BIO CERTIFICATES
Raw materials and finished products
W.I.P. researches, chooses and uses high quality, eco-friendly raw materials, with high technologic properties, selected from chosen companies committed to respect Civil Code and social care norms.
Particularly WIP uses
A) Cotton from organic / fair trade cultivations
B) Biopolymers derived from starches
a) The organic cotton used comes from:
- Arasy foundation Paraguay, for which W.I.P. is the exclusive coordinator in Italy. Arasy cotton in Organic and Fair trade certified (pdf.cert)
- Bio Re projects Tanzania (pdf.cert)
The products sold under the Naturaè trademark containing organic cotton as well as the 100% Natural baby wipes are ICEA certified (pdf.cert)
b) Fibres and films realized with biopolymers derived from polysaccharides (vegetal starches) are used under the trademark agreement, with printing licence: films and packaging MATER-BI® by Novamont (www.novamont.it); INGEO® by Natureworks (www.natureworkspla.com); Lysorb® by ADM Group (www.lysac.com) superabsorbent gel; LOVE’N sanitary towels (hypoallergenicity certificate from Parma University), Naturaé Baby diapers (hypoallercenicity certificate from Parma University); Naturaè wet wipes (certificate from Ferrara University); 100% Natural wet wipes (certificate from Ferrara University).
Considerations
Biopolymers: a chance for the environment and health
Organic cotton: an obligate choice for the environment and society
Eco-friendly disposable diapers VS washable diapers
BIOPOLYMERS
Scientific research every now and then finds USEFUL solutions, as it is happening for bio-polymers; often they are late remedies to announced disasters as the abuse of oil-derived raw materials and energy sources.
Biopolymers are sourced from vegetals (hence from yearly renewable resources) and often are A or THE alternative solution to oil-derivates.
A technologic, not much romantic, vaguously natural response but useful to the requirement of tutelage of the environment in front of the serious menace that the coming generations are facing that of a UN-sustainable development of Earth.
Bio polymers are the “best of a bad bunch” really indispensable to the wealthy society, characterized by ultra rapid cycles, by Scientific Beliefs affirmed and discredited in a generation time, by disposable good.
They have been developed in a globally non ethic industrial context and as for most part of inventions their basis is the research for long term profit, and were pushed by those who detain at global level the reins of scientific research.
They must be anyhow considered as a practicable solution.
Biopolymers are not the solution to all the evil, until the consumer becomes aware of his “needs”- not any more essential very often coincide with the privation of the same “needs” that might be really necessary to others.
The “Bio” prefix is running the risk to become as exploited as the prefix “eco”, which has become victim of a commercial abuse with an unclear significance this favored a commercial abuse with an ambiguous significance, also because of the lack of ethic codesand international legislature.
Definition of the “organic cotton” culture
- pursue the sustainable development of the planet (at a scientific-economic level)
- pursue the respect of human being (ethical level)
- there is no use of GMO
- cultivation process avoids pesticides/herbicides/synthetic fertilizers
- biodynamic techniques are used (field rotation natural fertilizing plants - controlled exploitment of resources -barrier plant - natural defenses - use of renewable resources - drop-by-drop irrigation) - pollution-free converting processes (air/water /soil) are adopted - there is a certification released by international associations that protect organic agriculture (e.g. ICEA)
The numbers
Organic cotton worldwide production*:
· Extimations of organic cotton harvests worldwide: from 24.000> 32. 000ca. ton/year (0,15% of cotton worldwide) - 33.000 ha cultivated(0,23%) average growth rate (>10% year)
· Where: Asia (India-Turchia-Egypt-China) Africa (Tanzania-Uganda -Bening) America (US + Perù. Paraguay, Argentina)
Comparison with conventional cotton worldwide production 2005/06:
- Harvest standard cotton **:>24 milion ton/year (2004/05 20 mio ton/year = -5%) extension 27 mio acres (270.000 km2= United Kingdom surface)
- Production areas**:China (world leader consumption/production) ca 5,7 mio ton/year = 23% worldwide market; US ca 5,1 mio ton/year = 20% world market, India ca 4,05 mio t/Year = 16% world wide market)
Amount of the cotton market worldwide ( chemical products/seeds): approx 8.260 billions/$ (Us 1.652 billions = 20%) + costs for energy/transformation, working force etc
Comparison with synthetic fibers worldwide production 2005/06**:
· Polyester (PES) fibre production**: 32 mio/t of which > 10 mio/t polyester fibre used for 70% (7 billions/t) for disposable products for hygiene
· Production PLA Fibre (Ingeo) biodegradable, gained from the fermentation of vegetal sugars: < 100.000 t (0,3%)
Worldwide marktet value of raw materials for cotton cultivations (chemical products/seed)**: ca 8.260 mld/$ (Us 1.652 mld = 20%) + energy/work costs etc.
- Atmosphere (5.000 litres x 27 mio/hectars x 10 average times/year)
- Water consumption: 1,350 billion litres polluted by pesticides in the atmosphere (5.000 litres x 27 mio/ ha x averagely 10 times a year) - 70% evaporated in the athmospere with no use for vegetation
- Value of pesticides/herbicides: **: worldwide 3.810 billion/$ - in US 63,5 $/year x acre (762 mio $);
- Value of fertilizers: ** worldwide 3.260 billion/$ - in US 54.3 $/year x acre (652 mio $);
- Value of seeds; ** in the world 1.199 mld/$ - in US 19,8 $/year x acre (238 mio $)
Note:
1. organic cotton harvest: 310 kg/acre (India)*conventional cotton harvest: 360 kg/acre conventional cotton (US)
2. organic cotton cultivations implies the rotation of cultures and it takes 3-5 years to be able to “certify as organic” an area that was contaminated before from conventional industrialized cultivation techniques.
WHY CONSUME ORGANIC COTTON TODAY?
· Cotton cultivation is the second pollution cause in the agriculture worldwide: 5% world cultivated areas 25% pesticides introduced in the atmosphere
· To produce a T-shirt of 160 g/lm, about 25 litres of water are wasted - contaminated by pesticides and herbicides to grow the vegetal: 70% of such as water can be saved by using biodynamic cultivation techniques (drop by drop spreading)
· Cotton is a huge international business: pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, g.m.o. seeds, all of them are supplied by multinational groups, who often release funds for local growers to get the supply - exclusivity
· In the collective imaginary cotton is THE “natural” fibre for excellence: the "friendly-natural" fibre from which you would never expect a betrayal
· Skin allergies are constantly growing: in children growth of 5% every year
--------------------------
sources from:
* Remei/ Biore foundation ** National Cotton Council of America
SUSTAINABILITY - Estimations about sustainability of disposable and washable nappies
Definition of sustainability:
Wikipedia defines sustainable development as: development (including development of the cities, of communities, economical development ectc. Etc. ) that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability for future generations to meet their own needs , preserving the quality and quantity of natural resources (that are depletable even if often regarded as non exhaustible). The target is to maintain an economic development compatible with social equity and ecosystems, therefore operating considering environmental equilibrium.
Wikipedia adds: the first definition given to the concept of sustainability was the one contained on Brudtland report ( named after the Committee president, the Novegian Gro Harlem Brundtland) in 1987 and then reprised by World Commission on Environment and Development, WCED) by ONU.
Sustainability, as a general concept, is a value applied to a human action, whose balance between the beginning and the end does not harm the ecosystem hence preserves the possibility of using it also in the future, and boundlessly.
The same principle can be applied to the production of a good: since the selection of raw materials until their total reinstatement into the environment (in gas, liquid state or as compost), the balance must be equal to 0, so that a certain resource can be used again and again.
To be more practical: as matter cannot be newly created but transformed, in realizing, using and wasting a good it is possible to define as sustainable a product when a material is put back into the environment without damaging the eco system.
A partial or superficial view of the sustainability of a product, for example in a limited context as that of a family, risks to generate false attentions and judgment.
The discussion about baby diapers sustainability hence their impact on environment - finds its main importance in such small contexts.
The starting point of the discussion about sustainability for disposable Vs. washable diapers is a report realized in 2005 by the British Council, that studies and analyzes mass phenomena among which baby diapers.
The conclusion was that washable diapers are not more sustainable than the disposable ones.
This sentence was reprised by the association of baby diapers producers to justify their job. They define their operation as environmental friendly as during years the weight and size of nappies has been reduced up to 30% (this means using 30% less raw materials).
On the other hand they have never stated clearly the specifics of the materials they use and the related impact on the environment.
If what stated by British Council is true, Disposable baby diapers like the ones produced by W.I.P. srl have an even greater reason for being.
As extensive reports and analysis over the difference between standard disposable diapers and eco-sustainable diapers are missing, the picture we are sketching is to a certain degree partial.
The only certainty is that the products we are talking about are deeply affecting the environment, and the main scope of our report is to detect diapers having the lowest impact achievable.
It is necessary to start from an analysis of the production processes until the recovery of the raw materials used in both production chains for washable and disposable diapers .
It is necessary also to separate the consumer perception of the cost weighting on the family balance , from a scientific, uncritical and detailed analysis of data and realty aimed at the interest of the collectivity.
Last but not least HEALTH of children should be regarded as a COST: less physical complications mean less additional costs like medical visits, leaves from works, medicines, cosmetics.
Production and consume
a) Disposable nappies
The whole production chain tends towards optimization of consumes and costs including Energy, salaries etc. so that it is possible to produce huge amounts of good at the lowest possible costs maintaining steady profits.
Therefore during the first 30 months of a baby s life max 250 Kg of raw materials are used wastes included (5 changes per day x 30 days x 30 months x 47 grams (medium weight of a diaper, efficiency 90%).
The above reported data are definite and non debatable. Except for disposal costs, they are sustained all at once from families.
This system aims to the CERTAIN efficiency of the product in this case to limit the leakage risks, that would result in a loss of time and money to wash clothes, bed sheets ect.
The raw materials used are certain as well, but not declared, so that the consumer does not know their real value nor the direct and indirect consequences deriving from their use.
b) Washable Nappies
Calculating raw materials production cost and monetary outgo for the waste of washable nappies is more difficult.
To evaluate the material used in the same period (approx 30 months 2 years and half) it is necessary to consider:
1. Raw material and transformation costs are determinable. Other indirect costs environment exploitation (soil aridity from extensive cotton cultivation, pesticides, OGM use) and in some cases people exploitation especially in developing countries; the dependence from Corporations operating in biogenetic and Chemicals. Moreover in most of cases washable nappies are not made in organic cotton most of them is in synthetic materials such as PES pile.
2. The cost of disposable goods - e.g. the removable band used in many nappies to remove feces is usually synthetic; when natural it is poorly performing as it is made in cotton, viscose or other cellulosic fibre, and it remains wet in contact with skin.
3. The daily cost for diapers maintenance (water, Energy, soap, time).
4. Disposal cost sooner or later it comes a time for disposal also for washable nappies.
How to calculate the daily impact on a Family s income of washable diapers?
Washable Diapers are made up by different layers in cellulosic fibres like cotton or viscose. Those fibres are 1:20 times less absorbent than disposable nappies, where such fibres are mixed with Super Absorbent Powder. The logic deduction is that to be performing, washable nappies must contain a higher level of cellulosic fibres: the internal removable band weighs averagely between 80 and 150 gr.
It is realistically presumable that:
a) every family must wash nappies every day or maximum every 2 days; for each Kg of diapers washed (5 or 6 per day like the disposable ones) the most eco friendly washing machines consume 10 litres water (purified drinkable water) or in case of hand wash 20 litres are wasted. In 30 months potable water consumption is more than 4500 litres/kg. This means that compared with disposable nappies the consumption of raw materials is 23 25 times higher in washable nappies.
b) Domestic tools consume Energy and are NOT efficient like the industrial ones hence the waste per capita is remarkably higher.
c) The use of domestic appliances introduces CO2 and dioxines in the atmosphere
Besides the above reported costs, additional expenses have to be added:
c) costs for soaps - often commercial trademarks, containing a high concentration of non degradable and polluting components.
d) water purification costs (when apposite plants exist) that the user partly pays with the bill
and in the end
e) purified water is paid by families at a political price ( for example in Alto Adige it is almost free of charge) and is often paid back in form of taxes or lack of water during arid Seasons.
It is important to keep in mind that according to many Researchers and Economists water is not an endless good and will be in the near future the main pole on which the politic interests will focus hence we should better start preserving drinkable water now.
Disposal
It is practically easier and cheaper to dispose of 250 Kg of materials than to dispose of some thousand kilos. In many public administrations the competencies are separated even if they should be coordinated by a singe body.
Communication
There are no laws at European level imposing evaluation criteria about the impact of disposable goods on the environment.
Hence there is no communication problem - which is left to the free choice of producers and distributors, with easily imaginable consequences on the practical side.
Final considerations
Upon this basis we feel the need to submit the problem and to confirm:
a) Disposable Nappies:
a1. are NOT sustainable at all
a2. are a social problem because they are still regarded as an indispensabile accessory and there is an unconditionate use of them. Moreover the production chain is not controllable, nor transparent.
a3. eco-sustainable diapers (so called as thei contain degradable mateirals from natural origin in different percentages) are a partial replay to the matter of sustainability as they are not intorduced in a general plan or public strategy, nor are they a solution to the social issue (e.g. they are more expensive than standard diapers because of the different materials used).
b) Washable nappies:
b1. Nowadays they are widely promoted and used without scientific support for their sustainability
b.2. have hidden costs, that families will pay today but most of all in the future(e.g. exploitment of purified water sources)
b3. must conform to the principle that they must be eco-friendly and ethical (traceability of raw materials) than the others
b4. must aim to preserve wellness of the end user and give less healthy problems than disposable diapers. E.g. in some cases it is reported that washable diapers made in PES pile are eco-friendly and healthy.
b5. Help the development of local businesses rooted in the territory.
b5. constitute an efficient mean of communication and presently are the main deterrent for parents to stop using diapers as soon as possible.
We feel the need to stress that to help concretely babies and environment it is necessary to stop using Nappies as soon as possible at least not beyond 2 years of age.
The benefits for the collectivity and the Earth would be amazingly effective.
For further info about baby diapers & sustainability visit:
http://www.edana.org/documents_sections/edana_sustainability
|