Reduce, reuse, reuse, reuse, reuse, reuse… recycle

Disposable cups and bottles are everywhere. If you’re in a city or in the suburbs, you can probably find some within a few yards of where you’re reading this. If you live in the country, you doubtless know of a heap of them (along with tires, part of an AC window unit, a broken fishing pole, and a pair of rabbit-ears) at the end of a local road. You've no doubt heard or read the caution that paper cups contribute to cutting trees and that these cups decompose to produce methane in landfills. You've also probably heard that polystyrene foam cups are a bad idea, because they're made from petroleum, they leach toxic chemicals into beverages, they're hard to recycle, and they don't biodegrade for a very, very long time. (Dunkin Donuts: Styrofoam is no good for beverage containers. Welcome to 1989.) Reusable cups can be a good solution to reduce demand for forest products and petroleum, while reducing the solid waste stream.
But be careful. Studies about the life cycle energy costs of reusable cups tell us that this is not a casual investment. That steel cup requires a good deal of energy to manufacture and a little on an ongoing basis to stay clean. One study (whose authors escape me, but rest assured that when I read it, it sounded terribly authoritative) suggests that a reusable steel cup needs around 300 uses to beat the energy usage of an analogous supply of single-use disposible cups. Not until after that magic number, are you enjoying a net-energy savings as compared to paper. If you’re prone to losing things or if the vicissitudes of fashion mean you won’t be caught dead with that steel cup in a year, stick with paper.
Be the solution. In the long run, that reusable cup does prevent waste and save and energy. (It also saves water over paper cups, but keep in mind that it’s saving water at a papermill somewhere, while using water in your neighborhood. This is important if you live somewhere with water issues.) If you have the moxie to invest in a reusable steel cup, E.R. Dunhill suggests a few tips to help you reach that lofty (and terribly authoritative) 300th use:
-Buy a quality cup. Before you purchase, make sure it seems solidly put together. Avoid plastics, because many of them degrade faster than you’d think, especially when filled with hot liquids. Besides, someone is bound to find something else toxic (phthalates, bisphenol A, partially deweaponized poisonium) in whatever polymer you choose. It’s also easier to recycle steel when that cup reaches the end of its usable life span, than a cup that could be made of several different plastics. Pay particular attention to the lid, any places where parts are joined or sealed, and any moving parts. Avoid anything with a spring-loaded closure or with a cumbersome twist-apart lid (for cleaning). These parts seem to fail a lot, and if they break, it’s almost impossible to replace them.
-Buy a container with simple aesthetics. That stencil may be hip now, but know the perils of the insidious hip life cycle: “Hip” downgrades to “popular” to “overdone” to “tacky” – then it gets better for a moment with “ironic” – then back to “tacky” and finally “what were you thinking?”. You can’t count on the possible graduation to “retro” or “vintage”. Instead, be gently boring, like E.R. Dunhill or be prepared to carry your tacky cup with pride.
-Clean your cup regularly. If you decide that your cup has cooties, you’ll stop using it. If your cup contracts cooties because you didn’t clean it regularly, get rid of the cooties and get over it.
-Bring your container with you (or, explain beverage-telekinesis* to me). Keep in mind that you can fill what is sold as a coffee cup with something other than coffee. This revelation makes your reusable cup even more useful.
-Estimate when the cup will reach 300. (No, don’t make a spreadsheet. Just use rough numbers.) If you use it instead of paper twice per week (about 100 times/year), you’ll need to have it at least 3 years. When you arrive upon your magic day, have a celebratory café au lait and blueberry bagel.

*Author’s note: E.R. Dunhill will accept and, as appropriate, publicly display a diagram or other rendering of beverage-telekinesis. Stick-figures, crayons, children’s work, and other tom-foolery are strongly encouraged. Scan it or photograph it and post a link in the comments.
Also, the author will address the other Rs, "repair", "repurpose", and "rebuy" in future posts.

Image: E.R. Dunhill's ca 2002 Einstein Brothers double-walled steel travel mug, used more than 300 times (Courtesy of the author).

it's always something...

...like Roseanne Rosannadana's grandma always said.

When it comes to making environmentally sound choices in your home, things can get quite complex.

Many people have chosen to go with new, energy efficient, low water use front loading washing machines in recent years, as a way to save money on electricity and water and be environmentally conscious. But it turns out that there's a major drawback to front loading washers and the solution uses more water and electricity.

Because the new front loading washers use less water, and are more tightly sealed, mold and mildew frequently grow in the inner tub, contributing to allergies and bad smells, some of which is transferred to the clothing. Using too much detergent or the wrong kind exacerbates the problem. Front loaders require low sudsing, high efficiency (HE) detergents, which are not as widely available nation wide as traditional detergents. [A quick review of the largest grocery store in my area found only one type of one brand specifically labeled HE].

The problem is prevalent enough to have spawned several class action lawsuits against LG, Whirlpool and Maytag.

An enterprising Minnesota appliance repairman Paul Flynn, has developed a solution "smelly washer" granules. But the catch (from an environmental and cost) perspective is that to be effective the product has to be used at the highest water level setting, and the hottest water temperature (Flynn recommends turning up your water heater to its highest "scalding" setting), at least once a week. While it is unclear from the website whether or not preventing mildew from forming can be done in conjunction with washing a load of clothes (assuming you have one that can be washed in scalding water), removing the problem after it has already occurred requires a machine empty of everything put water.

Suddenly the cost and environmental savings of a newer front loading washer begin to be eroded!

Please don’t throw away your incandescent bulbs

I recently heard a well-meaning and very enthusiastic college student advise passersby to “Throw away those old bulbs! CFLs are good for the planet!” She made this declaration from behind a table containing a display about bulbs and she handed out coupons to encourage people to make the switch. I’ve read and heard this advice before, but I caution readers to stay their hands and keep their incandescent bulbs.
If you’re like most people, you don’t buy light bulbs one at a time. You probably have a few sitting in a closet somewhere, waiting to replace burned-out bulbs as they expire. You also likely have a bunch of them in sockets around your home. This collection of incandescent bulbs is full of embodied energy, a kind environmental sunk-cost.
Embodied energy exists in everything that has already been manufactured or built- houses, cars, televisions, bicycles, &c, and obviously, incandescent light bulbs. Energy was spent in extracting all of the raw materials, in processing those into the inputs that make the product, in actually manufacturing the product, and in getting it from the place of manufacture to the consumer, likely with some stops along the way. Like time, there’s no way to get energy back, once it’s been spent.
Since those incandescent bulbs, whether in the light socket or in the recycling bin, have already spent a considerable amount of energy, it’s an unnecessary waste of energy to simply pitch them. Instead, let them live out their short lives, and replace them with something better when they go out.