the candy, costumes, and eerie celebrations, there’s no doubt that Halloween is one of Canada’s most loved holidays. In fact, we splurge over a billion dollars on all the tricks and treats of the season to make each 31st a night to remember. 

But after those few hours of terrifying thrills, we’re met with the most menacing monster of them all – the waste. And although Halloween comes and goes each year, this plastic-filled celebration produces concerning amounts of trash that stay with us long after. 

Harmful plastic waste is increasingly found in almost all types of Halloween products – candy, costumes, decorations, and more – and these products are not good for people or the planet.  

Most Halloween products are composed of non-recyclable oil-based plastics such as PVC, making these single-use items destined for the landfill. What’s more is that PVC plastics often contain toxic chemicals and heavy metals such as BPAS and lead which are linked to chronic diseases like cancer, asthma and diabetes as well as consequences for reproductive, behavioral, and metabolic health.  

Most Halloween products are composed of non-recyclable oil-based plastics such as PVC, making these single-use items destined for the landfill. What’s more is that PVC plastics often contain toxic chemicals and heavy metals such as BPAS and lead which are linked to chronic diseases like cancer, asthma and diabetes as well as consequences for reproductive, behavioral, and metabolic health.  

A report from the U.K. found that 2,000 tonnes of plastic waste, equivalent to 83 million plastic bottles, were produced by Halloween festivities in 2019. While these numbers aren’t representative of Canada, they’re still a reminder of our ghastly overconsumption and waste as we send over 2.1 million tonnes of plastic waste to landfills all year round. And this waste is responsible for killing wildlife, polluting our air and water, and further accelerating the climate crisis. 

Besides plastics, another concerning source of waste during Halloween is pumpkins. Over 80 thousand metric tonnes of pumpkins are produced annually in Canada. Yet, most of these pumpkins end up in the trash after they’re carved out for Jack-O’Lantern season, contributing to significant food waste. The amount of food wasted during Halloween is even more alarming when you think about the hot meals that could’ve instead been served to the one in five Canadians going hungry.  

We can’t keep celebrating Halloween irresponsibly. We need to pivot to sustainable plastic-free, low-waste celebrations, but that’s easier said than done.  

We can’t keep celebrating Halloween irresponsibly. We need to pivot to sustainable plastic-free, low-waste celebrations, but that’s easier said than done.  

Sure, you could opt for more sustainable treats such as homemade goodies, buy chocolate and candy in bulk, and compost or cook your pumpkins. You could even DIY or thrift second-hand costumes and avoid plastic décor and products. However, these solutions aren’t always accessible or affordable for everyone. These alternatives, while necessary, also don’t address the root of this wider issue.  

There need to be greater efforts from the big players involved in selling us these destructive tricks and treats because the companies preventing us from celebrating a plastic-free Halloween are the same companies heavily contributing to the pollution degrading the environment. 

Though the federal government has pledged to eliminate plastic waste by 2030, Halloween won’t look much different then, given our current rate of progress. To stay true to their commitments, the federal government needs to implement a more comprehensive nationwide single-use plastic ban along with strategies for reusable and refillable items.  

Halloween, however, is not the sole culprit for the waste in our landfills. We need to be considerate of the fact that disposable plastics and plastics, in general, are abundant in our everyday lives. And the only way to avoid our scary future is by actively working toward individual and system-level changes that prioritize sustainability now. 

The fast fashion industry is as dominant as ever and here is why we need to stop contributing to it

The one Friday every year when many parts of the world erupt in chaos, is the most anticipated Friday for some and the most dreaded for others. On Black Friday people surge into department stores at the early hours of opening time and in some stores, the day might end with unwanted clothes littering the floors while shoppers play an intense game of tug of war over a pair of pants.  

The prevalence of fast fashion consumption becomes increasingly evident as this materialistic holiday rolls around and more and more people are encouraged to buy larger amounts from unethical brands that offer very appealing deals.  

Many stores follow the fast fashion model in efforts to increase demand by rapidly producing clothes that are always up to date with fashion trends. Hence the name, fast fashion.  

These clothes are also made of relatively cheap materials, though the labourers making them are underpaid. As a result, the cost of items from the participating companies is exceptionally low, making it even more appealing to consumers.  

And now, living in a world with inflation on the rise, students find themselves on a tight budget when it comes to our spendings. Buying from fast fashion companies becomes immensely difficult not to do today due to the cheap pricing.  

However, the fast fashion industry brings great harm to the environment as the production of clothes involves copious amounts of energy, toxic fabric dyes and carbon emissions.  

Clothes are a necessity, but sometimes the cheaper price of fast fashion can make individuals get carried away. 

It is difficult to balance a tight budget and buying clothes from sustainable companies as their items can be quite expensive. Unlike fast fashion that produces in bulk, sustainable companies rely on smaller production amounts to reduce waste. Thus, making them more expensive. 

Naturally, many turn to fast fashion as it is more affordable. The problem with partaking in fast fashion consumption arises when consumers buy from these unethical companies in bulk. As they can fit many items into one bill that would fit three or four good quality pieces from sustainable companies that can also last you longer.  

In this manner, fast fashion fuels ignorance within our society. I believe buying from these companies for the sake of affordability is an individual’s right, but buying from the industry every month or so to keep up with the latest micro trends is ignorance at its finest.  

The items from your haul of new clothing allow the company to continue exploiting the men, women and many times, children who made those products.  

And though we may think we are not the issue; we most defiantly are. In a study done just this past year, 90 per cent of university students said they had recently purchased fast fashion clothing, with 17 per cent of those individuals doing so on a weekly basis.  

Moreover, despite individuals today owning more clothes than anyone before, the average person only wears 20 per cent of their clothes 80 per cent of the time. Now think about the weekly and monthly shops from fast fashion companies and just how wasteful all of it truly is. 

So this Black Friday, as you treat yourself to new clothes, consider spending your hard-earned paycheck on a few timeless pieces that are made ethically and whose quality will last you a lifetime. Or visit your local thrift store. Thrifting is such a great way to get unique and even quality pieces for such a low price, while the clothing is not going to waste and while no new clothing needs to be made. 

If we collectively avoid fast fashion to the best of our abilities, we can not only make our environment a cleaner one but we’ll also improve our quality of life overall by moving towards being a less ignorant and more mindful society.  

Graphic by Elisabetta Paiano/ Production Editor

The threat of climate change was made clear by the fires that spread across Australia earlier this year. Heat waves and drought caused bush fires that permanently altered the country’s landscape, which were made at least 30 per cent worse by the impacts of climate change.

Australia’s devastating fires are only an early example of the consequences of the climate crisis. Although, across the world, Hamilton has its own possibilities for disaster. In November it came to light that 24 billion litres of sewage spilled into Chedoke Creek from 2014 to 2018, which the city kept hidden despite possible impacts on the local environment and residents. 

In addition to the Chedoke Creek contamination, the city was charged in late 2019 to clean up toxic chemicals that had been seeping into local waterways. The city-owned John C. Munro International Airport had years-old chemicals in surrounding soil which leached into nearby water during wet weather. The spills make it clear that Hamilton needs to be prepared for the environmental impacts of climate change, especially flooding, which will become the city’s main concern along with extreme heat. 

Rising temperatures bring the possibility for droughts. Conversely, increased precipitation could lead to flooding, rising lake levels and could negatively impact shoreline erosion. 

Hamilton also has to worry about greenhouse gases, which are largely produced in the city by burning fossil fuels, transportation and industry. In 2018 the city committed to five points of action which include creating a greenhouse gas emissions inventory and an emissions reduction target. 

In March 2019 Hamilton declared a climate emergency along with hundreds of other municipalities across Canada. Along with the declaration, the city committed to a climate vulnerability and risk assessment, which has yet to be completed. In December 2019 city councillors approved a climate action plan, but they have yet to include any deadlines or costs associated with the project.

One important change is that the city will try to apply a climate lens to future actions. According to Kate Flynn, the acting director at the centre for climate change management at Mohawk College, the city is using a climate lens to prevent some of the worst effects of climate change and adapt to impacts we can’t avoid. For example, when the city makes an infrastructure improvement, they must consider the future environmental impact of chosen supplies and processes. 

Flynn also pointed out that infrastructure changes are necessary to prepare for climate change, specifically in transportation and public works. She noted that over time Hamilton will be at risk for increased precipitation which would lead to flooding and harm water quality, so updates to city infrastructure and residential homes are necessary to avoid damages. 

“I think one of the things that's really important to dispel is this myth that Canadians are going to be okay,” said Flynn, “the thing about climate change is that it's a global issue, but the effects of it are going to be hyperlocalized.”

“I think one of the things that's really important to dispel is this myth that Canadians are going to be okay [. . .] the thing about climate change is that it's a global issue, but the effects of it are going to be hyperlocalized.”

While the economic and physical effects of climate change are becoming more of a concern for the city, the social impacts are still largely overlooked. Caitlin Thompson and Joann Varickanickal, volunteers with Climate Ready Hamilton, a community organization, stressed the importance of social cohesion for disaster preparedness. 

Thompson and Varickanickal suggested that students get to know their fellow community members and think about how vulnerable populations, like elderly, homeless and low-income community members, will be disproportionately impacted in times of climate crisis. One project CRH worked on sought to map out spaces open to the public for food and shelter in times of disaster. If a heat wave occurred, vulnerable residents without air conditioning could find a place to cool down through the community-sourced resource hub. 

Beyond cases of climate disaster, CRH also works to help communities improve the environmental conditions brought on by local pollution.

“Look at communities that are in the industrial core . . . we know that they have poor air quality, but a lot of people in those neighborhoods don't know that they can work together and you can report those things to the government . . . part of this project now can be going into neighborhoods and supporting neighborhoods and understanding their rights,” said Thompson. 

Thompson and Varickanickal also noted the importance of preparing a 72 hour kit. 

“If there's a massive emergency . . . aid will begin [about] 72 hours after,” said Thompson. “Basically you need to be able to be prepared and stay okay by yourself for 72 hours because you may not get help.”

According to the city of Hamilton website, residents should prepare a 72 hour supply of food and water, along with a “go bag” with items like a first aid kit, blankets and more. 

Preparing for 72 hours only works in case of an emergency, but we have to prepare for a future where climate disaster is a regular part of our lives. According to the Centre for Climate and Emergency Solutions, climate resilience is a framework for thinking about climate change and our ability to prepare for, and bounce back from, climate-related disaster. Climate resilience accounts for the irreversible damage already done to our climate, along with possibilities for mitigating some of the worst effects we could see in the future. Flynn noted that climate resilience isn’t only about infrastructure, but also how we can improve our social systems to better support one another through the impacts of climate change. 

“If you're talking about climate resilience, well we should be talking about resilience in other ways too? Like making sure . . . everyone has access to good food no matter what happens, right? So it's kind of a framework for thinking through solutions through the lens of equity,” said Flynn. 

Despite possibilities for climate resilience, the state of climate change is dire and sometimes frightening. Flynn reflected on how she continues to work in climate change management despite the cataclysmic effects on the climate. 

“I think why people are like, how do you get out of bed every day and think about climate change? And I'm like, because believe it or not, there's so many opportunities within climate change to just like do all the things that we've always thought about doing, but never really prioritized. There's no more excuses,” said Flynn.

"There's so many opportunities within climate change to just like do all the things that we've always thought about doing, but never really prioritized. There's no more excuses."

Hamilton will face unique challenges from climate change that the city will have to manage. To create a climate resilient city, community members will have to come together to care for one another. Whether it’s creating a 72 hour kit or a map of resources, knowing who needs help in your community and how will be integral. 

Krista Kruja couldn’t be happier doing what she’s doing.

Having just finished her second year at McMaster, Krista is now focused on continuing the work that began in earnest last summer, when student Jonathan Valencia and volunteer coordinator Randy Kay first started the Hamilton Street Tree Project.

One of the main summer initiatives of McMaster’s Ontario Public Interest Research Group (OPIRG), the project’s primary objective is to inform local neighbourhoods about the Street Tree Program that has been funded by the city since 2004.

“The way that the city is doing this is by offering free trees on the city line – most people’s front lawn, or at least a portion of it, belong to the city,” Krista explained. “Anywhere that’s city property, [residents] are allowed to request a tree, and so the city will plant it, and it’s the city’s job to maintain it.”

As the project coordinator, Krista’s role has been to oversee efforts in going door-to-door and canvassing specific neighbourhoods in order to inform the public. Launched in part due to a 2011 Clean Air Hamilton study, OPIRG has focused on lower-income neighbourhoods that were measured to have the poorest air quality in the city.

Hamilton’s Keith neighbourhood, the focus of last summer’s pilot project, received an average of three tree requests per year prior to OPIRG’s efforts. After last year’s canvassing and door-to-door efforts, 65 new trees were planted.

This year, the focus has been on the Crown Point neighbourhood, which is located between Gage and Kenilworth. According to Krista, they’ve received nearly 70 requests for new trees so far, and are hoping to reach 80 by the end.

By expanding the urban canopy, OPIRG hopes to have a real effect on the air quality of these areas. But that’s not all they’re interested in doing with the program, Krista explained.

“Another sub goal [for the project] is community building – last year, it was just one student who went door-to-door and got lots of tree requests. This year we’ve been trying to get volunteers from McMaster, as well as the Crown Point community and Hamilton in general.”

Krista says that this summer, they’ve had more than 10 volunteers, some of whom aren’t even affiliated with OPIRG.

“For example… one of the co-presidents of Engineers Without Borders came out to volunteer, and she got in touch with the community developer for the Crown Point neighbourhood. She wants to work [with the developer] for some events in the school year,” Krista said with an enthusiastic smile. “It’s a nice partnership.”

Although it will be years before the trees have any noticeable effect on the air quality in these neighbourhoods, Krista’s enthusiasm for the project couldn’t be dampened.

“Sure, you don’t necessarily see the fruits of your labour in that air quality probably hasn’t changed much in the Keith neighbourhood from last year to this year, but you see the little trees, and you know that they’re going to get bigger, and in a couple of decades, it’s something you’ll definitely be able to see,” she said.

“Walking through that neighbourhood, maybe 20 or 30 years from now, I’ll be like: Oh, look at that! That’s something I was involved with,” she laughed.

Krista continued, “I think one of the greatest things about it is that it’s just such a big effort on behalf of everyone: McMaster’s done a lot, OPIRG’s done a lot, and Environment Hamilton has been really involved… Without everybody trying to help improve the neighbourhood, it wouldn’t have been possible, so I think it’s really exciting.”

With the project winding down in the first week of July, Krista expressed that she’s very interested in continuing the project during the school year.

“We were thinking of ways we can expand the Street Tree Project so it’s not just for the summer,” she said. “While I’m only working on it for nine weeks, I’m really enjoying it and I think it’s a really valuable thing.”

“I’d love to volunteer and work on it during the school year as well… to whatever capacity I can.”

Andrew Terefenko

Opinions Editor

 

“So long, and thanks for all the breaths.” Canadians, get used to adding this phrase to your daily diction in a decade, if this dastardly decision is not dismantled.

Environment Canada is pulling scientists away from monitoring the air pollution in various regions of Canada. They claim it is to assign them to “other priorities,” which are unnamed, but given that last year EC feared that as many as 700 jobs would be affected by budget cuts, those other priorities are likely more financially suitable for the organization. It’s a bad omen to consider any priorities higher than those of clean, breathable air.

This move did not come without criticism, of course, as many global environment research leaders strongly discouraged EC from going forward with this plan, but to no avail.

This move might very well knock Canada off it’s perch as a forerunner in environmental research, given our country’s diverse ecology and relatively low levels of smog, among major world capitals.

In addition to losing valuable smog-fighting manpower, EC has also shut down five of six total light ranging stations across Canada that have been integral to evaluating the damage done by airborne fossil fuel emissions. It is outrageous to think that facilities that exist solely the further the greater health of the Canadian populace are lying dormant across Canada, with easily operated equipment gathering dust at the cost of our successors’ livelihoods.

If you want a window into tomorrow’s Canada in this grey new world, look no further than the media’s smog staple, Beijing. Just under a year ago, Beijing air pollution was far above standard measurable levels, and citizens were urged to stay indoors, as even an hour outside would be a severe health risk. It is an example of a city that decided to fight air pollution only once it was a readily visible and immediate problem, and given that the city boasts an average of two days a week of blue skies, the fight was started a little too late.

This is the dilemma that I feel our nation is facing. We are reprioritizing the problem of pollution because it is not in our faces, screwing with our 2012 daily routine, which seems to be a requirement for meaningful popular support.

Worst yet is that we do not know what Environment Canada’s plan is moving forward. We have yet to hear what these “other priorities” are, which might help in defending their universally detestable decision. Their spokesman has also come forward to assure the world that EC will “still [provide] world class analysis,” which seems like a tall order for a recently downsized organization with less manpower in the field after today.

What is truly incomprehensible is the theory that these scientists have been relocated to the oil sands and other potential fuel-bearing regions as a measure in bolstering Canada’s export economy and evaluating the risk of environmental damage caused by new drilling maneuvers. Would that not be contributing to the problem instead of remedying it?

We have more immediate problems; that much I can comprehend. There is a global financial crisis that we are obligated to tread about carefully. There is ongoing strife in the Middle East that we are expected to combat. There are twenty thousand metric Rob Fords of garbage that have no place to go while we pad the ground with it. No doubt additional problems will surface while those persist, as is their tendency. But there will always be other problems. Now is not the time to shelve the importance of our gaseous lifeline.

We breathe what we sow, and at the moment the seeds we are spreading are awfully grey.