The Chicago Tribune is in the middle of publishing an investigative series on the safety and effectiveness of chemical flame retardants -- which are used widely in plastic foam upholstery.

The first two stories in the series, "Playing with fire," charge that the chemical industry misled consumers and legislators in order to require widespread use of flame retardants.

The second story is particular is sure to raise eyebrows. "Big Tobacco wins fire marshals as allies in flame retardant push" charges that the tobacco industry worked behind the scenes to steer the debate away from making cigarettes less hazardous -- and towards requiring wider use of flame retardant chemicals.

A primary player in the debate, according to the story, was Peter Sparber, a former Tobacco Institute executive who helped create and steer the National Association of State Fire Marshals.

The meat for the report came from tobacco industry documents that became public after cigarette companies settled lawsuits over the health costs of treating smokers, according to the Tribune.

Watch for the next two installments in the series on Wednesday and Thursday.

A controversial pro-plastics section has been removed from a proposed environmental curriculum in California, according to a report by California Watch.

Last year California Watch had reported that Gerald Lieberman, a private consultant hired by California school officials, added a new section to the 11th-grade teachers' edition textbook called "The Advantages of Plastic Shopping Bags," with the title and some of the textbook language inserted almost verbatim from letters written by the American Chemistry Council.

In the wake of that disclosure, the state Environmental Protection Agency took another look at the proposed curriculum, which is part of a statewide K-12 curriculum on the environment.

In a follow-up story posted last week, Suzanne Rust of California Watch reported that the curriculum has been rewritten.

The lesson (PDF) "no longer includes a section titled, 'The Advantages of Plastic Shopping Bags,' and it incorporates more recent and relevant recycling statistics," she wrote.

The story quotes Bryan Ehlers, Cal/EPA's assistant secretary for education and quality programs, who said: "We went back and looked at the whole unit and really picked through it with a fine-tooth comb."

"Our concern always with the curriculum was to ensure integrity and accuracy," Ehlers said.

In "Advantages of Plastic Shopping Bags" workbook section had asked students to list some advantages of plastic bags. The correct answer, according to the teachers' edition, was: "Plastic shopping bags are very convenient to use. They take less energy to manufacture than paper bags, cost less to transport and can be reused."

California Watch is an initiative of the Center for Investigative Reporting.

CNN's Jane Velez-Mitchell covered the debate over sustainability of PET water bottles yesterday, and while the report is worth a look, it also has some serious problems.

With a "Ban the Bottle" graphic looming in the background, Velez-Mitchell tells viewers that she has an ally -- none other than 84-year-old Jean Hill, who led the effort to ban single-serve PET water bottles in Concord, Mass. (See PN's April 26 story, "Concord, Mass., voters pass ban on PET water bottles ")

I enjoyed hearing what Hill has to say -- it's the first time I've seen her on camera. Her message is that the bottle ban in Concord is a big deal, and the media's coverage has been shallow.

She's absolutely right about that.

Velez-Mitchell is a little over-the-top, literally applauding Hill and saying "Thank you for leading the crusade against plastic bottles." But that's her opinion, so it's OK.

But then the story stumbles by using some discredited information.

Velez-Mitchell describes the garbage patch as "a giant mound of garbage ... bigger than Texas in the Pacific Ocean." That's hyperbole that's been discredited by ocean researchers.

She also cites a website (thinkoutsidethebin.com) that says plastic debris kills 100,000 marine animals a year. Remember that one? I wrote last year about how Harold Johnson, a Saco, Maine, journalist and author of "The Flotsam Diaries" blog, researched and discredited the oft-cited number.

Note to CNN: Interesting story, but don't believe everything you read on the internet.

Auburn, N.Y.-based custom injection and blow molder Currier Plastics Inc. recently hosted 60 local second graders.

The pupils were learning about manufacturing in their social studies unit, according to "Currier Plastics shows second-graders their future can be both bright and local," a story in Auburn's The Citizen.

"We were studying a unit in social studies on manufacturing," teacher Ann Kott told the newspaper. "We thought, 'What would be a good way to bring this to life for them?'"

The visit to Currier Plastics helped the pupils learn the importance of math and science, gave them a peek at how computers are used in a modern factory, and helped them realize that there are local jobs available in the manufacturing sector.

Currier was founded in 1982 by the late Raymond Currier, an engineer that bought two injection molding machines to form his own business. His son, John Currier, is currently the company's president.

The company takes pride in its work with the local community -- Plastics News' Frank Antosiewicz mentioned the efforts in a story last year about a $2 million expansion that included adding more blow molding and injection molding equipment.

"Herman Avenue second graders have been visiting Currier Plastics for about 15 years now," John Currier said in a recent press release, "and my son Tim was in one of the first classes to visit. He now works in our maintenance department."

When the plastics industry talks about "sustainability," usually the emphasis is on things like energy efficiency, recycling or carbon footprint.

But reaching out to the local community, and getting teachers and students to understand the importance and impact of the industry, is just as important to plastics sustainability in future generations.

The plastic debris problem in the ocean could be worse than some studies have estimated, according to a new report.

University of Washington oceanographer Giora Proskurowski and Tobias Kukulka of the University of Delaware say they found that high winds push lightweight plastic particles deep below the ocean surface -- deeper than previous studies had realized.

That meant decades of research on plastic marine debris may in some cases vastly underestimate the true amount of plastic debris in the oceans, Proskurowski said in a news release from UW.

Proskurowski's data came from a 2010 North Atlantic expedition, where he and his team collected samples at the surface, plus an additional three or four depths down as far as 100 feet.

"Almost every tow we did contained plastic regardless of the depth," he said.

Proskurowski said more research is needed, because at this point oceanographers just don't have a good handle on how much plastic is in the ocean.

He added: "On this topic, what science needs to be geared toward is building confidence that scientists have solid numbers and that policy makers aren't making judgments based on CNN reports."

Research for the report included data from the Sea Education Association's Plastics at SEA program.

Here are some short takes on plastics headlines from the past week:

"Lego gets snapped at over girls' line of toys," from the San Francisco Chronicle's SFGate.com. According to the story, "a pair of feminist activists" is unhappy with the new Lego Friends line of toys designed for girls.

Characters in the Lego Friends line include Mia, an athlete; Olivia, an inventor; Stephanie, an animal lover; Emma, who enjoys fashion; and Andrea, who likes to sing and dance.

The activists, Stephanie Cole and Bailey Shoemaker-Richards, started a petition on Change.org protesting Lego's marketing strategy.

And more than 55,000 people have signed the petition.

OK...

"Plastic remains No. 1 pollutant on Jersey coast," from the Greater Media Newspapers chain in Manalapan, N.J.

The story notes that according to Clean Ocean Action, 7,500 people participated in 2011 Beach Sweeps on the New Jersey Shore, and they collected 452,698 pieces of marine debris that had washed up in 65 locations.

Some 83 percent of the total was plastic.

There was some good news -- for the first time in 19 years, cigarette debris (filters, packaging, lighters and cigar tips) were not in the top three pollutants.

So perhaps there's hope after all for changing consumer behavior.

Thanks to all the volunteers who participated in the Beach Sweeps. Were there any Plastics Blog readers in the clean-up crews?

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has put a lot of muscle behind its sustainability campaign -- global plastics companies are well aware of the company's supplier scorecards.

But the nonprofit Institute for Local Self-Reliance is questioning the retailer's committment to the cause in a report released today -- Earth Day -- called "Walmart's Greenwash: How the company's much-publicized sustainability campaign falls short, while its relentless growth devastates the environment." (PDF)

There's only one mention of plastics in the report, and it's not critical. Wal-Mart's plastics recycling record is held up as an example of a project that the company wants environmentalists -- and the public -- to notice:

Walmart's sustainability campaign is not your typical corporate greenwash. It is more complex and clever than that. It has enough substance mixed in with the spin to draw you in. It's easy to get swept up in the big numbers Walmart can roll out -- like the 30 tons of plastic hangers it recycles every month -- and to be charmed by the very fact of this giant company, with its hard-nosed corporate culture, using a word like 'sustainability.'

More than a few environmentalists have been won over. With their endorsements and the flood of positive press that seems to follow each of Walmart's green announcements, the company has managed to turn around flagging poll numbers, shift its labor practices out of the limelight, and, most crucially, crank up its expansion machine.

ILSR takes the company to task for failing to take action on climate change, and falling fall short of a goal set seven years ago to use more renewable energy.

Some more materials-related items, potentially of interest to Plastics Blog readers:

• The report criticizes Wal-Mart's sale of shoddy products, like $6.24 toasters and clothing that doesn't last.
• It question's the company's Green Product Rankings, an "ambitious project" that "doesn't have much to show for itself."

The report says:

In the first year or two after its founding in July 2009, the Sustainability Consortium was closelipped about its progress. In the last few months, the consortium has finally said that it is not in fact developing a rating system or even product-specific information. It is assembling general lifecycle data for types of products - a typical environmental footprint for orange juice or detergent, say, but not for specific brands within those categories.

Spokesperson Jon Nicol says this data could be a starting point for a rating system should a company wish to develop one. So far, the consortium has finished just 10 assessments.23 A Walmart supercenter carries roughly 140,000 items across thousands of product types.

Was Walmart woefully naive about what it would take to create the kind of Sustainability Index it promised? Was it a miscalculation to have corporations play a big role in developing environmental standards for their own products? Should Walmart have put its efforts instead into refining and adapting an existing rating system, one not controlled by industry, such as GoodGuide? Was the index just a PR ploy from the start?

The auto industry is getting serious about using plastic composites to reduce weight and improve fuel economy.

Every week, it seems, we're seeing stories about automakers and suppliers using or studying ways to use plastics and/or composites to make vehicles lighter.

Today the headline came from Ford Motor Co. and Dow, which are teaming up to investigate ways to bring carbon fiber into high-volume auto production.

The project is part of Ford's goal of cutting average vehicle weight by 750 pounds.

For some additional insight into this issue, check out this video from our sister publication Automotive News. It features Plastics News' own auto industry beat reporter Rhoda Miel.

For some additional context, check out these stories on automotive weight savings, all in the past three weeks:

Teijin building $7.9 million composites center in Michigan

Magna and Zoltek team up on carbon fiber SMC

MuCell helps lighten VW Golf instrument panel

Partners developing auto parts reinforced with steel

When I attended Plastics News' last "Plastics in Lightweight & Electric Vehicles" conference, I was impressed with what the plastics industry people were saying about the potential weight savings they could bring to the table.

But at the time, I got the feeling that many automakers felt they could hit aggressive fuel economy goals through other means, like powertrain improvements, and slightly cutting the size of vehicles.

Now it's beginning to look like automakers are more serious about the potential of plastics and composites.

Is that the result of federal MPG mandates, or consumers who are starting to believe that they're never again going to see $2 per gallon gasoline?

Jean Hill, the 84-year-old Concord, Mass., grandmother of six, is at it again -- trying to ban sales of single-serve plastic water bottles.

According to the Boston Herald, Concord residents will vote at an April 25 town meeting on a bylaw that would ban sales of bottled water in sizes of one liter or less, except in an emergency.

Concord is a historic town -- site of the first battle of the Revolutionary War. If the bylaw passes, it apparently would be the first of its kind in the United States.

This isn't Hill's first attempt to ban single-serve water bottles. Last year the town narrowly defeated her measure, by a 272-265 vote.

"I'm coming back next year. I'm 83 and I'm tough. I don't give up," Hill said at the time.

While local retailers are worried that they'll lose business to competitors in nearby towns, Hill says they have nothing to worry about.

"If the ban did pass -- and I'm quite optimistic that it will -- I believe that any loss of revenue would be ... more than made up if they sell Thermos bottles, refillable bottles," she told the Herald.

I'm not a big user of single-serve water bottles. I prefer tap water, at home and at work. And I acknowledge that the recycling rate for these containers is way too low -- Plastics News has editorially supported bottle deposit legislation for years.

That said, I think there's something wrong with allowing voters to decide which legal, safe and convenient products stores can sell.

If Hill wants to discourage residents from buying single-serve bottled water, I've got no problem with that. But making it illegal doesn't mesh with the concepts of freedom and liberty that are synonymous with the name Concord.

Add actress Kyra Sedgwick to the list of celebrities who are crusading against single-use plastics.

Last week Sedgwick, star of TV's "The Closer," moderated ""A Global Call to End Plastic Pollution" at the United Nations in New York.

Lisa Kaas Boyle, an environmental attorney, co-founder of the Plastic Pollution Coalition and a board chair at Heal the Bay, posted a blog item about the talk over the weekend on The Huffington Post.

The post, "Kyra Sedgwick Leads Global Call to End Plastic Pollution at United Nations," quotes from her remarks at the UN event:

"When I became aware that plastic trash like the disposable plastic water bottle would survive not only my lifetime but my children's and their children's lifetimes, I knew that we, as a society, had a major problem. When I learned that in developed countries like the U.S., we recycle at best around 30 percent of the plastic we use and that even then, we turn the plastic into relatively useless items like plastic ashtrays, I became obsessed with the waste. I can be thrown into a severe anxiety attack at my neighborhood spinning class as I see mothers whom I know to be intelligent responsible parents go through a jumbo size water and then throw it 'away.'

There is no 'away,' and much of the plastic packaging we use could end up in one of the five Gyres -- swirling areas of the world's ocean current where trash is concentrated. Plastic pollution kills and injures wildlife. Tiny plastic pellets in the water absorb toxins, and studies are now being done to learn whether it is poisoning fish, which is globally the most important source of protein for humans.

I have done my best to alter my lifestyle to help solve this problem; avoiding plastic whenever possible and spread the word about its damaging effects. But I can only do so much. This is where the government must step in. There is a real solution that can be implemented now.

Who's Emily Utter? She's an anti-plastics activist who helped pass a ban on plastic bags in San Francisco, and now she's working to help other cities and towns do the same.

Utter is making "huge progress ... in spite of the plastic and chemical industries millions of dollars and best efforts," according to a Q&A interview with her that's making the rounds in environmental blogs.

The original interview, in Linda Rubright's "The Delicious Day" blog, is headlined "The Woman the Plastic Industry Can't Beat."

The interview has a David vs. Goliath tone, which is understandable given the subject matter.

To help balance that, I'll mention here that the U.S. plastics industry traditionally doesn't rank all that high on lists of most influential trade groups.

Also, let's assume that the plastics industry is correct -- how would you expect it to respond to numerous efforts across the country to ban or tax legal products? It's one thing to urge consumers to use less plastic, and quite another to make them illegal.

Here are a few snippets from the interview:

How would I go about getting a plastic bag ban in my town?

If it is just an individual that wants to get involved I always recommend people look for other groups in their area that are either interested in doing it or are currently doing something about the plastic bag problem - a Sierra Club Chapter, a Surfrider chapter or an environmental club are good places to start. Once people do the research they often find there are already groups in their area working on the plastic bag issue.

Then, once a group has formed they should check out the city council to determine the environmental leader within the council that would sponsor plastic bag ban or fee legislation and set up a meeting to see if the council person identified is interested in sponsoring legislation.

Are there are general challenges that everyone is facing regardless of town size or structure in passing plastic bag legislation?

The plastic industry. They are extremely well funded and they will send their representatives all over the country to fight the legislation.

How are people overcoming the challenges the plastic industry is creating?

Perseverance. We see the impact of plastic on our health and on our environment. There is a lot passion and understanding about this issue now. We see the plastic bags in our neighborhoods, in our parks and on our beaches. People know there are practical and easy ways to take care of this problem. We have seen this in Europe for years and now the US is finally starting to catch up. With all of the global examples, we are also seeing global momentum for this issue. It gives us the mental support to keep at it. It is not like we are proposing something totally out of the blue. Everything we are proposing is practical and it has a really obvious impact that we can see immediately.

It seems like the plastic industry would be kind of scary, especially to little towns.

I think for some of the smaller towns the plastics industry just kind of says, 'We are not going to bother.' They are focused on bigger targets and being strategic about it. Everyone looks to California for environmental legislation and the plastic industry is really trying to battle us here. Given the focus on suing California cities, some of the non-Californian cities have had an easier time because all of the plastic industry resources are going to California. I think if Denver brought the plastic bag issue up again you would see the plastic industry bringing in the big guns again. I know Chicago is starting to work on legislation and we will see the plastic industry come out in force. This is also why the plastic industry shows up to the smaller towns outside of Chicago because they see when a smaller town outside of a bigger city does it it spurs other cities around them to do it.

On top of the rest of the plastics industry's marine litter problems, get ready for a new twist. Experts say debris from last year's tsunami that devastated parts of Japan are headed for the West Coast of the United States and Canada.

According to a "West Coast officials agree on plan to deal with tsunami debris" from The Canadian Press, the tsunami swept 5 million metric tons of debris into the ocean.

The experts say the debris will hit North American beaches later this year or in early 2013.

And given the nature of marine trash, the most visible products are going to be plastic.

I've heard people argue that marine litter is an education problem, not a plastics problems. But this tsunami debris is pretty clear proof that the issue isn't quite so black and white.

We're not talking about people intentionally failing to dispose of or recycle their plastic trash -- this was unavoidable.

Unless the industry gets out in front of this issue, it's got the potential to be a black eye.

Attendees to the China Plastics in Automotive 2012 conference in Shanghai on April 17 will gain insights into Ford Motor Co.'s vision for creating greener, more lightweight and fuel-efficient vehicles globally when they hear from keynote speaker Jennifer Gilhool.

She's Ford Asia Pacific & Africa's Shanghai-based director of sustainability, environment and safety engineering.

Gilhool has a law degree from the University of Michigan. she started in Ford's legal department, then moved to the regulatory side of the business, working on safety and compliance matters.

Other topics to be covered at the conference include vehicle design trends, and the role plastics and advanced polymer composites will play in interiors, seating, powertrain and under-the-hood components, as well as in electrification and hybrid technology.

Check the agenda for a list of other speakers.

The bilingual event is being organized by Plastics News at the Kerry Hotel on the day before the huge Chinaplas 2012 trade show. See full event details at www.pnchina.com/cpa2012.

A few months ago I wrote about the potential for viewers to take away an anti-plastics message from "The Lorax," a Dr. Seuss-inspired film that opened today.

But the tone of that post, "'The Lorax' pits kids against plastics," wasn't quite right.

Upon further review, I think the American Chemistry Council's response is more on target.

ACC knew the film was coming, so it prepared a website designed to capture kids' enthusiasm for the film and its central message around making a difference.

ACC's "Plastics and the Lorax" isn't about fighting back against anti-plastics stereotypes (you may recall that the film's protaganist lives in "Thneedville," a town made of plastic).

Instead, ACC is focused on how kids can help recycle more plastic. The site educates visitors about what plastics can be recycled and how they are used.

ACC's Jennifer Killinger, the senior director of sustainability and public outreach, says the site went live yesterday. ACC is taking a low-key approach to the film -- after all, the audience is children.

The intent of the site is to promote recycling and give them simple tips to get more plastics in the bin.\

But ACC's not picking a fight with Dr. Suess -- which seems like the right approach.

Have you noticed any of the new package recycling labels?

Some manufacturers are voluntarily using the labels in an effort to make recycling easier. One of the biggest problems with the status quo labels is related to plastics -- specifically, complaints from consumers and recyclers who say many people don't understand the chasing arrows resin ID codes.

The new Package Recovery Label System was developed for the Sustainable Packaging Coalition. Mike Verespej, Plastics News' staff reporter in Washington, has written a few stories about the project, including "Recycling campaign kicks off as OEMs launch label system," and "New package labels aim to simplify recycling." Check those links for background on the project.

Today, thanks to a tweet from the American Chemistry Council's "Recycle Plastic" feed, I found a handy website that's supposed to help the public navigate the new labels.

The labels are being called "How 2 Recycle Labels," and the site is www.how2recycle.info.

Check it out for more information, and to better understand exactly what the labels mean.

Meanwhile, to help you recognize them when you see them, here's an example of one of the new labels:

Here's a suprising fact: It has been five years since Procter & Gamble Co. launched a brand in the United States, and that product was niche probiotic Align.

Is P&G, which has a long history as a creator of innovative products, slipping?

Jack Neff at our sister publication Advertising Age takes a close look at P&G this week with this story: "Why Some Think P&G's Innovation Is Slipping."

Some analysts "doubt the power of P&G's innovation machine and voiced concerns that the company is too big and too complacent," Neff writes.

Chairman and CEO Bob McDonald is aware of the criticism and he's working on rebuilding the company's image. P&G spent more than $2 billion on R&D in the past two years, and it has projects in the pipline, he said.

What's the view of plastics suppliers to P&G?

We know on the packaging side that the company has been undertaking significant materials-related changes -- first disclosed in 2010 ("P&G outlines broad sustainability plans").

More recently we saw a small step toward that goal, when the company revealed its new Gillette Fusion ProGlide packaging.

Does P&G have more plastics-related innovations ready to hit the market? Neff's story hints at one: a product named T@U, a patch for removable or temporary tattoos.

In the past few months, the curtain has been pulled back at Apple Inc. and the public is getting a close look at how the company operates.

But the spotlight hasn't just been on the legacy of Steve Jobs or on cool products like the iPad and iPhone. The media also has been starting to pay a lot more attention to working conditions at Apple's suppliers, including injection molder Foxconn International.

We've seen:

• In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad, a Jan. 25 story by Charles Duhigg and David Barboza in The New York Times.
• Mr Daisey and the Apple Factory, from Chicago Public Media's "This American Life." The report, which aired Jan. 6, told the story of a self-described "worshipper in the cult of Mac" who was disillusioned by the company's outsourcing practices.
• The Future of Foxconn from John Biggs of Techcrunch.com. The series, which started Nov. 24, took a close look on the molding company itself, including a visit to the massive Foxconn City plant in Shenzhen that had 14 worker suicides in 2010.

And that just might mean real change that will have an impact on the consumer electronics industry -- and possibly beyond.

Ed Frauenheim, a senior editor at sister publication Workforce Management. had a good blog post on the topic last week: Bad Apple: Could the Era of Exploitation Outsourcing Be Near Its End?

Frauenheim writes that problems at Foxconn have been reported before, but U.S. consumers have just started to pay attention.

"In recent years, there has been a shift in attitudes among consumers toward a desire to do business with companies that show 'kindness' in their operations," he wrote. "People also are increasingly identifying as 'global citizens,' meaning they have more empathy for people on the other side of the world. What's more, tools such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube give people more opportunities to express themselves. This means companies increasingly face penalties for mistreating people--whether those workers are direct employees or not."

He concluded: "The bottom line for Apple and other companies is that a shameful supply chain is less and less viable. Happily, the age of farming out worker exploitation is coming to a close."

Let's hope Frauenheim is right, and OEMs like Apple will play more attention to issues like working conditions and safety in their supply chains.

Unfortunately, I don't expect companies that have been treating workers humanely all along will benefit from this attention on "exploitation outsourcing." Instead, we'll see more pressure on the offenders to clean up their act. That's a pity.

I've described the proliferation of bag bans and taxes around the country -- indeed around the world -- like a Whac-a-Mole game.

For the industry, they're always popping up in different places, always requiring an urgent response.

For a while, all the action was in California. Now we've got bans and taxes on both coasts, and proposals in Texas, Ohio, Illinois -- just about everywhere.

Wondering how to keep up? There are several websites devoted to plastic bag laws. One I rediscovered this morning, thanks to Susan Freinkel's blog, is called plasticbaglaws.org.

Jennie Roemer, a San Francisco Bay-area lawyer, started the site as a resource for her own research, writes Freinkel, author of "Plastic: A Toxic Love Story."

In addition to keeping up with bag bans and taxes, the site also includes a links section with descriptions of all the sites.

Impressive collection -- although I wonder why there's no link for the Save the Plastic Bag Coalition.

Here's a good link for all the environmentalists in the plastics industry -- as well as those who realize that it's in the industry's best interest to irmprove its recycling record.

Today the American Chemistry Council sent a link to RecycleYourPlastics.org, a web site created to help communities recycle more plastics.

The portal includes information on different types of plastics, recent news releases recycling rates for film, containers and non-container rigid plastics.

It also includes tips, tools, best practices, case studies, and a section where readers can submit questions to experts.

The new report on plastic film and bag recycling is encouraging, but it's not going to end the debate on grocery bag taxes and bans.

Plastics News' Mike Verespej reported today that film and bag recycling in the United States jumped 14 percent in 2010 to 971.8 million pounds -- the first annual increase of more than 3 percent since 2006.

But Mark Murray, executive director of the Sacramento, Calif.-based Californians Against Waste, still feels that bag recycling has been a "failure."

Is recycling the last word on the bag issue? The National Center for Policy Analysis doesn't think so.

Today our sister publication Waste & Recycling News posted a column by H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at NCPA, arguing that plastic bag bans hold hidden costs, and result in "little or no benefit for the environment."

"Contrary to the myth propagated by environmental lobbyists and other plastic bag opponents, plastic bags are rarely single-use items," Burnett wrotes. "Rather, long after plastic bags transport the groceries, people find a variety of ways to reuse them. They are used as lunch bags, car litter bags, to line bathroom trash bins, to collect dog waste and to seal soiled diapers. Other uses include carrying donation items to goodwill, transporting laundry to the cleaners and securing items in the garage and attic. Some people carry bags on walks to pick up stray trash.

"Without them, we will likely buy more trash bags and baggies to compensate. In stores that ban plastic grocery bags, shoppers have become creative, using thin plastic bags from the fresh vegetable sections of stores to carry out groceries -- double- and triple-lining them to make them work. Now that´s a waste nightmare and a sheer waste of resources."

How appropriate -- a day after the Super Bowl, Forbes.com has a Q&A interview today with the "other" Tom Brady -- you know, the plastics guy.

Of course I'm talking about Tom Brady, the founder of Plastic Technologies Inc., the packaging and recycling specialists in Holland, Ohio.

Gregg Fairbrothers interviewed Brady for a Forbes section on leadership. The interview covers his background at Owens-Illinois Inc., including his role in the company's efforts to commercialize PET containers, plus insight into his decision to leave the company and form PTI.

"Like many entrepreneurs, I began as a company of one person. I was Chairman, CEO, President, Chief Engineer, and Customer Service Manager; I was also the accountant and the janitor," Brady told Fairbrothers.

"The PTI family of companies now includes two manufacturing companies, two technical development and engineering service companies and three joint venture companies that license technology or sell specialty services to the packaging industry. We have more than 200 employees worldwide and many of the products you buy every day are sold in plastic containers designed by one of our companies.

"Interestingly, all of the other PTI companies were the "brainchildren" of PTI employees. Today we remain a private, employee-owned company and only a handful of professional employees have left us over our 26-year history," he said.

Check out the link for the full interview. Unlike that other Tom Brady, this one should be feeling pretty good about his team's performance today.

On top of the Forbes interview, I discovered just minutes after I posted this today that Brady is a new member of the Plastics Hall of Fame. He's one of 10 new inductees who will join the hall on April 1 at NPE2012 in Orlando, Fla.)

Here's the full list:

Thomas E. Brady, PhD. A pioneer of today's PET industry, Dr. Brady did fundamental research on polymer and packaging technology, founded Plastic Technologies, Inc. (PTI) and six other packaging-related companies, and received patents relating to PET and packaging.

Lawrence J. Broutman, ScD. A prolific researcher, Dr, Broutman has developed techniques for the analysis and characterization of polymer materials that have spurred further research and generated innovation in many plastics sectors. He has written nearly 170 technical publications and two textbooks, been awarded four patents, and received five best paper honors from the Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE).

Jay L. Gardiner. A tireless volunteer for plastics causes, Mr. Gardiner has been continuously active in service to the industry for more than two decades and has held leadership positions or board memberships with many plastics organizations.

Jobst U. Gellert. One of the most prolific inventors in Canadian history, Mr. Gellert has been awarded hundreds of patents. He patented the first commercially viable hot runner system in 1965 and built Mold-Masters Limited, a leading worldwide supplier of hot runner systems.

H. Gunther Hoyt. Mr. Hoyt has played important roles in the internationalization of the plastics industry and in the progress of SPI and the NPE exposition. He has also been a technological leader in the field of machine components.

Robert P. Kittredge. An entrepreneur and philanthropist, Mr. Kittredge founded Fabri-Kal Corp. in 1950. It is now the eighth-largest thermoformer in North America, serving the packaging market. Mr. Kittredge also established the Fabri-Kal Foundation, which has provided millions of dollars in scholarships and community grants.

H. Richard Landis. An inventor and entrepreneur, Mr. Landis has been a pioneer in injection molding. His company, Landis Plastics, grew from a one-machine operation in 1956 to an enterprise with six U.S. locations employing more than 2,100 people. He has been awarded 16 patents in the design of plastic parts. He participated in SPI's development of the resin identification code for the "chasing-arrow" recycling symbol.

Robert A. Malloy, PhD. An educator, researcher, and author, Dr. Malloy chairs one of the leading U.S. plastics engineering departments and has trained many engineers who have gone on to make an impact on the industry. He holds 16 patents, has been a principle investigator for more than 70 funded research projects, and has authored or co-authored more than 60 conference and journal papers in the field of plastics engineering.

Daniel W. McGuire, Jr. Dubbed "the father of resin distribution," Mr. McGuire founded the first plastics distributor in North America. His vision was to create an organization to fill in the gap between resin producers and small or medium-size processors. This became the mission of his company, General Polymers.

Timothy W. Womer. A widely recognized authority on plasticizing screws, Mr. Womer has designed thousands of these components. He holds 15 patents and is a prolific author and lecturer. He has been extensively involved with industry associations, held a number of leadership positions, and received several of the industry's most prestigious honors.

We've seen this story hundreds of times -- which type of bag is better, paper or plastic? Frequently the coverage is not complimentary to plastic.

Toronto's The Globe and Mail deserves credit for bringing some balance to its Feb. 1 report, "Which is greener, paper or plastic? You might be surprised."

The story focuses on what types of bags local retailers use, and how some of them explain the decision to their customers.

The story isn't entirely pro-plastic, despite what the headline may imply. But Augusta Dwyer covers both the pluses and minuses of the different options in a balanced way.

That's good for consumers, who need facts to help make decisions -- not one-sided lectures.

Toronto retailers have been using fewer plastic bags since 2009, when they were required to start charging consumers 5 cents per bag.

That's resulted in a 75 percent drop in plastic bag use, according to the story.

I'm praising one company today for its sustainability message, so forgive me for going negative on two others.

My targets -- Repurpose Compostables Inc. and Bed Bath & Beyond stores, for their misleading messages about line of compostable cups made from polylactic acid.

A few weeks ago PlasticsNews.com posted a story about the cups from our sister publication Waste & Recycling News.

The original WRN story said: "Repurpose cups are made from polylactic acid -- made from corn -- and require 65 percent less carbon dioxide to make than plastic, the company said. The lids also are compostable, and no plastic means the cups are nontoxic."

Plastics industry defender and consulting engineer Allan Griff spotted that paragraph and sent me a quick note: "I assume the cupmaker said this, but PLA is a plastic, isn't it?"

Absolutely right, I replied, so I quickly corrected the story.

But Griff wasn't finished. He did some research on what else Repurpose and Bed Bath were saying about the cups, and he found more misleading information.

Both companies were openly contrasting their PLA product with "plastic," he said, feeding the public's fear of the plastics industry.

Griff found this on the Bed Bath & Beyond site:

The plant-based cup is made from corn, not oil like traditional disposable cups, so it's non-toxic and BPA free. It also lowers your carbon footprint, and uses soy based inks, so it is compatible with a zero waste program. Includes set of 12 cups and 12 lids.

As Griff points out, mentioning BPA in a commercial message about foam cups is like putting "no trans fats" on a water bottle label. Of course there's no bisphenol A. There's none in polystyrene cups, either.

So he added this review to the company's website, in the consumer comments section:

BB&B misinforms us. The cup material may be compostable, but who does this at home, and how many cities do it? As for petroleum, it takes plenty of petrobased energy to grow the corn and convert it to the compostable plastic (yes, plastic) PLA. As for carbon dioxide, by far the biggest producers are heating, cooling, lighting and transportation, and all this greenwashing is really a distraction from having to deal with room temperatures, lighting waste, and capricious car use.

He did some more checking and found that the cup maker, Repurpose, said this about itself:

Repurpose was founded in 2009 by a group of young environmental entrepreneurs, looking for quality solutions to the problem of single-use petroleum-based plastic products ... its mission [is] to replace all single-use disposable plastics with high quality, innovative, plant-based alternatives. Repurpose makes products from plants, not petroleum, using Ingeo resin.

Its FAQ section sometimes calls the cups polymers, but stresses the differences between PLA and plastic. For example, it says: "Repurpose products are now available to consumers and to businesses allowing everyone the opportunity to lessen their dependence on oil, lower their carbon footprint, and find non-toxic, safe alternatives to plastic."

Looking further, Griff found more information that he considered misleading.

One section says: "The revolutionary new insulated cup requires no sleeve, uses 65 percent less CO2 than a traditional cup to produce, and can be composted in 90 days."

Griff wrote to me: "But what are they talking about? We don't use CO2 to make cups. And we want to get it out of the atmosphere, not leave more in!

"What's a "traditional cup" now? Do they mean the foam cup, or the Starbuck Standard -- a paper cup with PE coating and a paper sleeve? If they mean that the manufacture of the cup uses less energy and production of energy creates CO2, that's creating less, not using less! And if they compare with paper as traditional, doesn't paper degenerate in composting as well?

"And if they compare [Repurpose cups] with foam cups, I'm not sure it takes more energy to produce them. The biggest energy impact of the foam cups arises from their lightness and volume, which means fewer cups per truck and thus more truck fuel per cup to ship it to its point of sale/use. I don't think they think that way. They got the words "less CO2" together, that sounds green and that's enough for them."

Did I mention that Griff is a pit bull when it comes to defending plastics against misinformation?

What's the next step? Griff is sharing his correspondence with the American Chemistry Council's plastics division, and he's also including it in his file of topics to discuss in a course he teaches at the University of California Berkeley Adult Extension program, "Plastics in the Environment."

That's not a typo -- Griff is teaching a course on plastics in the environment at Berkeley. Plastics Blog readers in California should consider enrolling -- it's sure to be both informative and entertaining.

Meanwhile, I'm happy to share Griff's efforts to shine the light on some companies that are using "bolonium" [one of his favorite terms] to prey on public plastophobia.

Well done, Allan Griff. Keep up the good work.

I don't expect to see commercial messages that reference plastic resin consumption during an NFL game.

But in commercials that ran last weekend during the football playoffs, Glad Products Co. chose to highlight source reduction achieved by its its Tall Kitchen trash bag line.

According to the ads, the bags are stronger, yet use less plastic, allowing the company to save 6.5 million pounds of plastic per year.

Or as the company puts it, the equivalent of keeping 140 million extra trash bags out of landfills annually.

Seems like a simple, clear message. But will the public understand? Can consumers be convinced that source reduction is a legitimate path to product sustainability?

It might be a tough sell, since many consumers are pre-programmed to think that the only way for a product to be sustainable is for it to be biodegradable or contain recycled content.

But Glad Products deserves credit for this very high profile attempt at educating customers about source reduction -- a strategy that's widely used by plastics processors.

Are you curious about who supplies the molded parts, packaging or tooling for products like the iPhone an iPad?

Now the names are public: Apple Inc. last week released a list of its suppliers (PDF).

Apple released the list as part of its Supplier Responsibility Progress Report, which includes details on the company's efforts to improve worker protections and factory conditions -- tracking things like worker safety, environmental goals, and use of underage labor.

Here are links to a handlful of Apple's plastics-related suppliers:

Flextronics International Ltd.

Foxconn Technology Group

Jin Li Mould Manufacturing Pte Ltd.

Prent Corp.

Check the full list for more familiar names, as well as suppliers of competiting materials and other products.

And here's a link for companies interested in information about becoming a supplier to Apple.

The future of bioplastics is a little fuzzier today, following Archer Daniels Midland Co.'s decision to drop out of its alliance polyhydroxyalkanoate resin company Metabolix Inc.

I included some insight into the news in the story posted on PlasticsNews.com last night:

• Metabolix reported a loss of $29.2 milliion for the nine month period that ended Sept. 30, on sales of $567,000. ADM considered the business one that was "not delivering sufficient results now," and it was "not expected to deliver sufficient results within a reasonable timeframe."
• Despite the steady news coverage of biopolymers in recent months -- remember Coke's commitment to using more bio-based resins? -- I differentiated the activity in making conventional resins made from plant materials vs. making corn-based polymers like PHA.

This morning I asked PN's two authorites on plant-based polymers, Frank Esposito and Mike Verespej, for their thoughts on the news. Here are some of our additional observations:

Metabolix and ADM started production of their Telles-brand PHA last year at a 110-million-pound-per-year plant in Clinton, Iowa. Typically that's the point where a resin takes a big step forward, when high-volume production brings down prices.

But PHA is still substantially more expensive than polylactic acid -- its main competition in plant-based resin. And lower prices for conventional plastics like polyethylene and polypropylene hurt prospects for bio-based materials, too.

Metabolix's stock price has fallen more than 40 percent today, to about $2.60 per share, following ADM's announcement.

Metabolix said it is conducting a strategic review of its business plans for 2012, and that it will restructure its bioplastics business and downsize its operations. CEO Richard Eno said the company is still "committed to successfully commercializing PHA bioplastics."

Going forward without ADM will require a major change in strategy, though.

What makes a package sustainable -- and can plastics packages qualify?

Our friend JoAnn Hines -- the Packaging Diva -- answers those questions and more in a blog post today by Jim Tierney on MultichannelMerchant.com.

Here are a few highlights from 6 Myths and Facts about What's Green Packaging -- check the link for the full list.

And remember, these are myths!

• Recyclability is the only answer. Unfortunately although recycling packaging makes sense, in many cases the infrastructure isn't in place to make it a widespread practice. Consumers have to want to recycle too. In many cases it's simply too much trouble to save and dispose of in a recycling facility. Another quandary, washing out containers to recycle (you are using energy and water so where's the eco win?)
• All plastic packaging is bad. Not true. There are so many new compounds and formulations that have been introduced. Companies are seriously looking at ways to not only reduce the amount of plastic used but alternative methods for disposal and reuse. I might mention here too that in many cases the eco plastic alternatives use more energy to manufacture and have disposal issues of their own.

Check out JoAnn Hines' website for more on sustainable packaging, plus a link to her blog.

Journalist and author Harold Johnson has posted a column on the perils of plastics pollution that's worth a look, even for readers who are unapologetically pro-plastics.

You may remember Johnson -- he's the writer who researched and debunked the oft-cited statistic that plastic debris kills 100,000 marine animals a year.

He's also author of The Flotsam Diaries blog, where he records all the trash he picks up on a quiet beach in Saco, Maine..

Johnson's latest column appeared in The Portland Press Herald's "Maine Voices" section,

The headline: "In Maine and around the world, oceans, shores filling with plastic." Obviously he's not a big fan of single-use disposable plastics.

"We have filled our households and our lives with stuff we use for a month or a day or five minutes, but which persists for a dozen lifetimes," he writes. "The average American goes through 220 pounds of plastic a year."

He anticipates the argument that plastic pollution is a result of improper disposal, saying: "Garbage has always escaped from the waste stream. (Not to mention from windstorms, floods and worse disasters.) It always will. Despite our best efforts. Now that most garbage is plastic, every escapee adds to the persistent fouling of our shores and waters."

Johnson has a point. Remember the dramatic video footage of the tsunami striking Japan last year, sweeping away everything in sight?

Plastic pollution is already a serious problem -- Johnson knows from his own beach clean-up routine, and he also cites Columbia University research that estimates at least 73 million pounds of plastic now floats in the world's oceans.

Johnson's solution to the problem is simple -- he's an advocate of the philosophy that I'll call "use less stuff."

"Plastics certainly have their benefits and their place. But our gross overuse of them has polluted nearly every last pristine, remote place left in the world, as well as our own backyard. It's time to change the game," he writes.

Could there be another solution? Truly biodegradable plastics could help, although I don't expect them to be more than niche materials for the foreseeable future.

And I believe stepped up efforts to recycle single-use plastics can help. In the United States, at least, there's a lot of room for improvement in recycling nearly all plastic products. As Johnson notes, that wouldn't completely put a stop to the plastics litter problem.

But it would be a good start.

Here's a fun plastics-related headline: the Occupy Seattle movement is banning plastic sporks (and paper plates) from their encampment's food service.

The news comes from Real Change, a Seattle, Wash., organization focused on providing opportunity and a voice for low-income and homeless people and taking action for economic justice.

Amy Roe, editor of RealChangeNews.org, reports:

They may not be clean, but they're green. Faced with criticism for alleged violence, drug use, and an insufficient political agenda, organizers of the leaderless movement known as Occupy Seattle are touting the "sustainability" of their Seattle Central Community College encampment.

Residents have banned plastic cutlery and paper plates from the encampment's meal service as part of a sustainability initiative, the campers said in a statement.

If they're going to be using traditonal metal forks and spoons, let's hope the encampment is clean, and not just green. No need to invite food poisoning to the Occupy movement.

Too bad they couldn't have found someone willing to recycle those used sporks.

In case you haven't been paying attention, not everyone thinks plastic bag bans are a bad thing.

Last week, Greenbiz.com senior editor Marc Gunther wrote a post in defense of plastic bags. Today, Stiv Wilson offers a counterpoint, "In Defense of Plastic Bag Bans."

Wilson works for the 5 Gyres Institute, which is focused on plastic pollution. Close readers of Plastics News will also remember his name for the petition he started on change.org to encourage the National Park Service to ban single-use water bottles from at the Grand Canyon.

It's clear that both Wilson and Gunther have a strong grasp of the issues related to plastic bags -- yet they come to opposite conclusions.

To Wilson, the bottom line is that plastic does not biodegrade.

What's at issue is this: Plastic does not biodegrade in a meaningful if even comprehensible timeframe. Thus, some portion of it accumulates in the environment. The more we produce, consume, and recycle plastics, the more plastic will come into the world and accumulate in landfills, on land, in rivers, and the sea. Plastics at sea concentrate incredibly dangerous chemicals, fish eat plastic, and we eat fish.

It's really that simple. This is why we care. It sure as hell isn't for the paycheck.

But wait -- is biodegradability a good thing? We've heard from recyclers concerned that increasing use of biodegradable plastics and additives would hurt their business.

Wilson points out that -- at least when it comes to plastic bags -- recycling isn't an issue. He estimates that the recycling rate for single-use plastic bags is about 1 percent.

That figure might be low -- Plastics News estimated the bag recycling rate at 2 percent in 2008, and it's likely to have grown since then. But that's not a record to crow about. So what we've seen the past few years is instead of running on its record of bag recycling, the industry has been forced to respond to bans by talking about the potential to recycle more bags.

Wilson knows that, and writes: "That plastics bags are 100 percent recyclable isn't the issue. It's that by a massive percentage they are not recycled. ... Furthermore, why are we investing in a system that has to fabricate bag recycling rates to trend positively, even though the fabricated trend still amounts for next to nothing? What society accepts a 4.3 percent efficacy rate in any system without abandoning it and going back to the drawing board?"

Wilson's post won't be the last word -- but it's required reading for anyone interested in the bag ban debate.

Care to guess the topic of the most-read story on PlasticsNews.com in 2011? Was it about resin pricing? A major industry acquisition? A hot trend like sustainability?

Take a guess -- I'll give the answer later in this column. But first, let's look at the biggest Plastics News stories from the second half of 2011, measured by web traffic.

Again, these are only the stories posted after July 1. Let's look at the top 25:

1. Braskem buying Dow's PP business Brazilian plastics giant Braskem SA made another big move in the polypropylene market in 2011, this time acquiring the PP business of Dow Chemical Co. for $323 million.
2. Prices fall for PP, PE, PVC, PS and ABS This story from early November reported that commodity resin prices were tumbling, with polypropylene experiencing the steepest drop -- a 14-cent dive since Oct. 1.
3. Neil Kruschke Jr., former Stopol owner and CEO, dies in chainsaw accident PN was the first to report the sad news that Neil Kruschke Jr., former owner and CEO of plastics equipment dealer Stopol Inc. and its auction business, Stopol Auctions LLC, had died in a tragic accident on Aug. 26 at age 44.
4. Prices fall for polyethylene, polypropylene and PET resins Another resin pricing story -- this time it was polyethylene, polypropylene and PET bottle resin that were taking a tumble.
5. Sabic's Charlie Crew retiring, DuPont's Keith Smith on board In the afternoon of Nov. 23, just before the Thanksgiving holiday, Sabic Innovative Plastics announced that long-time executive Charlie Crew would retire on Jan. 1, and that he would be replaced by Keith J. Smith, most recently DuPont Co.'s vice president for sourcing and logistics.
6. Polypropylene resin prices dive, trailed by less-volatile polyethylene Another resin pricing story? Yep. This one was from late October, reporting that PP prices had plummeted an average of 14 cents per pound since Oct. 1, while PE prices had fallen 3 cents. Notice a trend?
7. Fortis Plastics announces shutdown One of the three stories in our top 25 on problems at a major Indiana-based custom molder.
8. Former PolyOne sales rep sentenced for embezzling Worker falls for the phony inheritance scam, steals company funds, ends up in prison.
9. Rubbermaid Home Products closing Greenville, Texas, molding plant Molding plant with 490 workers will close by the middle of 2012.
10. ConAgra chief talks sustainability A Q&A interview with Robert Weick, vice president of packaging and sustainability at ConAgra Foods Inc.
11. PET thin film shortage over; glut's now the potential problem The biaxially oriented PET thin film shortage of 2010 has turned into the glut of 2011 -- thanks in part to 29 judges in New Delhi and a concoction called gutka.
12. ConocoPhillips splitting in two, fate of plastics operations undecided In July, ConocoPhillips Co. announced it was splitting itself into two independent companies -- but the fate of its plastics joint venture was not clear.
13. China's new regulation shakes up plastic recycling industry In November we reported that plastics scrap imports through China's Guangzhou customs fell by more than 80 percent in the past two months, as the local customs stepped up enforcement of a new regulation on solid waste imports.
14. Markets shift, struggles persist Resin supply and demand is in the spotlight again -- this time it's our annual report on the outlook for commodity materials.
15. Kraft pushes innovation, sustainability How does Perfecto Perales, senior director of packaging research for Kraft Foods Inc., feel about the sustainability of plastics packaging? Not surprisingly, a lot of you wanted to know.
16. Fortis closing Fort Smith, Ark., plant This was our first story that hinted at problems at Fortis Plastics LLC. Within a matter of weeks, most of the company had shut down.
17. Bemis Co. to close 3 film plants Big news from one of the largest plastics processors in the world.
18. Sonoco buys Tegrant for $550 million A major acquisition that makes Sonoco a much bigger and more diverse player in plastics packaging.
19. Dow ramping up molding of solar shingles We've been writing about Dow Chemical Co.'s foray into solar shingles since 2008. Quite a few Plastics News readers are paying close attention.
20. Berry Plastics closing Henrico, Va., plant Berry announced plans to close a former Captive Plastics plant.
21. Phillips Sumika closing Texas PP plant As polypropylene prices fell in the second half of 2011, this supplier reacted to the news by shutting down capacity.
22. Prolamina's 3rd plant ready to roll The packaging industry is keeping a close eye on Harold Bevis' new company, Prolamina Inc.
23. Fortis Plastics to auction off equipment The New Year will bring a giant auction -- more than 130 injection presses and 20 extruders -- from four closed-down plants of Fortis Plastics LLC.
24. Flooding in Thailand does major damage to local plastics processors Steve Toloken, our Asia bureau chief, reported that flooding in Thailand was causing signficant damage to the country's injection molders.

Now, about that top story from 2011 -- how many of you guessed that it was a major packaging sector scoop?

We posted the story on our website in April: Coke joint venture shuts down food-grade PET recycling plant (This link takes you to the story as it appeared in our April 25 print edition).

Our coverage of the problems at the Coke joint venture recycling plant in Spartanburg, S.C., generated big reader traffic in the first half of this year.

Marc Gunther, senior writer for GreenBiz.com, posted a long defense of plastic bags on his website today. But judging by other headlines in recent weeks, I wonder if anyone will pay attention.

Gunther's blog post, "In Defense of the Plastic Bag," compiles and summarizes a lot of points we've already seen:

• Bag bans aren't based on science.
• Plastic bag litter is not as bad as some critics have implied.
• Recycling is a viable alternative to bans.

He concludes: "The truth is, we don't really have a clear answer to the age-old question of 'paper or plastic,' now amended to say 'paper, plastic or reusable?' Too many variables are at play.

"My own answer? I carry several reusable bags in the trunk of my (hybrid) car and bring them into the grocery store when I remember. When I don't, I take plastic and bring it back to be recycled. I don't feel bad about that. Neither should you," Gunther wrote.

But is it too late for debate and reasoned arguments? Recent headlines suggest to me that the pace of bag bans and taxes will accelerate in 2012.

Seattle passed a bag ban on Dec. 19. The law may face a challenge -- although Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat thinks that's unlikely. He opposed Seattle's previous effort to tax bags, but he says this attempt is "reasonable."

Hawaii's Big Island also approved a bag ban -- that news came yesterday. Mayor Billy Kenoi could still veto the bill. But there's momentum for eventual approval of a bag ban or tax that would cover all of Hawaii.

For more background on the plastics industry's strategy for fighting bag bans, check Plastics News staff reporter Mike Verespej's recent story.

He explains how the Society of the Plastics Industry is taking charge of fighting local efforts to tax or ban plastic bags, while the American Chemistry Council is putting its muscle behind an effort to improve film and bag recycling.

It seems like a reasonable plan. But the question remains, is it too late?

Coca-Cola Co. is taking a leading role in advancing bio-based plastics. That's been obvious for about two years, since the company introduced PET bottles made, in part, from renewable monoethylene glycol.

Now the company is working on the next step, to make large quantities of its bottles from 100 percent plant-based plastics.

Plastics News' staff reporter Mike Verespej reported yesterday how Coke is making multi-million dollar investments in three bio-based companies: Virent Inc., Gevo Inc. and Avantium Research and Technology.

Mike's story was one of the first on the announcement, but more importantly it was probably the most thorough. That's because he was already quite familiar with all three of Coke's new partners and the technology that they bring to the table.

Mike wrote in detail about Virent and Gevo earlier this year. I encourage PN readers who are interested in more information about bio-based plastics to re-read that story: "Cost, viability will determine bio-winners."

And while you're mining our archives, check out my April 25 column on Coke's PET recycling problems.

I noted at the time:

Coke is making a big push into bio-based materials this year. The company has said it expects to convert all of its PET packaging to PlantBottle materials -- made from sugar-cane ethanol -- by 2020.

We could be headed for a debate on the merits of recycled vs. bio-based content in plastics packaging. If so, there will be winners and losers -- and I doubt Coke will be on the losing side.

I got some criticism from readers for that comment. And it may be that Coke will stay committed to both goals: using more recycled content and using bio-based plastics.

But I feel it's still worth watching.

Finally, let me highlight a comment from Mike's story yesterday. He wrote that Rick Frazier, Coke's vice president of commercial bottle supply, said moving to bottles made entirely from plants is imperative because of Coke's goal is to double the daily serving from Coca-Cola beverages to 3 billion by 2020.

"To double our business in a sustainable way, we must find a new way to do more with less," he said.

At the risk of repeating myself: Coke has some big goals that are related directly to plastics packaging. This is a company that looks further ahead than most OEMs.

I would argue that even companies that don't supply Coke -- even companies that aren't in the packaging sector -- are going to be impacted by this decision.

This one is short but sweet. Apparently plastic bags are getting tired of all the attention they've been getting in the news media.

This bag carefully planned its revenge and made the most of its moment in the limelight.

No word on whether it was recycled. Perhaps, as punishment, it was sent for "reuse" to a home with multiple dogs.

Scrap theft is serious problem, and I've written about plastics companies that have been victims. But here's a twist -- an application for plastics that can benefit from the trend.

The Western Daily Press in Somerset, England, writes today about a community's plan to buy plastic manhole covers, after a rash of thefts in the past year.

According to the report, 19 wrought iron manhole and drain covers were stolen in a single 48-hour stretch in March.

The plastic covers cost about 400 pounds sterling each ($630) and last for around 15 years, according to the story. The metal covers cost around 110 pounds sterling ($172) and last about five years.

Interesting that the newspaper blames the thefts on "unscrupulous [scrap] dealers in the Far East." They may be the customers, but they're not the ones doing the heavy lifting in Somerset.

Remember the story about the antique cannon that was stolen from a Michigan plastics fabricator? Good news: it's been recovered.

Edston Plastic Co. in Romulus, Mich., was making a plastic replica of the cannon to be used as a donation container at a museum, but it was stolen in November, probably by thieves who expected to sell the 225-pound bronze item for scrap,

According to the Detroit Free Press, Detroit police found the cannon on Tuesday after receiving a tip about its whereabouts.

And I was waiting for it to show up on Pawn Stars.

If you're planning to see some movies over the holidays, get ready for a glimpse of "The Lorax," a film that may have an anti-plastics message.

The movie trailer was released today. One website for film buffs headlined the release: "New Trailer for 'The Lorax' Pits Kid Against Villainous Plastic Industrialists."

"In this new trailer, we get a little more than just a boy who falls in love with a girl kind of story," Mike Lee writes for FusedFilm.com. "It is revealed that there are villainous industrial tycoons who will try to do anything to stop our hero from successfully growing a tree in a world of plastic. Fox News is going to have a field day with this one when the movie is released. "

Check out the trailer below. Celebrity voices include Danny DeVito, Zac Efron, Ed Helms, Taylor Swift, Rob Riggle, and Betty White.

The film is scheduled for release in March.

Hewlett-Packard Co., leads Greenpeace International's new list of electronics companies ranked by energy usage, green products and sustainable operations.

Jeremy Carroll, a colleague at Waste & Recycling News, wrote about the report today. He notes new criteria this year also challenged the companies to reduce their carbon footprint in manufacturing, in their supply chain and through the end-of-life phase for their products.

Here are some materials-related highlights, directly from the Greenpeace reports. In addition to the details about phasing out certain materials, processors may note that Greenpeace now is looking favorably about companies that are using post-consumer plastics.

"[HP] scores the least points in the Products category; although it scores comparatively well for its progress on phasing out the use of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from its product range and is on track to achieve 90 percent of its new goal to phase out BFR and PVC in newly introduced personal computing products in 2011. HP needs to report on the amount of post-consumer plastics it uses as a percentage of all plastics and publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines, as well as show more innovations to extend product life. HP does not provide a summary of the energy efficiency of its products by giving
a percentage of its products that meet the latest Energy Star standards (or other relevant international standard for external power systems); this should be published on its
website, for each product range. However, HP risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of trade associations that have commented against stringent
energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"Dell scores poorly on all the other Products criteria. Although it reports on the quantities of post-consumer recycled plastics used, this is not given as a percentage
of total plastics use and there is no target and timeline for increasing its use. Dell needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product
lines in order to score any points for extending its products life cycle. Dell does not provide figures on the percentage of its products that meet and exceed the latest Energy Star
standard, although it offers tools for users to optimise energy efficiency. Dell also risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of trade associations that
have commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"On Products [Nokia] scores no points for the use of recycled plastics; although it now reports that the Nokia 700 is its first smartphone to use recycled plastics which make up 33 percent of the plastics used, it needs to expand its use further and report total use as a percentage of all plastics used in order to score points. To score on the products life cycle criteria it needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines. It scores close to maximum points on the new criteria for hazardous substances in products, with all of its products free from almost all the specified hazardous substances, missing the target because it does not include all antimony compounds in its restrictions on hazardous substances. It continues to score maximum points for the energy efficiency of its products; it has achieved its target of reducing no-load power used by its chargers by 50 percent from 2006 to 2010 and has set a new target of 75 percent by 2012. However, Nokia risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of trade associations that have commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"[Apple] continues to score well on the Products criteria; all Apple products are now free of PVC vinyl plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs), with the exception of PVC free power cords in countries where their safety certification process is still ongoing; however, it does not mention plans to phase out antimony or beryllium. Apple scores a point for its information on battery life for the product life cycle criterion, but it needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines. It provides no information on its use of post-consumer recycled plastics. It gets maximum points for reporting that all of its products meet or exceed the latest Energy
Star standards for energy efficiency, however, it risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against stringent
energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"On Products [Philips] has brought a number of product ranges onto the market that are free from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs), as well as six phthalates and antimony, to add to the industry's first PVC/BFR free TV, the Econova LED TV, as part of its commitment for all new products to be free from these substances from 2011. It needs to commit to phase out exempted uses of beryllium and all phthalates. Philips has a target to double its use of recycled plastics by 2015, but needs to specify if this is post-consumer recycled plastics; it also needs to report the percentage of post-consumer plastics it uses currently. To score points on the product life cycle criteria Philips needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for their main product lines. It also has targets to increase the energy efficiency
of its products but needs to update its information on the percentage of its products that meet and exceed the Energy Star standards. Philips risks a penalty point in future
Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive
positions with a strong statement."

"Sony Ericsson takes 6th place in the re-launched Guide. It is one of the top scorers in the Products category, scoring maximum points for the energy efficiency of its
phones, its advice to users and its targets to increase their efficiency. It is close to scoring maximum points for its avoidance of hazardous substances in its products, with only a few exemptions for uses of antimony and some types of phthalates remaining. It reports the recycled plastics content for several of its phones but still needs to report the amount of recycled plastic sourced as a percentage of all plastics used. To score on the product life cycle category it needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines."

"Samsung takes 7th position in the re-launched Guide. The penalty point which was first imposed in v.14 of the Guide for backtracking on its commitment to eliminate
brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in new models of all products by January 2010 and PVC vinyl plastic by end of 2010 has been lifted. It now has notebooks, mobile phones
and MP3 players that are free from these substances, but its commitment to phase out hazardous substances now only covers some product groups - TVs and household
appliances are no longer included. Samsung does reasonably well on other Products criteria - it is one of the leaders on the new product life cycle criteria for providing
information on its warranties and provision of spare parts as well as details of innovations. Samsung also scores well for the energy efficiency of its products, but it risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"Lenovo takes 8th place in the re-launch of the Guide; it benefits from the removal of the penalty point that was imposed for backtracking on its commitment to eliminate PVC vinyl plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in all its products by the end of 2009. While its current goal for new products in 2011 to be PVC/BFR free has not been completely met, Lenovo has launched a number of PVC/BFR free products, including notebooks and a desktop and many components are PVC/BFR free. On other Products
criteria it scores well for its use of recycled plastics, where a slightly higher percentage of post-consumer plastics use would earn Lenovo maximum points. However, to score any points on product life cycle it needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines. It reports on the percentage of products that meet and exceed the Energy Star standard, although this needs to be a higher percentage for more points. Lenovo risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"Panasonic is one of the top scorers on Products, scoring well for product life cycle as it provides information about its warranties and replacement parts, as well as many examples of innovation to make its products last longer. It has many products that are free from polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC), and plans to eliminate PVC and brominated
flame retardants (BFRs) from its notebooks and mobile phones by the end of 2011, but this commitment does not extend to all of its products. It reports on its use of recycled plastics but does not specify whether this is post-consumer plastic. It scores maximum points for the energy efficiency of its products for reporting that 100 percent of its TVs meet the latest Energy Star standards and exceed the standby power requirement. However, it risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of trade associations that have commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"Sony also risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of trade associations that have commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement. On Products its performance on the energy efficiency of its products earns top marks; all of its TVs meet or exceed the latest Energy Star standards. It uses comparatively high quantities of post-consumer recycled plastics but no longer provides information on its use of recycled plastics as a percentage of total plastics used. It is less impressive on the other products criteria; it scores no points on product life cycle as it does not report on the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines. Although it has phased out polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC) from many of its products the scope of its phase out of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) is limited."

"[Sharp] scores most of its points on the Products criteria for the energy efficiency of its products, reporting that all of its TVs meet the latest Energy Star standard, with 90 percent of them exceeding the requirements for sleep mode. However, it risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against
stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement. Sharp has many products that are free from polyvinyl
chloride plastics (PVC) but its phase out of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) is mostly limited to casings and it has not met its commitment; it it needs to communicate the
dates when new products will be free of PVC, phthalates, BFRs and antimony. It reports on its use of recycled plastics but not as a percentage of total plastics used. Sharp provides some examples of extending product life cycle but does not publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines."

"Acer takes 12th position with a score of 2.9. ... However, it does report on the use of post- consumer recycled plastic in monitor casings of seven families of EPEAT Gold models. It has also launched many new models of products that are free from polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and it has informed Greenpeace that the majority of its products will be PVC/BFR free in the near future. A higher percentage of its products need to meet or exceed the latest Energy Star standards
in order for it to score more points on product energy efficiency."

"LGE scores 2.8 points and takes joint 13th place, together with Toshiba. It benefits from having a penalty point lifted, imposed for backtracking on its commitment to have all its products free of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) by the end of 2010. All of LGE's mobile phones are now free from PVC and BFRs as well as phthalates, antimony trioxide and beryllium oxide; other products such as TVs and notebooks have many PVC/BFR free parts and LGE aims to phase these substances out
from TVs monitors and PCs by 2012 and household appliances by 2014. On other Products categories LGE scores best for its product energy efficiency; it regains points that it lost in the last edition by making a strong statement in support of more stringent Energy Star verification standards. LGE reports on the quantities of post-consumer plastics that it uses and gives an example of a product with recycled content, but does not have a target to increase its use of recycled plastics. It does not yet score on the product life cycle category, as there is no information on product warranties or replacement parts availability."

"Toshiba scores 2.8 points and takes joint 13th place, together with LGE. It also benefits from having its two penalty points lifted, which were imposed for backtracking on its commitment for all new consumer electronics products to be free of PVC vinyl plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) by 1 April 2010 and for misleading its customers
and Greenpeace by not admitting that it would not meet its public commitment. It released a PC in March 2011 which is PVC and BFR free. It has also made a new commitment
to phase out PVC, BFRs, antimony and compounds, beryllium and compounds and phthalates by FY2015 from ALL its consumer products; the timeline is unreasonable, however, the fact that it covers all products and a range of hazardous substances is welcome. It also scores poorly on other Products criteria; it provides some information on extending product life but does not publish information on its warranties and availability of spare parts. The quantities of recycled plastics it uses have also gone down. It needs to report on the percentage of its products that meet and exceed Energy Star standards for each product range. However, it risks a penalty point as it is a member of a trade association
that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement."

"RIM makes its first appearance in the Guide in last place, with 1.6 points. ... For Products it only scores points for the energy efficiency of its products, for reporting that its Blackberry charger gets the European Commission IPP 4-star rating, although it does not report on the energy efficiency of its chargers as a percentage of all its external power devices. It also risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member
of a trade association that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement. For hazardous substances, RIM should set timelines to phase out their use in all of its products. It needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines to score points on the product life cycle criteria."

Would the phrase "Make it work" be appropriate here? Lexus had four designers -- jewelry, shoes, eyewear and clothing -- create something from parts from its CT Hybrid.

Final products included:

• "Nomadic Sanctuary"--A sleek trench coat, shorts and clutch designed by John Patrick, featuring floor mats made from plant-based plastic, sustainable sound-dampening material, wire harness, leather seat covers and cargo covers
• "The Luna Shoe"--Created by Alejandro Ingelmo using armrest leather trim and clear plastic tubing.

Thanks to Rhoda Miel, Plastics News' staff reporter in Detroit, for this item.

And Rhoda's not even embarrassed to say that she remembers that TV's "Project Runway" had a challenge to make clothing out of car parts some seasons ago. (A Saturn.)

It's rare to get a look inside Foxconn International, so I was excited to see John Biggs of TechCrunch.com is writing about his visit to the company's Foxconn City factory in Shenzhen, China.

Biggs is writing a series of posts titled "The Future of Foxconn," the Taiwan-based injection molder and contract manufacturer that makes computers and electronics at 26 plants around the world.

Foxconn City has 400,000 employees, according to Biggs. To put that number into perspective, that's more than the number of people who live in Cleveland, Ohio, or Miami, Fla.

Part one of the series addresses the high-profile problem the plant had last year with 14 workers committing suicide. Today the plant has nets to prevent workers from jumping to their deaths.

Part two takes a look inside the factory, with some eye-popping details about what it takes just to feed the workforce every day.

Biggs has an ambitious goal for the project -- not just to write about the company, but to write about Foxconn's place in manufacturing history. Here's a taste:

To state the obvious, the world isn't fair. Factories like Foxconn City shouldn't exist. There should be no reason employees should stand for 10 hours a day, six days a week, to manufacture an iPad. But, in fairness, Foxconn sees its own place in the world changing as we speak. I'll address these changes my final piece, but it is clear that the company doesn't expect to be in the manufacturing business forever nor does it expect its employees to always stay on the line. The truth is that the sunset of the human worker is upon us and as Foxconn and other factories begin replacing their employees with robots, the societal changes that will take place could be striking.

I'm already looking forward to the rest of the series.

Following up on their meeting and joint declaration on plastics and marine debris back in March, global plastics industry leaders met again in Dubai this week.

According to a news release put out by the American Chemistry Council's Plastics Division and PlasticsEurope, the group identified 100 projects in 32 countries that are aimed at addressing the issue.

The group is inviting assistance from other stakeholders.

"The global plastics industry is determined to do its part and to play a constructive role in building new partnerships to create solutions to the issue of marine litter," PlasticsEurope Executive Director Wilfried Haensel said in the release.

"Plastics makers from around the globe agree that our products don't belong in world's oceans," said Steve Russell, vice president of plastics for the American Chemistry Council. "And, plastics are valuable resources even after use. We look forward to doing our part and working with partners to implement solutions that keep more valuable plastics in productive use through improved stewardship and expanded infrastructure to grow recycling and energy recovery."

The group's activities are highlighted at www.marinelittersolutions.org.

The plastics industry is not an obstacle to recycling. But despite all the effort that many have put into recycling, that's not universally understood outside the industry.

I've been writing editorials for Plastics News pushing for expanding bottle deposit programs for almost 20 years.

In a 1994 column favoring a national deposit program, I wrote:

"Certainly this would appear to be a radical idea. But consider the benefits to the industry:
It would provide recyclers with a plentiful supply of clean, uncontaminated raw material.

"Supporting, rather than opposing, the legislation would provide a shot in the arm for the industry's environmental image.

"It would give a huge boost to the industry's recycling rate-which may be needed if plastics packaging is to reach its goal of recycling 25 percent of bottles and rigid containers by 1995."

It may surprise readers outside the plastics industry to learn that my column did not prompt an outcry from readers, or a slew of canceled subscriptions.

That's because, despite the reputation that plastics may have, your average plastics industry executive/ company owner/ worker is not opposed to recycling.

As I've written before, many actually consider themselves environmentalists. And the fact that they work in plastics doesn't present a moral dilemma. They know that plastics can help save energy and materials in many applications.

Why bring this up today? Because I spotted a column on HuffingtonPost.com's "Green" page headlined "How to Increase Plastic Bottle Recycling."

I don't want to pick on the author, Diane MacEachern, who also wrote "Big Green Purse: Use Your Spending Power to Create a Cleaner, Greener World." Because I agree with her goal -- to boost plastics recycling.

But her column seems to imply that plastics manufacturers are the obstacle.

"Consider single-use plastic water bottles," she writes. "Companies that manufacture the billions of plastic water bottles flooding the market claim the product is 'eco friendly' because the bottles are recyclable.

"In reality, only 12 percent of the 15 billion throwaway water bottles manufactured each year are being recycled. ... That being the case, manufacturers should make good on their claim that their bottles are recyclable by putting a deposit on the bottles to ensure they're returned to a recycling facility."

First -- and this is a relatively minor point -- the 2010 U.S. recycling rate for PET bottles was 29.1 percent. I think that's a more relevant number to cite than MacEachern's 12 percent number.

But the more important point is that her column may give readers the impression that plastic bottle manufacturers are opposed to plastics recycling. And that's just not true.

If anything, bottle manufacturers would like access to more high-quality recycled PET -- the kind that they could get from expanded bottle deposit programs.

And in the spirit of America Recycles Day, let me thank all the readers who diligently recycle all of their plastic containers -- whether or not they get a dime in the process.

When thieves burglarized a Michigan plastics fabricator, they probably didn't expect to get away with a 225-pound bronze cannon that dates to 1795.

But that's exactly what they found at Edston Plastic Co. in Romulus, Mich., according to the Detroit Free Press.

According to the story, the fabricator was making a plastic replica of the cannon. The replica was going to be used as a donation container at a museum.

Ed Roberts, owner of Edston Plastic, said the burglars cleaned out his business, taking power tools and several 200-pound boxes of aluminum -- and the cannon.

The cannon's owner is offering a $1,000 reward -- about double the scrap value of the weapon, but significantly less than its actual value.

When raw material prices are high, I tend to see more stories about plastics companies being robbed of valuable commodities: steel tooling, copper piping, even plastic pallets.

Let's just hope the burglars in this case don't decide to use the cannon in their next armed robbery.

There's no shortage of great ideas for saving weight in vehicles using plastics. So what's holding the industry back?

That's a question I'm hearing a lot today, as I blog and tweet from the Plastics in Lightweight & Electric Vehicles conference in Livonia, Mich.

Bruce Benda, vice president for automotive & transportation at Bayer MaterialScience LLC, had one of the best answers.

First, the context. Benda cited an example of a long fiber polyurethane underbody that the company helped design for a Ford Explorer simulation. The part could have helped save a whopping 45 pounds.

For an industry that's trying to save grams, 45 pounds is massive.

So why isn't this in commercial production yet?

"This industry is very firmly entrenched in existing infrastructures and technologies," Benda said. But he hastened to say that he's excited about the potential for progress now.

What's changed is that the government is now pushing automakers for rapid fuel economy improvements. The current 25 mpg average is supposed to hit 34.1 mpg by 2016, and 54.5 mpg by 2025.

OEMs will be using a wide variety of strategies to meet those goals -- the experts say electrification will be a big part of the equation.

But making vehicles lighter is also a high priority.

Tom Pilette, vice president of product and process development at Magna International Inc., said the OEMs he talks to now say their No. 1 priority is mass reduction.

Here are some more highlights from the conference today. Make sure to watch our Twitter page for updates throughout the event:

Maurice Sessel, senior vice president at International Automotive Components North America, said future vehicle designs may eliminate the crossbeam, a metal structural part under the instrument panel that accounts for 30 percent of the weight in a vehicle interior.

Sessel added that it will take close cooperation with OEMs to bring home new technology.

Magna's Pilette highlighted the company's extensive use of different materials, noting that Magna is materials agnostic. But he added that while the company is looking at applications for biomaterials, it won't step up their use until they are cost-neutral to customers.

Jay Baron, president and CEO of the Center for Automotive Research, said so-called "driverless technology" is technologically feasible now, and could be commercial by 2020. That's a trend being driven by the federal government too -- regulators want to create cars that won't crash, in order to reduce vehicle fatalities to zero.

There are materials implications to that push. For example, think of all the automotive parts that have to be steel or aluminum now in order to protect the driver and passengers in a crash. Now imagine that the car is designed to never crash...

Baron believes the future lightweight vehicle will be a mixed material product - not aluminum-intensive, steel-intensive or plastics-intensive.

Tom Gould, design director for North America for Johnson Controls Inc., says suppliers and OEMs need to collaborate to make lightweight vehicles.

That means bringing designers to the table. And once they're part of the team, push them to solve problems.

"That's what they're trained to do," he said. "Don't let them off the hook."

Likewise, Jim Tobin, chief marketing officer at Magna, said that to cut weight, suppliers need to use high tech expertise to deliver solutions that are affordable, environmentally friendly and reliable.

"This is where our industry shines," he said.

Is the CD about to go the way of 8-track tapes and disappear from music store shelves?

That's the word from music magazine Side Line. Its story, citing unnamed sources, says major music labels plan to eliminate music CDs by the end of 2012.

CDs would be replaced by downloads from iTunes and other music services. Only limited edition CDs would remain, and they would be sold primarily through Amazon.

"3 weeks ago we heard it for the first time and since then we have tried getting some feedback from EMI, Universal and Sony. All declined to comment," the story says.

Some readers seem pretty skeptical, but it's not completely unrealistic. As the story points out, CDs cost money to make, store, and recycle (when they go unsold). It must be tempting for music companies to believe they can eliminate all those costs.

According to Wikipedia, the first album to be released on CD was Billy Joel's 52nd Street, which was sold beginning Oct. 1, 1982, in Japan. CDs and CD players were released in the United States in eary 1983.

The term "polyester slacks" might be not seem exactly cool or modern, but recycled PET just might help to make something old-fashioned seem new again.

According to our sister publication Advertising Age, 85-year-old Haggar Clothing Co., is preparing to launch an ad campaign for "Life Khaki" pants, which are made in part from recycled PET.

Ad Age says the company is hoping the eco-friendly pants "will give it cachet with a younger consumer."

Using recycled PET to make polyester fabric isn't exactly new. But I've noticed a few companies highlighting the recycled content of the fabric used to make graduation gowns and soccer uniforms.

"CNN Reports" did a report on plastic bags yesterday that focused on marine debris.

Correspondent Amber Lyon starts the report in a boat off the coast of California, fishing for plastic bags. Then she dives beneath the surface to find more bags, and she talks to a veterinarian who has seen plastic bags in the stomachs of whales, sea lions and dolphins.

According to CNN, this is the first in a two-part report.

OK, this isn't a high-volume application for recycled plastics, but it's still pretty cool.

Jim Griffioen, a stay-at-home Dad in the Detroit area, has blogged about making his son's Halloween costumes the past couple of years, and taken shots in appropriate run-down Detroit locations.

Last year's RoboCop was made from an old bike helmet, laundry detergent bottles and "a bunch of plastic crap," among other items. Check out the link, you'll love the photos (and captions) of the little guy visiting with some of Detroit's finest.

This year, he's "The Rocketeer", with a helmet made from an old BMX helmet, the lenses out of an old pair of sunglasses and a piece of acrylic, along with a rocket pack made from two-liter soda bottles.

Super creative stuff.

Thanks to Rhoda Miel, Plastics News' staff reporter in Detroit, for contributing this item today -- and have a Happy Halloween.

The town of Sioux Lookout in northwest Ontario is bucking a trend -- it just decided to reverse a ban on plastic bags.

Bryan Meadows of The Chronicle Journal in Thunder Bay, Ontario, reports today that the town council removed the 4-month-old ban on single-use plastic bags because of opposition from the community.

"We had a whole pile of petitions from business people and up to 400 names of private citizens" who opposed ban, Mayor Dennis Leney told the newspaper. "It was pretty unanimous that people were not happy with it."

The law had not been fully implemented -- it took effect this summer, but there was a one-year phase-in period.

Sioux Lookout had been the first municipality in Ontario to ban plastic bags, according to the report.

What's this -- a community rolling back a bag ban without a lawsuit? I'm not sure Plastics Blog readers in the United States will be able to relate to this story.

A couple of items related to product bans caught my eye today, because both highlight some interesting logical arguments.

First, the Los Angeles Daily News posted an editorial in favor of plastic bag bans.

The column, "Plastic bag ban proposal should be carried out with OK of the public," argues that plastic bag bans are OK because bags carry hidden costs to society.

"For single-use bags, it is a double whammy: the pass-through cost from the retailers, as well as the cost of dealing with billions of discarded plastic bags in our landfills, sewers, gutters, parks, trees, rivers, beaches and oceans. We all pay for the estimated 1.2 billion to 2.3 billion (yes, billion) single-use plastic bags and 400 million paper bags used each year in the city, whether we know it or not," the column says.

I wonder about the accuracy of an estimate with such a wide range -- 1.2 billion to 2.3 billion. But that's not my problem with the column.

Take a look at this part:

The most pervasive argument against the ban of single-use bags is that doing so kills jobs at companies that produce plastic bags. That doesn't make sense when you consider reusable bags are often made from plastic. And shoppers won't stop needing bags to carry their purchases, though it's true they won't need as many.

In fact, some forward-thinking companies have already jumped on the opportunity to make reusable bags, creating jobs that didn't exist before. That includes the Van Nuys-based company, Green Bag America, which makes private-label reusable shopping bags for retailers.

So it's OK to kill jobs at companies that make one kind of plastic bags because there are other companies making other bags willing to step in and create jobs "that didn't exist before"?

That's a pretty big leap in logic.

My other example comes from The News-Herald in Willoughby, Ohio, which did a lengthy feature story on college campuses that are banning sales of single-serve water bottles.

The story, "Bottled water ban possible in future of Lakeland, Kent State and Lake Erie College," highlights the situation at some local schools, noting that at least nine colleges across the country have banned sales of bottled water.

My problem here is the focus on bottled water. I don't have concerns about drinking water from public fountains, I do it almost every day.

But I know many people avoid drinking fountains -- some for health and safety reasons, some for taste. If colleges ban bottled water, don't they end up encouraging people to buy less healthy alternative drinks? That's not their aim, but it's a logical result.

And aren't college campuses prime spots for recycling empty bottles?

I don't have a problem with policies that encourage people to use less stuff. That includes giving out fewer single-use bags at stores, and encouraging customers to use reusable bags, or to reuse and recycle single-use bags.

But making the leap from encouraging people to use less stuff and legally requiring it is a pretty big jump.

Add Microsoft Corp.'s suppliers to the growing list of companies that are going to have to keep track of -- and report -- data on their environmental records.

Yesterday the company announced that starting in 2013, it will require "a cross section" of its suppliers to provide reports on how they adhere to Microsoft's Vendor Code of Conduct.

That could have some specific plastics-related implications.

Julie Bort, editor of Network World's Microsoft Subnet and Open Source Subnet communities, wrote about the issue yesterday in PC Advisor, in an item headlined "Microsoft strong-arms hardware makers into social responsibility."

Bort writes that Microsoft's policy might push suppliers like Dell Inc. to accelerate efforts to move away from PVC and brominated flame retardants.

"One of the policies in Microsoft's code of conduct is: 'If applicable, identify the chemicals or other materials being released that pose a threat to the environment and manage them appropriately to ensure their safe handling, movement, storage, use, recycling or reuse, and disposal,'" Bort wrote.

"Greenpeace has been after Dell for years to cut the dangerous chemicals out of its electronics manufacturing."

Microsoft's proposal is a response to a shareholder proposal received from New York City Comptroller John C. Liu on behalf of the New York City Pension Funds.

For 27 years, experts have been citing this statistic: that plastic debris kills 100,000 marine animals a year. And it turns out that no one really knows whether the number was ever accurate.

The research today comes from Harold Johnson, a Saco, Maine, journalist and author of The Flotsam Diaries blog.

Johnson, who's outspoken of his criticism of the plastics industry, was nonetheless skeptical of the number, which he wrote "keeps cropping up, on personal blogs, nonprofit Web sites, popular scientific eZines, press releases."

(Plastics News has mentioned the number a few times, most prominently in coverage of a 2006 conference on plastic debris and the oceans.)

Johnson, writing in a guest blog for Scientific American, said something bothered him about the number.

"It's too round. Too easy. Too 'everywhere.' The vanilla ice cream of heartstring-tugging environmentalism," Johnson wrote.

So he set out to find the source -- and determine if it's worth repeating.

It turns out that it's not.

Johnson's research took him all the way back to a December 1984 story from The New York Times, "Deadly Tide of Plastic Waste Threatens World's Oceans and Aquatic Life." The story cited its source: a report from a group called The Entanglement Network at a November 1984 Workshop on the Fate and Impact of Marine Debris in Honolulu.

The Entanglement Network's report itself, from the conference's proceedings (PDF) does not cite the 100,000 figure.

"And just like that, I had the answer," Johnson wrote. "A 'fact' handed down & bandied about from article to nonprofit, conservation society to international organization, over years and years. So long that it has taken a life of its own, and becomes unquestioned, and unsourced. Whether there is -- or was -- any science behind it remains in doubt."

And, as he points out, even if it was accurate in 1984, it's out of date.

Marine debris is clearly a significant problem. But it is a magnet for hyperbole. We've seen that before in descriptions of the North Pacific Central Gyre that imply it is an actual floating island. And we've seen other exaggerated reports on the threats to marine life.

As Johnson wrote today, just because you see a 'fact' in 100 places, doesn't make it true.

But don't be surprised if, a year from now, you see it another 100 times.

Reckitt Benckiser plc, known for its Clearasil, Lysol, Durex and Woolite brands, among others, released its 2010 sustainability report today. Here are some of the plastics-related highlights:

The company's very proud of that eliminated all the PVC packaging from its household products by the end of 2009. The step is highlighted in big blue letters on page 3 of the report (downloadable here), and on top of the company's news release.

It notes, however, that "Healthcare products are excluded from this target as no viable alternatives have yet been identified for some healthcare applications."

Under the category of "material use," the company notes several plastics-related innovations:

• In 2010 a packaging redesign introduced an all-plastic trigger in the North American market. This will eliminate more than 198 metric tons of stainless steel a year. Since it is mainly polypropylene resin, it is also widely compatible with US recycling streams.
• We have also made progress with 'light weighting' in North America, most notably on the Lysol Dual Action Wipes, Lysol Spray, and Lysol 32oz cleaners. This has avoided more than 290 metric tons of resin usage and reduced our carbon emissions by 920 metric tons.
• Small savings can make a big impact In Europe we have changed the dosing scoop for Vanish powder from an injection moulded scoop to a thermoformed scoop. This change in manufacturing technology has reduced the weight by nearly 50% resulting in 153 tons of PP resin saved. As the thermoforming process requires much less energy than injection moulding this project also saved around 638 metric tons of CO2.

Actually, PP caps aren't widely recycled in the United States, although there's growing interest among recyclers and cap makers.

Americans are becoming much more confident with their knowledge about the environment, according to a new survey commissioned by SC Johnson.

That's despite the often confusing or even contradictory messages that they receive on many environmental issues, from global warming to the benefits of paper vs. plastic bags.

This poll isn't specifically about plastics, but I expect it will be studied carefully -- and quoted extensively -- in the coming year.

According to the survey, 73 percent of Americans say they know a lot or fair amount about environmental issues and problems. That's up 20 percentage points since 1995.

Also, fewer people now agree with the statement "I am very confused about what's good and what's bad for the environment." Just 18 percent agreed with that statement in 2011, down a whopping 21 percentage points since 1990.

A growing number of respondents say they've made lifestyle changes that have a positive environmental impact. For example, 58 percent said they recycle on a regular basis -- twice as many as 20 years ago -- and 29 percent said they buy "green" products.

Click here (PDF) for a copy of the full report, "The Environment: Public Attitudes and Individual Behavior -- A Twenty-Year Evolution."

Let's say you're on the city council of a coastal community where many residents are concerned about marine debris. Some of your constituents want to ban single-use plastic bags.

But if you pass a ban without first doing an expensive study on the environmental impact of the decision, you'll face a lawsuit -- and the prospect of an expensive legal battle.

That's the dilemma that communities in California face now, following the California Supreme Court's recent decision in the Manhattan Beach plastic bag lawsuit.

Last week, for example, the Save the Plastic Bag Coalition said it would ask the First District California Court of Appeal to overturn a bag ban in unincorporated areas of Marin County.

(Also, in a related move, yesterday Hilex Poly Co. LLC announced that it will be part of a lawsuit against the County of Los Angeles in response to a ban on plastic bags and a tax on paper bags.)

Now Huntington Beach is taking a slightly different approach. The community says it will look at a plastic bag ban. But it wants environmental groups to pay for the expensive study.

According to The Orange County Register, the Huntington Beach City Council voted 4-3 yesterday to pay Rincon Consulting nearly $30,000 to prepare an environmental impact report

The Surfrider Foundation has already given the city $3,000 for the study, and it plans to raise the rest of the money -- plus funding to copy and disseminate the report.

The newspaper quotes Surfrider Foundation member Bill Hickman: "Think of this as an investment, not a cost to the city. ... Recycling is not the answer for plastic bags. [Less than] 10 percent are recycled."

For a few years now, the Surfriders group has been a serious player in debates about plastics bags and litter, especially in California.

The decision to pay for Huntington Beach's environmental impact report will be an interesting test of how much support the group has, and whether its clout can eventually spread to other communities.

Here's an odd twist to the plastic marine debris problem: your laundry may be a major source of microscopic plastic particles found in the ocean.

Until now, litter and spilled pellets have received most of the attention. But according to Clothing Sheds Microplastics Into Sea, from Chemical & Engineering News, synthetic fabrics are a major -- if often overlooked -- source.

According to the story, researchers from University College Dublin collected samples of microplastics from 18 coastal sites around the world.

The particles' shapes and sizes indicated they were fibers of synthetic fabrics. The researchers used Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy to determine the fibers' chemical composition. They found that polyester made up about three-quarters of the plastics; the rest consisted of polyamide, polypropylene, and acrylic, a composition that matches that of textiles.

The spectroscopy data led the team to think of washing clothes. So the researchers analyzed the water drained from frontloading washing machines after throwing fleece jackets, blankets, and synthetic business shirts into them. In one wash cycle, they found, a single piece of clothing shed more than 1,900 tiny fibers.

The scientists also determined that the chemical composition of their coastal plastic samples matched that of microscopic plastic found in treated discharge they collected from two wastewater treatment plants in Australia. [Researcher Mark Anthony] Browne and his team concluded that plastic fragments from synthetic fabrics most likely flow from wastewater treatment plants down to the seashore, and perhaps out to sea.

If other researchers confirm the findings, it will be interesting to see if:

1. Scientists determine if this microscopic plastic is harmful,
2. Clothing manufacturers, laundry products makers, or wastewater treatment plants can do anything to reduce the volume of microscopic plastics being released into the environment, and,
3. Which community will be the first to suggest banning polyester slacks.

John Concannon, managing director of Tuam, Ireland-based plastics rotational molder, pipe extruder and recycler JFC Manufacturing Ltd., hasn't had a typical career as a manufacturing company entrepreneur.

Concannon became something of a celebrity in 1987 when he appeared on the popular Irish talk show "The Late Late Show" to highlight an invention -- a special three-part bucket that allowed farmers to easily carry more food to hungry calves.

Now Concannon is in the spotlight again. Yesterday he was featured in "The Secret Millionaire," a new program on Ireland's Raidió Teilifís Éireann (RTE).

I didn't see the program. But from what I can tell from the thoroughly positive reviews, Concannon came across quite genuine and likeable.

Few plastics processors would follow in Concannon's shoes and try to make a name for themselves -- and their companies -- on TV talk shows and reality programs.

But it's definitely been effective for JFC Manufacturing.

Duluth, Ga., recycler U.S. Plastics Recovery has a good story to tell about how it started operations just before the start of the Great Recession, but it still managed to thrive.

Plastics News staff reporter Mike Verespej shared the story last year.

Now the company is getting another moment in the spotlight. This week U.S. Plastics Recovery is featured in The Wall Street Journal's "Small Business, Big Innovation" competition.

Steve Hogan, one of the firm's co-founders, tells the WSJ blog that the industrial plastics recycling company "was nearly swept under by the world-wide recession which hit in the fall of 2008. Our inventory was devalued by 90 percent and our sales fell by 70 percent in the first few months following the global collapse."

The company decided the only way to survive was to buy all the scrap it could at low prices, and wait for demand to pick up.

"To do this, we needed to raise capital, buy additional processing equipment and move into a larger facility. If we could implement this strategy quickly, we would leapfrog the competition," Hogan said.

Check the competition website for more stories about small businesses that are trying to innovate their way out of the recession. Eventually the newspaper will pick a company to feature in its Nov. 21 Small Business report.

With Washington so focused on the economy, I can't resist sharing a sure-to-be controversial column from CNN.com that questions the importance of jobs.

Author Douglas Rushkoff asserts in "Are jobs obsolete?" that, as a result of changes in the economy, our focus should no longer be on creating jobs for the unemployed.

Instead, we need to change our attitudes and realize the value of "creative activities" that make life "fun, meaningful, and purposeful."

"Unlike Industrial Age employment, digital production can be done from the home, independently, and even in a peer-to-peer fashion without going through big corporations. We can make games for each other, write books, solve problems, educate and inspire one another -- all through bits instead of stuff. And we can pay one another using the same money we use to buy real stuff," Rushkoff writes.

Maybe this is the ultimate in a sustainable economy. It's definitely a strategy that can minimize the consumption of energy and raw materials.

It may be be an interesting idea, but I'm skeptical that the economy is ready to turn away from manufacturing and selling real products.

Can more than a small fraction of workers generate enough value from their "creative activities" to avoid living in the basements of friends and family who have traditional jobs?

U.S. readers might believe California is ground zero for the debate on plastic bag taxes and bans. But long-time Plastics Blog readers know that the latest wave of anti-bag legislation actually originated in the United Kingdom.

Film maker Rebecca Hosking sparked the debate in the small village of Modbury, England, after a trip to the Pacific Ocean where she saw environmental damage created by plastic marine debris.

The bag ban battle rages on today, in England, Wales and Scotland, as you can see from these headlines from sister newspaper PRW. And the latest, somewhat surprising, word comes from a newspaper that has long crusaded against plastic bags, the Daily Mail.

The paper posted a story today, "Shoppers 'hoarding free plastic bags' because of fears they will be outlawed," which was the result of a discussion about bag bans today in the House of Lords.

The story contains two surprising revelations, both courtesy of Lord Baroness of Parkes.

First, she claims that "some people are starting to hoard free plastic carrier bags because they are so fearful they will become unavailable."

Why do I find this surprising? Because just about everyone who cares for dogs will hoard free plastic bags all the time -- not just when they're afraid they'll become unavailable -- for obvious reasons. Perhaps Lord Baroness of Parkes would like to visit my house and help clean up after our terriers.

Second, she suggests that plastic bag makers can control the degradability of bags to a degree that sounds a bit exaggerated.

"The chemical additive D2W, which has been used since the 1970s, has now been developed to a degree of accuracy that almost the exact date of self-destruct can be built into plastic bag manufacture," she said.

"Would not it be an advantage for everyone to know this date so that bags could be tailored to certain markets such as the fast food industry to prevent bags clogging our waterways and to prevent other bags intended for long-term storage unexpectedly turning into confetti?"

D2W is an additive marketed by Britain's Symphony Environmental Technologies plc.

While Symphony is an active participant in the bag ban debate, I'm skeptical that the company would go so far to say they can predict "almost the exact date" that bags manufactured with their additives will "self-destruct."

Hype and exaggeration are often weapons used in the debate over plastic bags -- both in the United States and the United Kingdom.

Steve Jobs' decision to resign as CEO of Apple Inc. last night is the biggest story on the business page today. Jobs is one of the rare corporate CEOs who became a household name. Newspaper readers understand that, no matter the company culture, Apple without Jobs will be a different company.

Apple may not be the No. 1 player in personal computers, but the company's impact in that market -- and in smartphones, tablet computers and portable media players -- has been significant.

And that's not limited to operating systems, software and features. Apple also put an emphasis on design -- the materials, the colors, the shapes -- that has been revolutionary.

That's one way that Jobs has had a major impact on the plastics industry.

Plastics News correspondent Roger Renstrom touched on Apple and plastics design in a sidebar story to a special report on electronics earlier this year.

Jonathan Glancey of The Guardian newspaper also wrote about Jobs' influence on design, in a feature today headlined "Steve Jobs: iDesigned your life."

Here's part of Glancey's column that highlights the plastics-related design breakthroughs at Apple:

One of Jobs's greatest contributions to design was the promotion of Jonathan Ive, the brilliant young British designer, to senior vice president of industrial design at Apple Inc in 1998. Jobs had been away from Apple for some years - creating Pixar and thus Toy Story in the interim - yet when he came back, he teamed up with Ive to create a range of hugely appealing products. The first was the colourful iMac of 1998, a bold attempt to break away from the dull world of beige and grey plastic computer cases. With its oddball marriage of boiled sweet colours and transparent plastics, the iMac was certainly eye-catching, and it also sold - two million in the first 12 months.

But Jobs and Ive really got into their stride in 2001 with the iPod MP3 player, a small, minimalist design that evoked the work of the legendary German designer Dieter Rams, who had done so much since the 1950s to make Braun products, from record players to electric shavers, sell in prodigious quantities worldwide. The iPhone (2007) and iPad three years later have seen the Jobs-Ive design partnership come to fruition. These lightweight yet well-made, jewel-like objects, with their crystal-clear screens, finally imbued the design of computers and digital gizmos with a seductive quality. Once seen and touched, sales were made.

Another way that Jobs has had an impact on plastics is related to material choices -- specifically those that have been the result of pressure from environmentalists.

For years, Greenpeace has pressured Apple to avoid PVC and brominated flame retardants. Long before the word "sustainability" become a buzzword, Apple's plastics material choices have been under a microscope.

Greenpeace determined that a significant number of Apple buyers cared about these issues. Apple, indeed, has paid attention, and it has adjusted its material portfolio as a result of the campaign.

Now that Jobs is retiring, will we see changes from Apple that will impact its plastics part and material suppliers? Or will the company be cautious about straying too far from Jobs' strategies?

What's your stereotype of the "super green" consumer? Scarborough Research recently prepared a report, "All About the Super Greenies," that attempts to categorize them.

Scarborough defines a "super green" consumer as someone who does at least 10 of these 14 "eco-friendly" activities regularly:

• Buy eco-friendly household cleaning supplies
• Buy locally grown food
• Buy organic food
• Donate money or time to environmental causes
• Drive less/use alternative transportation
• Pay more for eco-friendly products and services
• Plan to buy a hybrid vehicle
• Recycle electronics
• Recycle glass, plastic or paper
• Support politicians based on environmental policies
• Use cloth or other reusable grocery bags
• Use energy efficient light bulbs
• Use less water at home
• Use rechargeable batteries

I imagine quite a few Plastics Blog readers qualify, using that criteria.

According to Scarborough's research (PDF), "super greens" are "high-income, high-spending consumers who purchase luxury items and lead active lifestyles. Further, they are using the Internet for local information - from basic information on the weather to seeking out local businesses."

According to the report, they're more likely than typical consumers to contribute to political campaigns, to ride a bike, and to buy expensive jewelry.

The top markets for "super greens" are San Francisco, Seattle, Portland and San Diego, where they make up 17, 13, 11 and 11 percent of the local markets, respectively. (Did you think the percentages in those cities would be higher? I did).

The national average for any given market is 5 percent, and the cities with the lowest percentage of "super greens" are Rochester, NY;, Phoenix, Indianapolis, Knoxville, Louisville, San Antonio, Chattanooga, Miami, Nashville and Houston, all with 3 percent.

U.S. District Judge Ortrie Smith in Missouri has denied a request by plaintiffs' lawyers for class certification in lawsuits against six makers of polycarbonate baby bottles and sippy cups.

The ruling (PDF), dated July 5, involves a case with defendants Handi-Craft Co., Gerber Products Co., Playtex Products Inc., Evenflow Co. Inc., Nalge Nunc International Corp. and RC2 Corp.

The plaintiffs allege that the manufacturers failed to warn consumers of the dangers of BPA despite their knowledge of its alleged toxicity.

Denying class certification doesn't end the lawsuits. But it's interesting that the court had some comments about the debate over BPA safety, which it addressed in determining if the lawsuits could satisfy federal guidelines on "commonality."

Here's a portion of the ruling:

"Defendants contend - and the Court agrees - that a consumer's knowledge of BPA's existence and the surrounding controversy is legally significant. Knowledge of the controversy carries with it knowledge of the likelihood (or at least possibility) that a plastic baby bottle contained BPA. A consumer who knew about the controversy and also knew that the bottle s/he purchased contained BPA would have all the knowledge Plaintiffs allege should have been disclosed, and will have tremendous difficulty convincing a jury that the seller was unjustly enriched. Similarly, a consumer who knew about the controversy and exhibited no concern about whether the product purchased contained BPA may have difficulty convincing a jury that the seller was unjustly enriched. This same analysis holds true for claims under consumer protection statutes."

Many businesses are skittish about marketing sustainability benefits of their products these days because they are afraid of being branded as "greenwashers" -- I think that's especially true in the plastics sector.

But Jacquelyn Ottman, an adviser on green marketing and author of "The New Rules of Green Marketing: Strategies, Tools and Inspiration for Sustainable Branding," says skepticism shouldn't scuttle companies' sustainability efforts, or their marketing campaigns.

Ottman has a column today on sister publication Advertising Age subtitled "5 Steps for Gaining Consumer Trust Despite Greenwashing Fears."

Here are some samples:

• Thwart the most discriminating of critics by visibly making progress toward measurable goals. Being proactive in responding to the public's concerns and expectations starts with a visible and committed CEO. That's because CEOs can create an emotional link between the company and its customers. Empower your employees, too. Educate them on environmental issues and the specifics of their company's processes so they can fuel authentic communications about your company's green initiatives.
• Don't mislead. Be specific, prominent and comprehensive so as not to confuse. Consumers may claim to know what commonly used terms such as "recyclable" and "biodegradable" mean, but they can be easily mistaken -- creating risk for unsuspecting sustainable marketers.
• The best advice for green marketers is to adopt specific standards for disclosure of green initiatives and to follow the FTC Green Guides or other appropriate government guidelines.

Click the link to Ad Age for the full article, and check out her "Moving Sustainability Forward" white paper.

Don't expect this to be the last word on the issue, but the latest study on bisphenol A safety suggests that people don't accumulate enough of the chemical to cause harm.

The Wall Street Journal editorialized on the study yesterday. The research was led by Justin Teeguarden at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and published in the journal Toxicological Studies -- and funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

According to the WSJ report, subjects were fed a BPA-rich diet for 24 hours, then their blood and urine was monitored for traces of the chemical.

"The results of the study, which was duplicated in two separate government labs, may not change the fate of BPA in the court of public opinion," the newspaper editorialized. "Lost amid the hysteria were the benefits of BPA, including the fact that it helped to eliminate botulism in canned food. Where does a chemical go to get its reputation back?"

Maybe I've been following bag ban lawsuits for too long, but when I read this story today I chuckled.

According to The Beach Reporter, the former city attorney in Manhattan Beach, Calif., plans to file a lawsuit against the city. He's upset that he's not being credited with winning the landmark case that allows the city to ban plastic bags.

Former city attorney Robert Wadden was terminated in April. Then, earlier this month, the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city in the bag ban case.

"Their argument in firing me was that I was not competent. But you have to be fairly competent to win a Supreme Court case," Wadden told The Beach Reporter, a weekly newspaper in Manhattan Beach.

Wadden, who is 62 and worked for the city for more than 15 years, says he plans to file an age discrimination case, and he is seeking at least $155,000 in severance.

According to the local story:

The city's elected leaders have applauded the ruling as a major victory for Manhattan Beach, but excluded mentioning Wadden in public remarks. His name was not included in a press release issued shortly after the ruling was announced, nor was it mentioned during a brief ceremony marking the victory at the most recent City Council meeting.

Wadden believes the lack of public recognition is intentional.

I guess the city could have saved itself some embarrassment by mentioning Wadden in their press release. Now the courts may have to decide who gets credit for winning the bag suit!

Mike SanClements, an ecologist at the University of Colorado, just concluded a two-week attempt to minimize the plastics in his life, which he blogged about for Grist.org.

I've blogged about "let's live without plastics" efforts before, and some of SanClements' observations are pretty typical. So let's focus on what he does differently.

He started the series by observing that plastic is "both amazing and horrible. Think about all the great things made from plastic -- the computer I'm typing on, our phones, medical and scientific equipment. I don't think wooden cell phones would work so well.

"At the same time, we use far too much plastic and the environmental and health effects are terrible. Plastic is made from fossil fuels so it's energy-intensive to produce. It doesn't go away when you put it in the trash and when you recycle it, it doesn't get used over and over and over again like aluminum."

SanClements had an entertaining post about trying to minimize plastics that he encounters because he has a dog, Hank. SanClements eventually purchases some biodegradable plastic bags (made from cornstarch) to clean up after Hank.

It's interesting how the term "plastic" is being applied only to materials that are made from natural gas or oil and take a long time to degrade. Is that intentional -- are suppliers of resins made from renewable materials and/or degrade more quickly intentionally avoiding the term "plastic"? I don't think so. But that's how SanClements uses the terms, and I think that's a pretty typical attitude these days.

Also interesting -- check out the comments from his readers about how they tackle the dog waste issue without using plastic bags.

SanClements concluded his series yesterday, noting that "it would be nearly impossible to avoid plastic entirely unless maybe you were homesteading in Alaska. Even then, I think you'd be hard pressed."

He then divides plastics into three categories -- the good, the bad, and the ugly.

"The good is your phone, camera, computer, medical equipment, ski bindings, etc. These things last a long time and using plastic makes possible, or greatly improves, their performance. Backpacking with a canvas tent? I'm cool with nylon, thanks.

"The bad is stuff like plastic food storage containers. It gets reused over and over but while you are using it, who knows whether or not it's leaching nasty chemicals into your food? It's nice to know that in some instances, like water bottles, BPA-free plastics are now available for purchase.

"The ugly is what I call lazy plastic -- single-use plastic that's easily avoidable with almost no effort required to find a substitute. Plastic grocery bags are the king of ugly plastic. There is never a need to get a plastic grocery bag at the store. They should be banned. You can bring your bags and you can also bring your own bags for produce."

When Jon Huntsman Jr. first announced that he's running for the GOP nomination for president, political columnists dusted off their "Can a Mormon be elected president" files.

But now I wonder ... is Huntsman's history as a -- gulp! -- chemical company executive a bigger stumbling block than his religious background?

I ask because of a column by Jeremy P. Jacobs from Greenwire, posted on The New York Times' website today.

The column, headlined "Styrofoam Made Huntsman Rich, but Candidate's Role in the Family Business Remains Unclear," throws quite a few darts at Huntsman because of his connection to the family chemical business.

Here's a snippet that plastics industry readers may find objectionable:

Many of Huntsman's earliest products have gone on to become some of public health advocates' top targets.

The majority of their concerns focus on two aspects: the toxicity of polystyrene and the lasting environmental impact of Styrofoam.

Polystyrene is made using styrene, a component of many plastics and rubbers. Since it was popularized -- in part by Huntsman Corp. -- in the 1970s and 1980s, it has fallen out of favor as food packaging because of potential health effects.

"Styrene as well as various chemical additives in polystyrene leach into food, which increases significantly for hot liquids," said Olga Naidenko, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group. "This is a problem, because polystyrene is very commonly used as disposal packaging for hot food and beverages. While further research is needed, many chemical additives leaching from plastic packaging have been associated with hormonal disruption in people."

The National Toxicology Program said last month that exposure to high levels of styrene is "reasonably anticipated" to cause cancer (E&ENews PM, June 10).

And Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York who is known for his work on public health issues, said there is a direct connection between styrene and Styrofoam.

"My biggest concern about Styrofoam lies in its threat to the environment," Landrigan said. "It clogs up landfills and is virtually immortal. Moreover, its constituents such as styrene can leach into groundwater and thus have potential to end up in drinking water."

So, there's concern about the toxicity of PS? Potential health effects? Are we talking about styrene or polystyrene? They almost appear to be interchangeable here.

What are the chemical additives that Naidenko seems to be saying leach from PS packaging? Does PS really clog up landfills any more than any other product?

I feel like I'm being transported back to the early 1990s, when attacks like this convinced McDonald's to abandon the PS burger clamshell.

If Huntsman is going to have to fight -- and win -- that battle in order to be elected president, then I wouldn't bet on him eventually occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We know how the last big debate over PS turn out.

There continues to be intense interest among many readers in biodegradable plastics.

A case in point: a story that we posted on June 1, "Biodegradable products in landfills may be harmful" was the third-most-accessed story on PlasticsNews.com in June.

The story, from our colleagues at Waste & Recycling News, said that biodegradable products such as some disposable cups and utensils may be doing more harm than good in landfills, because they release a powerful greenhouse gas as they break down.

Since there was so much interest, I want to make sure that readers notice that we've published a Perspective column from one of the authors of the study that prompted the first story.

The column, headlined "Collecting landfill gas good step," is by James Levis, a researcher and doctoral student at North Carolina State University.

Levis notes that he is aware that his report, "Is Biodegradability a Desirable Attribute for Discarded Solid Waste? Perspectives from a National Landfill Greenhouse Gas Inventory Model," had generated news headlines.

In some cases, he said, writers have drawn improper conclusions from the report.

For example, writers who he identified as anti-environmentalists "have tried to use the results to portray environmentalists and environmentalism as naive and/or misguided. This argument is nonsensical when made by those who deny anthropogenic climate change. This research is meaningless if one does not first accept basic climate science. The purpose of the research is to allow us to more effectively mitigate GHG emissions by making informed decisions."

What the study does suggest is that landfill operators should be much more aggressive about collecting methane from landfills. In addition, it suggests that "increasing composting infrastructure could also be beneficial if additional life-cycle research shows benefits from composting these materials instead of landfilling."

I know this won't be the final word on the merits of degradable plastics. But it should help to put the North Carolina State research into the proper perspective.

California had a long history of groups trying to secede from the rest of the state -- and the newest one has a plastics angle!

Jeff Stone, a member of the Riverside County board of supervisors, has proposed that 13 mostly inland, conservative counties break away from the rest of the state and form a new state of "South California.''

His proposed new state would include Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Tulare counties.

Los Angeles is the largest city in southern California, but it's not included in Stone's "South California" -- and that's where the plastics angle comes in.

Stone told Phil Willon of The Los Angeles Times:

"Los Angeles is purposely excluded because they have the same liberal policies that Sacramento does. The last thing I want to do is create a state that's a carbon copy of what we have now. ... Los Angeles just enacted a ban on plastic grocery bags. That put three or four manufacturers out of business.''

Willon's story notes that Stone's proposal has the proverbial's snowball's chance of actually going anywhere.

A spokesman for Gov. Jerry Brown called it "a supremely ridiculous waste of everybody's time," and a USC historian noted that secessionist movements are nothing new in California.

"It's never passed, and it will never pass. It's been up to bat 220 times and struck out every time," said USC history professor Kevin Starr.

Plastics News readers have a lot of interest in Dow Chemical Co.'s solar shingle project -- the company is actually injection molding durable plastic shingles that double as solar panels.

Carol Williams, a Dow group senior vice president and president of the chemicals and energy division, mentions the shingle project prominently today in an interview posted by James daSilva in the SmartBlog on Leadership.

"Driving the invention is solar, but innovation is putting it into the shingle," including making such shingles more energy- and cost-efficient for residential installations, Williams said.

She cites the shingle as an example of an innovative project that Dow is investing R&D dollars in, in hopes that the company can create a significant business by responding to major challenges facing society.

Williams says Dow invested $1.6 billion in R&D last year, while coming up with 500 projects that the company believes could generate $30 billion in sales.

Biodegradable plastics offer some promise for dealing with waste issues like litter and marine debris. But a new report prepared for the European Commission's Directorate-General Environment recommends more study before policymakers take actions that encourage manufacturers to redesign products to use biodegradable polymers.

The report (PDF), Plastics waste, redesign and biodegradability, considers the implications of redesign and increased use of biodegradable plastics.

Among the conclusions:

• The redesign of plastics and bioplastics has the potential to reduce the use of fossil fuels, decrease carbon dioxide emissions and decrease plastic waste.
• More agreement is needed on the use of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) to assess the environmental impact of bioplastics and redesigned plastics and LCAs need to focus more on end-of-life analysis.
• Clearer definitions and better labeling on the new breeds of plastics are required as well as improved public communication.
• Assessments of the impacts on waste management infrastructure should be performed at a local and national level.
• Research is needed to assess the critical mass needed to make bioplastics affordable and to identify the most appropriate plastics to substitute.

The report doesn't go into a great deal of depth, but it is a useful primer for readers interested in the issues involved with the potentially growing market for biodegradable plastics.

The Monterey County Weekly in Seaside, Calif., is unhappy that many restaurants in its circulation area are ignoring local bans on polystyrene take-out containers. So the newspaper has created a database of offenders, and now it is asking readers to help add to the list.

"Nobody likes to tattle on their favorite restaurants. And we understand that in these times, any added expense is hard on business owners," Kera Abraham writes today. "But elected officials - like our own readers - have sent a strong and united message that getting this toxic stuff out of the waste stream (and natural streams) is worth the extra investment."

She writes that as of June 15, 18 local restaurants were apparently violating local PS bans, while 12 were in compliance.

City officials don't really have the time or staff to go around and check on whether restaurants are complying with bans. So if anyone is going to pressure them to do so, it's likely to be local papers like this one, and grassroots environmental groups.

Even if 99 percent of customers don't care if a restaurant is using PS take-out containers, it takes just one complaint to draw attention to an offender.

So while I don't think most patrons would bother to report a violation, this "tattle" strategy could work in towns where the local media embrace the bans.

Plastics News has written hundreds of inches of copy on the plastic-bodied Think car. But it looks -- once again -- like the company is in serious financial trouble. And despite growing global interest in electric vehicles, this time the company might not get another chance.

Our sister publication Automotive News Europe is reporting today that Norway's Think Global AS has filed for bankruptcy.

Incredibly, this is the fourth time that the company has collapsed financially in its 20-year history.

According to ANE's Douglas A Bolduc, this time liquidation is a possibility.

The company has a wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, Think North America, which has a manufacturing plant in Elkhart, Ind. The location was considered a plus since local RV suppliers have plastics expertise that can help a low-volume automaker like Think.

But while the U.S. subsidiary is a separate entity, its future now is in doubt because it is financially supported by the parent company.

Plastics News staff reporter Rhoda Miel visited the Elkhart plant a few months ago. Check out this story, with a link to a video report, for more on the company, including plenty of plastics-specific details.

You may recall that Think was owned by Ford Motor Co. from mid-1999 until January 2003.

Think's most recent troubles were signaled a few weeks ago, when battery maker Ener1 Inc. said it would return its 31 percent stake in the Norwegian company and take a $73.3 million write-down on the investment.

General Motors Co. is honoring the supplier that spearheaded a program to recycle hundreds of miles worth of used oil booms from the Gulf of Mexico and use the material in car parts.

Mobile Fluid Recovery Inc. of Birmingham, Ala., worked with the Detroit-based automaker previously on efforts to clean and recycle rags used during auto production.

The multi-company effort headed by Mobile Fluid Recovery cleaned and recovered more than 200 miles of polypropylene, polyethylene, PVC and other materials from booms used in the 2010 oil spill cleanup in the Gulf.

The plastics were then used in air baffles for the Chevrolet Volt electric car.

GM announced in a June 10 news release that it gave the company is Environmental Excellence Award for providing unique recycling ideas and collaboration on projects.

(Thanks to Rhoda Miel, Plastics News' staff reporter in Detroit, for writing this up).

It's a pleasure to report tonight that Plastics News was honored by the Press Club of Cleveland with two Excellence in Journalism 2011 awards.

The entire Plastics News editorial staff was honored with a second place in the "Best Trade Publication in Ohio" award. PN actually tied with a sister publication, Waste and Recycling News, in the category.

Here's what the judges had to say about PN and WRN: "These publications made it difficult to pick one over the other, as both are jam packed with relevant news for their industry and provide must-have content for their audience."

I couldn't have said it better myself! (First place in the category went to a landscaping magazine).

PN also was honored in the "Departments or Columns" category. I received a second place award for my Viewpoint columns. (First place went to Michael Feuer of Smart Business Cleveland).

It's a treat to be recognized by our peers in journalism for the work we do every day for our readers. Congratulations team!

After I posted a video tour of Marglen Industries' PET recycling plant yesterday, I received an email link to another good recycling plant tour. So today I encourage readers to check out Placon Corp.'s EcoStar recycling plant in Fitchburg, Wis.

Jennifer Mitchell, Placon's marketing communications manager, says the company put together the video to provide a virtual tour the new recycling facility.

"We wanted to show the recycling story, not only tell it," she said. "Our EcoStar facility is unique in its ability to run mixed thermoform bales as well as bottles. Watching how it starts out as dirty plastic and comes out clean food-grade flake is quite the process. There are several washing cycles, sorting processes, metal detectors and even a decontamination process that can only clearly be explained by watching how it flows through."

Mitchell brought up another good reason for companies to create video tours of their plants (I mentioned a few in my blog post yesterday) -- it helps potential customers who have limited travel budgets.

"Many of our customers were interested when we announced we were adding this facility, but with traveling freezes it isn't always possible for companies to come and tour it," she said.

"This video has been used for more than customers though. We showed it at our open house a few weeks ago prior to employees and local community members going through the plant.

"Even with a tour guide it is difficult to hear the step-by-step process so this familiarizes them before they go in and may prompt some additional questions as they go through."

Placon hired a local company in Madison, Wis., to shoot and edit the video.

"We discussed trying to do it ourselves but because of the noise level from the machines it is hard to take a camera through and do it at a level we would be happy with," Mitchell said. "We are very pleased how it turned out and summarizes the story."

I hope the Marglen and Placon examples encourage more plastics processors to look into how they might use video to help promote their companies.

I don't think we're to this point yet, but perhaps it's almost here: At a debate in Aspen, Colo., yesterday on "Rethinking plastics," one participate made the argument that the time for debate is over -- single-use plastics should be banned.

That's the position of David de Rothschild, an environmentalist and author who in 2010 made a trip across the Pacific in a boat made from recycled plastics to raise awareness of ocean debris.

According to this report from The Aspen Times, Rothschild "said the debate is getting bogged down because the American Chemistry Council (ACC) is pumping millions of dollars annually into a campaign to warn people that the 'plastics police' will ruin the economy."

"Rothschild said the argument that banning plastic grocery bags will doom the economy is ridiculous. It will benefit imperiled ocean life and improve the food chain that threatens human health, he claimed," according to Scott Condon's report.

Rothschild was participating in "Rethinking Plastic: Design, Reuse and Recycling," a panel discussion that was part of the 4-day Aspen Environment Forum.

The plastics industry was represented at the debate by Marsha Craig, engineering polymers global business manager for DuPont Co. She's quoted in Condon's report talking about plastics recycling, adding: "I'm an optimist. I think plastics are good. I think they are going to get better."

I've been to my share of plastics recycling plants, but for Plastics Blog readers who have not, here's a nice video tour of a Marglen Industries plant in Georgia, courtesy of the International Bottled Water Association.

"This video traces the path that an empty bottles travels, from a bound bale to being made into clean plastic flake that is then heated and converted to make either food-grade [recycled PET] pellets, which are used to make PET containers for food, or rPET fiber which is used in pillows, mattresses and carpeting," said Tom Lauria, IBWA's vice-president of communications

The video highlights the technology used to recycle PET, as well as the persistent issue that recyclers have getting enough bottles to feed their plants.

"We hope that this video will help promote recycling through a better understanding of the need for more recycled material and the useful products that can be made from empty PET bottles," Lauria said.

Other manufacturers might consider doing similar videos to highlight their technology and processes. They could come in handy helping to recruit new talent and in explaining the importance of your business to your community.

I've blogged many times about thieves targeting plastic pallets and crates, and various efforts to foil them. The state of Arizona is raising the ante, with a new law aimed specifically at protecting plastic pallets.

Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services writes about the effort today in a story on the Arizona Daily Star's website, "New rules aim to stop theft of plastic pallets."

One bottling company executive quoted in the story estimates his firm spends $700,000 replacing pallets that "disappear."

"At night, people go out and scavenge and sell them," said John Kalil, vice president of Kalil Bottling Co. in Tucson. "If you're unemployed, lack cash, have a pickup truck, you're in business. We need something to shut them down."

According to the story, starting July 20 if a company -- for example, a plastics recycler or scrap dealer -- buys more than five pallets at a time that have a company logo, they'll have to collect personal information from the seller, including name, phone number, driver's license and license plate information. The buyers will have to keep the information on file for a year.

The penalty for failing to comply is a fine of up to $30,000.

Some states have similar laws that apply to other frequently stolen recyclables, like copper piping and catalytic converters.

NewsChannel 8 in Washington is reporting that 38 percent of the business there are not complying with the city's 5-cent-per-bag tax on single-use plastic and paper grocery bags.

The station's report quotes an unidentified official with the district's ">Department of the Environment who has been visiting stores as a "secret shopper" to check on whether they're complying with the law.

My question: Why are they failing to comply?

According to the story, the problem is that stores "simply don't understand" the law. Also, many shoppers don't understand that the law applies to businesses like sporting goods stores and hot dog stands.

This is something other cities mulling bag taxes will have to consider -- there will be a cost associated with enforcing the law, even if it's just aimed at educating retailers.

Despite being a college town, Evanston, Ill., historically has not had a reputation as a bastion of liberalism. But the city is now the focal point of the expanding U.S. debate over banning (or taxing) plastic bags.

Alderman Coleen Burrus started the local debate earlier this year when she suggested a 5-cent-per-bag tax, like the one in Washington, D.C. But now the city is debating a ban on both plastic and paper bags instead.

Will it fly? News reports from last night's City Council meeting seem to indicate that there's still room for debate.

"For every person who has said they are against it, there is someone else who has said they would shop in Evanston to support it," said Catherine Hurley, sustainable programs manager for the city.

Todd Ruppenthal of the Central Street Merchants Association told a reporter, "We are not against a greener Evanston. What we are against is something we believe is very small-sighted. This is the head of the pin of what could possibly be done."

I'm a former resident, so I was surprised when this issue first surfaced in Evanston. I thought it would disappear right away. When I went to school there, the city was known as a pretty conservative place. (It is still home to the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and the city was "dry" until 1984).

But now I'm wondering if Evanston will be the first of many Midwest communities where government officials will debate the merits of single-use grocery bags.

Until now, most of the industry's efforts to combat bag bans has focused on boosting recycling programs in places like California, where the pressure was most intense. But it looks like bag makers had better step up that effort nationwide.

One local report from the Chicago area today quoted the industry's record on bag recycling to date:

Only 1.5 percent of plastic store bags are recovered through recycling programs in Illinois, a dismally low figure compared to the recovery rates for aluminum cans, plastic bottles, glass jars and most other recyclables, according to a 2009 study contracted by the Illinois Recycling Association.

If the response to taxes and bans is going to be to push recycling, that 1.5 percent recycling rate had better improve right away.

If you've ever been to the finish line at a marathon -- at least in a cold-weather location like Cleveland -- you know that runners wrap themselves in disposable blankets that look like giant pieces of aluminum foil to stay warm after the long race.

But runners don't tend to like to carry a lot of extra gear, so most of the blankets are discarded at the end of the day.

Let's see, we've got a relatively large volume of a material made of an identical material -- This sounds like an opportunity for a recycler, right? You've got it.

Today AFM Inc., the manufacturer of Heatsheets-brand blankets, announced that it worked with wood-plastic composite decking and railing manufacturer Trex Co. Inc. to recycle the finish line blankets from the Greater Washington Sports Alliance's SunTrust National Marathon on March 26.

According to the companies, this was the first race to participate in the new program, which allows events of any size to recycle and repurpose their Heatsheets thermal-reflective finish line blankets at Trex collection facilities across the country for transformation into durable decking and railing products.

"The Blankets to Boards program allowed us to easily recycle our Heatsheets, reduce our event's waste and improve our environmental impact while still providing the finish line blankets that runners need, especially on a cold day," said Daniella Levy, event manager for the Greater Washington Sports Alliance and finish line director for the SunTrust National Marathon.

With temperatures dipping into the low 30s during the marathon, the Greater Washington Sports Alliance provided 12,000 Heatsheets to runners. Approximately 2,000 - or 16 percent - were returned for recycling.

The sheets, which are made of low density polyethylene, were taken to a local Safeway store, then sent on to Trex.

The Safer Chemicals/Healthy Families blog is right -- this video "will both make you laugh and make you mad."

But I'm not sure it will be in the ways they intended.

The Xtranormal video is a make-believe interview of a chemical company spokesman by a mom who apparently has her own late-night TV talk show.

The chemical guy says ridiculous things like "toxic chemicals are perfectly safe already. The real problem is people who worry too much," and "scientists worry too much, they're scaring people with too many facts."

The interview concludes when the mom offers the chemical industry guy a drink from "a plastic water bottle made by your company. It contains chemicals that have been shown to lower sperm counts."

Not exactly a fair debate.

The video equates the plastics bottle maker with the chemical industry, and personifies industry with a PR-speaking buffoon who says one ridiculous thing after another.

For readers who want to dig deeper than what the video offers, the Safer Chemicals/Healthy Families blog does offer more information on bisphenol A safety in its "resources" section. The information is even presented pretty fairly, considering it's specifically there to convince the public to lobby Congress for tighter regulations on BPA.

It's another interesting example of how the debate on plastics and chemicals safety is playing out in social media, with easy-to-use tools like blogs, YouTube and Xtranormal.

Injection molder Cascade Engineering Inc. is continuing its annual report on its "triple bottom line," noting its efforts in promoting environmental and social progress as well as economics.

The Grand Rapids, Mich.-based firm recently released details for 2010, which are available as a pdf file here.

Cascade notes its continued reduction in waste going to landfills, its use of post-consumer recycled content and investments in solar as well as wind power. The company's welfare-to-work program averaged a 97.13 percent retention rate, while Cascade's pink trash carts -- which support breast cancer awareness programs -- are now available in 35 states.

The report also notes new efforts for 2010. Cascade -- aided by donations from Dow Chemical Co. and other groups -- worked with the U.S. Navy to send 1,000 large scale water filters to Haiti following the earthquake there.

"The U.S. Navy's Project Handclasp provided the logistics to get the filters transported to Haiti and through customs. Another willing partner, Pure Water For The World, was waiting on the ground in Haiti to begin installations while our local neighbor, Amway, provided chlorinators and de-chlorinators to make the filters work immediately," the report notes.

"Since the original filters were installed, we have continued to receive emails, pictures and stories about how the filters have impacted lives. In one orphanage, many children used to be seriously ill from the water, but thanks to the filter they are no longer at risk due to unsafe drinking water. Our filter was even profiled on a CNN broadcast. The Navy has also shared with us that it is the, 'No. 1 requested item on all of the ships,' because of its effectiveness and the positive impact it has on people's lives."

CK Technologies also joined an outreach program working with the Toledo Correctional Institution inmates while Cascade also participated in two different youth job mentoring programs.

Get ready to meet "Kai," a real goldfish that is the centerpiece of a social media-focused ad campaign designed to raise awareness of plastic marine debris.

The campaign, on behalf of Project Kaisei, a non-profit ocean cleanup initiative, was created by advertising agency Cohn & Wolfe.

The plan? They're putting "Kai" (pronounced Kī) in a fish tank filled with plastic trash. Starting today, for the next 30 days, the sponsors will stream live video of the tank on the "Kai's Home" Facebook page.

In order to "Save Kai" and remove plastic from his tank, Facebook friends can make donations to the project. As donations increase, plastic debris will be removed.

Does this remind anyone else of the iconic National Lampoon cover from January 1973, "If you don't buy this magazine, we'll kill this dog?"

"With this campaign we want to help people around the world to understand the impact of plastic pollution in the ocean and rethink our use of materials that end up there as debris," said Doug Woodring, co-founder of Project Kaisei.

Cohn & Wolfe prepared the campaign as part of a pro-bono partnership with Project Kaisei -- the goal was to create a project that would cost just $1,000, be orchestrated in 30 days, and raise 10 times that amount to help fund Project Kaisei's next ocean expedition.

"This was a creative exercise to push our people's thinking to the outer limits, giving them almost no money or time to design a program that would accomplish something rewarding. Who knew the idea would center on a single goldfish? We know people will donate to help save Kai," said Cohn & Wolfe Chief Creative Catalyst Jeremy Baka.

The Plastics Blog is pleased and humbled to be included on "50 Best Blogs for Industrial Design Students," a list put together by OnlineUniversities.com.

The list is described as "50 blogs that anyone interested in learning more about great product design should check out, with news, stunning photos and tips that can help you improve your skills in the field."

Check the link for the whole list. They include 12 "Must-Read" blogs including Core 77, Yanko Design, Product Design Hub, Industrial Design History, Industrial Design Served, CAD CAM News, Embody 3D, ID Tuts, Planet Industrial Design, Get It Made, Industrial Design Sandbox and IDSA News.

There are also blogs listed under the "General Design," "Inspiration," "Designers and Firms," "The Business of Design" and "Niche" categories.

The Plastics Blog is in that last category, with this description: "So much of what we use and what you'll be designing will require plastics. Why not learn a bit more about it now? Start with this blog."

The other day at Antec, someone asked a question during my panel discussion about how plastics recycling could be more like aluminum. The question kicked off a good discussion on the differences between the materials.

Today the "Save the Plastics" blog posted an item on high density polyethylene recycling that, if I'd seen it last week, I could have cited it as a source. So for the benefit of everyone, I'll share it here.

According to the blog, recycling HDPE makes great sense these days, in part because of the high costs of energy and virgin resin.

Here's the part that reminded me of aluminum: according to the post, "converting previously used HDPE plastic into resin uses 90 percent less energy than virgin resin to produce."

On the aluminum side, we've often seen the claim that recycling scrap aluminium requires only 5 percent of the energy used to make new aluminium.

Of course aluminum is more expensive than plastic, so the comparison isn't perfect. But that's a great fact that Plastics Blog readers can cite in support of the commercial viability of plastics recycling.

I'm at the Society of Plastics Engineers' Antec 2011 conference today in Boston. My head is just spinning a bit after sitting in on forums with names like "High temperature polyimide film for roll-to-roll copper-indium-gallium-selenide (CIGS) deposition."

All good stuff, and thoroughly researched. I love how the Q&A after a technical presentation can be so specific -- or how sometimes an entire roomful of experts has no questions at all!

SPE provided some facts and figures today about the conference:

• Experts will make more than 700 presentations at 108 topical sessions this year.
• Paper and presentation submissions were up 25 percent from 2010 levels.
• Student presentations have hit a 10+ year high.

Next year, Antec will take place April 2-4 in Orlando, Fla., in conjunction with the NPE 2010 trade show.

There's a spirited discussion about BPA safety and science reporting taking place in Milwaukee this week. One point that it reinforces to me: If you want to get a journalist's attention, attack his ethics.

Jon Entine, director of the Genetic Literacy Project at STATS, writes about the controversy today in The American, the Journal of the American Enterprise Insititute.

The post, headlined "Milwaukee's Best No Longer," goes into detail about the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's coverage of a report about BPA safety by the German Society of Toxicology.

(Entine first gave the German report a wider audience last week, as I covered in this previous post).

I've been watching the Journal Sentinel's coverage on its web site this week. Even before I saw Entine's post today, I thought the debate was quite interesting.

There's obviously disagreement about BPA safety between the paper's news reporters and editors and a conservative columnist. The dispute seems to have spilled over into the paper's own web site, with a spirited debate in the comments section.

I won't recap everything here -- check Entine's post for the full story and his links.

I doubt this will be the last word on the issue. The Journal Sentinel has put a lot of resources behind its BPA reporting. So I expect it will take steps to defend its credibility.

It will be interesting to see if, in the end, the paper decides to keep both of its conflicting "voices" that it has speaking about BPA -- its news reporters and editors, and its conservative columnist.

Plastic bag bans and taxes remain hot issues. Five U.S. communities have approved bans so far this year. And the state of Oregon could be next.

The Oregon legislature is considering a bill that would ban plastic bags. The industry is fighting back, and now residents are hearing radio ads urging legislators to reject the bill.

Plastics News staff reporter Mike Verespej wrote last month about the pro-bag effort, spearheaded by major bag maker Hilex Poly Co. LLC.

The company created a website -- www.bagthebanoregon.com -- in addition to bankrolling radio and newspaper ads, and submitting editorial page columns to newspapers around the state.

I thought it would be interesting to share the radio ads with Plastics Blog readers, so here's a link to the "bagthebanoregon" multimedia page with the latest spots.

To summarize, the ads stress pretty strongly that if the ban passes, grocery prices would go up -- not a popular consequence in Oregon's troubled economy.

The ads also touch on some other hot buttons likely to appeal to some voters: Doesn't the legislature have more important issues to deal with? A ban would threaten U.S. jobs -- they even call them "green jobs." Reusable bags aren't as clean as single-use bags.

These are arguments that we'll likely see repeated elsewhere around the country, anywhere that a serious bag ban proposal surfaces.

The economic angle has been successful before -- voters aren't likely to support proposals that hit them in the pocketbook. Will that strategy work in Oregon?

You might not expect an interview with an environmental activist to include comments like "Plastic can be an incredibly reusable, resilient, sustainable material."

But that's the case with David de Rothschild, who is now pitching his new book "Plastiki: Across the Pacific on Plastic: An Adventure to Save Our Oceans."

Joe Fassler has a nice Q&A interview with Rothschild on The Atlantic's web site today.

I've blogged about Rothschild's mission before -- about the little boat made of recycled PET bottles, and about his effort to promote a recycled PET resin called Seretex. So we won't cover that again.

But the entire interview is very much focused on plastics, so I'll encourage you to click the link, while teasing you with a couple of the questions and Rothschild's answers:

Why do you think the plastic industry hasn't tapped into long-term use for its plastics? Wouldn't it make their own products more valuable?

"No. It's the high-volume, high-consumption model. The margins on a straw, say, are tiny. They want to sell 60 billion straws every year to make their profits, as opposed to something where you buy one, and that's it. It's not in the interest of the plastic industry to make products that are reusable and last longer when they're making money on high-volume, low-margin products, and churn, and consumption. It's an age-old problem: we live in a disposable society. At one point, it was a sign of affluence, I guess. These days, we've become highly suspicious of hygiene--so we use plastic forks once and throw them out. And we're hooked on convenience."

It's interesting that plastic is both villain and hero of your story. Yes, plastic's a dangerous, ubiquitous pollutant--but it's also a useful industrial material with vast untapped sustainable-design potential. How should we feel about it?

"I think we have to recognize that plastic's not going to disappear any time soon, and we've got learn to live with the consequences of our modern materials. Plastic can be an incredibly reusable, resilient, sustainable material. It can be the right material. Look at the number of applications--you're sitting on a plastic phone, writing notes on a plastic computer, using a plastic pen to draw up some other notes. When you look around, you see how ubiquitous it is. It's probably the most ubiquitous of all man-made materials."

Cigarette butts are a big component of litter, but they are difficult to deal with and often overlooked. Blake Burich, from the Columbus suburb of Dublin, Ohio, thinks he has a solution.

Burich's company, InnovaGreen Systems, is touting a process for turning the cellulose acetate butts into a material that can be used to make new products.

The Columbus Dispatch published a feature story on Burich a few weeks ago.

According to the story, Burich has patented a process to recycle the filters by mixing them with different solvents, creating plastics with a range of properties. The company is still a part-time, R&D-phase operation.

"I work on this thing from Saturday morning to Sunday night a lot of times," Burich told the Dispatch's Robert Vitale. "We're a bunch of guys who want to do something to improve Mother Earth."

Burich's current project is to create a sculpture for the city of Columbus using butts collected by volunteers.

This may be one of the oddest materials I've ever seen recycled -- and I once visited a plant that was trying to recycle disposable diapers.

If you're wondering how environmentalists feel about Coca-Cola Co.'s PlantBottle -- PET and HDPE containers made in-part from bio-based raw materials ... well, let's say it's not completely positive.

The Earth Resource Foundation sent a news release today after some of them received an invitation to an Earth Day event to launch Coke's Dasani-brand bottled water in a PET PlantBottle.

The release, titled "No Glee from Environmentalists for Coca-Cola 'PlantBottle'," takes the company to task. Much of the critcism could apply to any bottled water manufacturer, but a few of the points are specific to the PlantBottle material:

We Regret that despite your green leaf logo, your "plant bottle" is still just a PET plastic bottle and is not biodegradable or compostable on land or at sea.

We Regret that Coca-Cola will not be collecting and recycling their own PET "plant bottles," and that only approximately 20.9% percent of PET bottles are "recycled" (mostly into lower grade material that is not used in bottles again) in America. The remainder, at over 20 billion bottles, last forever in our landfills or in our environment, including our oceans. We also regret that Coca-Cola failed to achieve it's own pledge of using at least 10% recycled content in PET bottles and has just announced the shut down of it's PET recycling joint venture in South Carolina.

We Regret that Coca-Cola is substituting its chemical-laden petroleum plastic bottle with a chemical-laden petroleum and plant plastic bottle.

We Regret that estrogenic compounds in your PET "plant bottle" may leach into the water and impair human health and reproduction.

The release is in the form of a petition, and is signed by a number of leaders of California-based environmental groups.

While the petition does not link to Plastics News, we are the source of the information about Coke's recycling plant in South Carolina. For that story, check out this news story (which was updated today), as well as this interview with Coke's Scott Vitters.

Remember the paper "bottle" that Ecologic Brands Inc. rolled out last month for its Seventh Generation laundry detergent? A sustainability consultant blogged today about how he is disappointed in the package.

Paul Smith, the founder of GreenSmith Consulting, wrote that "there was something about the design that missed the mark, on a psychological level. The lack of handle made it feel strange to hold. It was only then that I realized how crucial a handle is to my laundry detergent paradigm. The package utilizes pressed recycled paper, which makes the inclusion of a handle quite a challenge."

He added that the sample bottle he received leaked, and he also was critical of the company's claim about how much plastic it was saving.

It looks like Santa Barbara, Calif., will be the new ground zero for the U.S. debate on plastic bag bans.

According to Santa Barbara's The Daily Sound newspaper, the City Council "appears to be leaning away from creating an ordinance to ban plastic bags or heavily regulating them."

That's blasphemy to some in a city that's proud of its environmental legacy. (Among other things, the city is home to the University of California at Santa Barbara's Bren School of Environmental Science & Management.)

According to the Sound's report, a majority of the city's ordinance committee support a plan to voluntarily reduce single-use plastic bag consumption, and encourage residents to use reusable bags.

Kathi King of the Santa Barbara Community Environmental Council likened the defense of the plastic bag industry to those defending tobacco companies, according to Joshua Molina's report.

With that level of rhetoric, watch for sparks to fly as the City Council continues its debate on plastic bag bans.

Is public concern about bisphenol A safety rooted in science, or in poor journalism? According to Jon Entine, director of the Genetic Literacy Project at STATS, the problem lies with ink-stained wretches (like me).

Entine wrote a blistering column for The American, the Journal of the American Enterprise Insititute, where he pronounces BPA safe and says the problem is that journalists have an anti-plastics bias.

His latest example: the lack of coverage of a comprehensive review of BPA safety from the German Society of Toxicology, which concluded that "[BPA] exposure represents no noteworthy risk to the health of the human population, including newborns and babies."

"Although this evaluation is noteworthy because of its prestigious authorship, it will come as news only to those who ... well, it will probably come as news to almost all readers," Entine wrote. "Many journalists long ago signed the 'plastics are dangerous' pledge and have ignored the slew of recent comprehensive international meta-reviews that contradicted that narrative."

STATS is affiliated with the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

Pour yourself a cup of melted butter and check out this story about University of Maine researchers who are using lobster shells to mold biodegradable golf balls.

The best parts: the lobster-dervived balls are made from a waste material, and they may be cheaper to make than biodegradable golf balls already on the market.

In conjunction with the Lobster Institute, Professor David Neivandt and undergraduate student Alex Caddell developed the technology.

These balls aren't meant for the PGA Tour, or even for duffers like me. The ball was created for use on cruise ships.

According to the university, the balls are the first to be made with crushed lobster shells with a biodegradable binder and coating. The shells would otherwise end up in a landfill.

Biodegradable golf balls now on the market retail for just under $1 per ball. The raw materials for the lobster shell balls cost as little as 19 cents each.

"The flight properties are amazing," Caddell told the university. "It doesn't fly quite as far as a regular golf ball, but we're actually getting a similar distance to other biodegradable golf balls."

UMaine has filed a provisional patent for the lobster-shell mixture, which can also be used for such products as plant pots that decompose in the ground, surveying stakes and other applications.

Here's a twist on a frequently cited industry argument on chemical safety: are alternative materials safer than products that legislators want to ban?

Elizabeth Grossman brings up the point on The Atlantic's website today, in "Beyond BPA: Could 'BPA-Free' Products Be Just as Unsafe?"

Grossman clearly explains which plastics, and what sorts of products, may contain BPA. She also gives some detail on the current status of BPA regulation and legislation. This story goes beyond the typical news report on BPA safety.

She cites Eastman's Tritan copolyester as a material being marketed as a BPA-free alternative to polycarbonate, but without the long history of testing.

"The point is not to single out the Eastman Chemical Co. or Tritan copolyester, which may be entirely environmentally benign, but to highlight the dilemma we're in when it comes to assessing the safety of new materials," she writes.

"Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the U.S. law that regulates chemicals in commerce, it's entirely permissible to launch a new material into high-volume production without disclosing its precise chemical identity or any information about its toxicity.

"This makes it impossible for the public to assess product safety independently of manufacturer claims. And currently, despite EPA and FDA policies that support 'safe' alternatives to a chemical of concern like BPA, neither federal agency conducts safety testing of new materials destined for consumer products before they come on the market."

Grossman concludes that the U.S. needs a better system for testing new materials before they become commercially available.

As an observer (but not a participant) of the process for winning food-contact approval, I think she implies too strongly that FDA approval is simple. But it's still a thought-provoking story that will likely get some attention, since BPA remains a material in the headlines.

Blog readers will recall the Plastiki and Project Kaisei ocean voyages, which aimed to increase public awareness of plastic marine debris. Somehow I missed another adventurer with a similar goal -- Roz Savage, a British woman who had already rowed across the Atlantic Ocean.

This week Savage set off from Australia to row across the Indian Ocean. She's traveling alone in the 23-foot boat on a 4,000-mile journey that should take about four months.

She has an interesting story, which she shares on her web site. Here's a taste:

It was the year 2000, I was 33 years old, and I seemed to have the perfect life. I had a job, a husband, a home, a little red sports car.

In theory, I should have been happy.

Fast forward to March 2006. I am 38, divorced, homeless, and alone in a tiny rowing boat in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. My last hot meal was two months ago, before my camping stove broke. My stereo is bust. I've had no human contact since my satellite phone stopped working several weeks ago. All four of my oars are broken and I've had to patch them up with duct tape and makeshift splints. I have tendonitis in my shoulders and saltwater sores on my backside.

I have battled twenty-foot waves, sleep deprivation, self-doubt and depression. But I have never been happier.

They said I was crazy. They said I wasn't big enough, not tall enough, not strong enough.

But at last, after three thousand miles and 103 days at sea, I am about to accomplish my goal. I am proving that anybody can achieve the extraordinary, if only they have enough guts and determination and sheer bloody-mindedness to see it through.

I am realizing my dream, one stroke at a time.

Her mission is less focused on plastics than the Plastiki and Project Kaisei voyages, which is probably how she's escaped my notice until now. But banning plastics is part of Savage's message.

"Although every action counts, some actions count more than others. The further up the ladder of engagement we move, the more powerful our actions become," she writes. "For example, saying no to plastic - that's at the consumer level. Canvassing the neighborhood to get bags out of the local grocery store - that's the distribution level. Petitioning legislation to outlaw plastic bag production and voting reaches the manufacturing and extraction level. With each level upstream the effectiveness magnifies exponentially. Upstream actions pay off more, but no action is too small, and every action fits and has a purpose and helps us reach a better place."

Savage's trip should generate plenty of publicity -- her website explains her media strategy (PDF), as well as a solicitation for corporate sponsors.

Getting abundant natural gas through hydraulic fracturing contributes to global warming as much as coal, if not more, according to a study quoted by political news website TheHill.com.

The story, from the site's E2 energy and the environment blog, quotes a soon-to-be published report by Cornell Prof. Robert Howarth:

The [greenhouse gas] footprint for shale gas is greater than that for conventional gas or oil when viewed on any time horizon, but particularly so over 20 years. Compared to coal, the footprint of shale gas is at least 20 percent greater and perhaps more than twice as great on the 20-year horizon and is comparable when compared over 100 years.

The study will run in the journal Climatic Change, according to the E2 blog.

The blog quotes an expert from an energy consulting firm -- with clients in the natural gas industry -- who questions Howarth's study study.

If the study is confirmed, it could have repercussions in the North American plastics industry, which is counting on plentiful supplies of natural gas from U.S. shale deposits as feedstocks for polyethylene resin.

This isn't decades down the road, either -- in the past month, three ethylene projects have been announced in North America to take advantage of the newfound supplies of natural gas in the region.

Tom Nosker, a plastics recycling expert long affiliated with Rutgers University, is featured in the April issue of Inventors Digest magazine. Nosker is being recognized as a mechanical engineers whose problem-solving skills touch our daily lives.

"It's a great honor for any group of peers to recognize one's work, and this is no exception," Nosker said in a news release. "Since my undergraduate days I've dedicated my career to finding a solution to the large amounts of waste that normally end up in landfills. If we can continue to search for innovative ways to convert garbage to useful products or energy, we're going to find ourselves a lot closer to solving some of the world's most pressing environmental and sustainability issues. And the solutions aren't hard to find. They just take creativity, dedication and sometimes a little luck. Okay, maybe a lot of luck."

Inventors Digest selected Nosker and five other mechancial engineers "based on peer recognition, societal impact of their work and commitment to their craft."

Today Nosker is also working with Axion International Inc. on using recycled plastics to replace wood and other traditional materials in applications such as railway ties and bridges.

It's hard to believe that Plastics News has been writing about Tom Nosker for more than 20 years.

At the risk of giving readers the impression that Ford vehicles are made of mushrooms and recycled carpeting, here's another post on how the automaker is highlighting its use of sustainable materials.

Ford Motor Co. today put out a news release on how it is using EcoLon nylon, made from 100 percent recycled carpet, to make cylinder head covers.

Ford said the cover is "the first automotive product of its kind manufactured from post-consumer recycled nylon," and is used in the Escape, Fusion, Mustang and F-150

To date, the program has saved more than 4.1 million pounds of carpet from landfills, the equivalent of nearly 154 football fields.

The supplier of the EcoLon material is Wellman Engineering Resins, and the molder is Dana Holding Corp.

"By working with Wellman and Dana, Ford has found a way to bring green applications to a new, unique location in our vehicles," said Brett Hinds, Ford manager, engine design. "This single use has made an incredible impact, and we're continuing to look for ways to expand the use."

Ford Motor Co. has a well documented history of using bio-based polymers. But mushrooms? That's the word from Ecovative Design LLC, a Green Island, N.Y.-based company that makes polymers from agricultural waste.

The news is all over the environmental blogs this week. This one is reporting that Deborah Mielewski, head of Ford's plastic research department, is interested in using Ecovative's mushroom foam "to replace 30 pounds of each car's petroleum-based foams with more environmentally sensible alternatives."

I was surprised to see the story explode in blogland. I had to go back a few days to find the source. It was this press release announcing that Mielewski and Ford research engineer Angela Harris will give presentations at the upcoming BioPlastek 2011 Forum, set for June 27-29 in New York.

"Ms. Harris' presentation will outline Ford's R&D process for finding and developing novel bio-based material solutions that meet the rigorous requirements for automotive, highlighting key technical obstacles that must be overcome before widespread usage of these materials takes place," the release said.

Ford was the first major automaker in North America to begin using soy foam blends (in the Mustang), and the company has also used natural fiber-reinforced composites. It will be interesting to see just how committed Ford will be to using mushroom-based plastics.

For more about Ecovative Design, check out this video. Note that co-founder and CEO Eben Bayer isn't a big fan of polystyrene, and he makes a special effort to call the company's Ecocradle a "polymer," rather than a bio-based plastic.

Little Tikes Co. announced an unusual partnership today -- the rotational molder announced that it is partnering with the Sea Turtle Conservancy to raise awareness of worldwide threats to sea turtles.

I say unusual because plastics companies wouldn't typically be considered defenders of sea turtles -- even the Sea Turtle Conservancy has numerous items on its web site about plastic marine debris, problems with turtles getting entangled in plastic fishing line and nets, and turtles dying from eating plastic trash.

But Little Tikes is stepping up to assist with the issue, to celebrate the 33rd anniversary of the company's Sea Turtle sandbox.

The company said it will work with the conservancy "to shine light on imminent threats to sea turtles including climate change, marine pollution, marine debris, oil spills, and artificial beach lighting."

"Little Tikes makes products that are safe and durable for kids, and we believe in making this a safe planet for sea turtles as well," said Rosanne Kubitsy, Senior Director of Marketing, Little Tikes. "We want to make sure that turtles grow to their adulthood age of 33 years -- so celebrating our product's 33rd anniversary gives parents the opportunity to educate their kids about sea turtles in a fun way."

Forget about Libya, the budget deficit and Social Security. Some pundits think they can swing a U.S. House of Representatives election by focusing on the polystyrene vs. compostable foodservice debate.

You'll recall that this issue popped up in February, when the new GOP-controlled House decided to stop using compostable foodservice products in its cafeteria, and went back to using PS.

Today the political newspaper Roll Call is reporting that some California Democrats think the issue may be enough to beat Rep. Dan Lungren -- one of the architects of the move to PS -- in his 2012 relection race.

They've even given Lungren a new nickname: "Styrofoam Dan."

Hmm. The last politician I recall with a plastics-related nickname was Ronald Reagan, once known as the Teflon President.

What's new in biobased polymers? How about high-strength plastics made from bananas and pineapples? I'm getting hungry just thinking about it.

I'm seeing headlines from all over the world today about an announcement from scientists in Brazil who are developing "super-strong automotive plastics" that may be commerialized in as little as two years.

"The properties of these plastics are incredible," project leader Alcides Leão of Sao Paulo State University said in a news release.

"They are light, but very strong -- 30 percent lighter and three to four times stronger. We believe that a lot of car parts, including dashboards, bumpers, side panels, will be made of nano-sized fruit fibers in the future. For one thing, they will help reduce the weight of cars and that will improve fuel economy."

Leão revealed the materials at the National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society in Anaheim, Calif.

The U.K.'s Daily Mail calls the announcement "the ultimate green development."

Stephen Joseph is becoming the plastics industry's version of Lady Gaga. Every time you turn around, he's making headlines.

The latest is The Wall Street Journal, which featured Joseph in "Paper or Plastic? A Lawyer's Answer Sends Him From Hero to Pariah."

As the Plastics Blog has pointed out before, Joseph is a quoteable character. If anything, Vauhini Vara's WSJ article underplays his colorful nature.

"I have a plastic watch, and I just got new plastic glasses," Joseph told the newspaper. "I love plastic."

He adds at the end of the article that he's fighting a losing battle in behalf of the plastic bag, but "I never, ever give up."

Joseph has previously been featured in Time magazine, which called him "The Patron Saint of Plastic Bags."

I'd argue that Joseph, thanks to his quotablility, and the attention that he attracts with his cleverly named Save the Plastic Bag Coalition, may currently be the highest-profile advocate for the plastics industry in the world.

By the way, the reader comments section attached to the WSJ's story is active, and worth reading.

The plastics industry will generate some international news headlines in the next couple of days, following its "Global Declaration for Solutions on Marine Litter," announced March 22 in Honolulu.

The declaration was announced at the 5th International Marine Debris Conference in Honolulu. Plastics News staff reporter Mike Verespej wrote this story, "Plastics associations pledge to cooperate on global marine debris issue," on the announcement, which we posted minutes after it was released.

As Mike wrote, the decision to forge a joint agreement among plastics associations began in a meeting after the K show in Germany in October.

Some 47 global plastics associations representing groups in 26 countries signed on, including the Society of the Plastics Industry Inc. and the American Chemistry Council's plastics division.

With SPI's participation, more U.S. plastics processors can feel like they're now taking part in the debate.

"SPI and its member companies continue to embrace the concept of sustainability, and I am proud that we have joined with our peer organizations across the globe to make this formal declaration concerning marine debris," SPI President and CEO Bill Carteaux said in a news release. "The plastics industry has always been about creating innovations that meets societal needs. Marine litter is no exception and SPI stands ready to participate with others in problem-solving this issue."

Will the declaration make a difference in this issue, which until now has been driven largely by grass-roots environmental groups pushing for taxes and bans on products like plastic bags and polystyrene foodservice products?

Sarah Abramson Sikich, coastal resources director for Heal The Bay in Santa Monica, Calif., told Mike that it will not.

"Strong regulatory and policy action is needed that prevents trash from getting into waterways in the first place, as well as to promote the use of more sustainable items, like reusable bags and water bottles," she said. "We recommend target trash reductions, bans or charges on the most prevalent items found in aquatic environments be established to truly address the plastic pollution problem."

The Boston Globe had a nice story on Sunday about a trend in the housewares sector that we've been following, the rise of recycled-content products. The story went into some detail on housewares brand Preserve Products.

Plastics News staff reporter Rhoda Miel touched on this a few weeks ago, when recycled resins specialist NextLife LLC announced at the International Housewares Show that it had signed a partnership to supply post-consumer polypropylene to Recycline Inc., the Waltham, Mass., company that developed Preserve.

NextLife, based in Boca Raton, Fla., has worked with other companies to source recycled resins for their products. Its resins include proprietary post-consumer recycled PP and polystyrene that meet U.S. food safety requirements.

For Preserve, NextLife will provide PP for a range of items including toothbrushes, dishes and food storage products.

The Globe's story goes into some more detail on Preserve's plans, including naming the company's custom molder -- G&F Industries Inc.

G&F Industries Inc. of Sturbridge makes the Mini, along with other Preserve products, including colanders and reusable drinking cups. The two companies began working together in 2007. G&F president John J. Argitis says Preserve is still his only customer using 100 percent recycled plastic in its products. "From my perspective, I think it's pretty rare in the industry,'' he says.

While the relationship started small, today Preserve is a major customer of the 100-person plastic molding company. Once the Mini has been produced, G&F applies several labels (like "BPA Free'' and a bar code), puts a dozen of them into a cardboard box, and sends the boxes off to a distribution center in upstate New York. (Preserve uses software to analyze the environmental impact of nearly every decision it makes, such as whether to use trucks or trains to transport materials and products. The finished Minis are trucked; plastic the company reuses travels by rail.)

Check out the March 21 issue if Plastics News for our special report, "Plastics in Housewares," which includes a story on more products that are using recycled content.

And watch PlasticsNews.com tomorrow for Rhoda Miel's video reports from the show.

After all the talk in recent weeks about avoiding plastics, The New York Times has a little different take on the topic today, with an op-ed column "Plastic: Too Good to Throw Away."

The column is written by Susan Freinkel described as the author of the forthcoming "Plastic: A Toxic Love Story."

While "Plastics Blog" readers may relate to the Times column's headline, the article itself isn't exactly a love letter to the industry. But it does have a message that some readers may consider positive -- that plastics have many worthwhile attributes.

"It's estimated that half of the nearly 600 billion pounds of plastics produced each year go into single-use products. Some are indisputably valuable, like disposable syringes, which have been a great ally in preventing the spread of infectious diseases like H.I.V., and even plastic water bottles, which, after disasters like the Japanese tsunami, are critical to saving lives," she writes.

"In a world of nearly seven billion souls and counting, we are not going to feed, clothe and house ourselves solely from wood, ore and stone; we need plastics. And in an era when we're concerned about our carbon footprint, we can appreciate that lightweight plastics take less energy to produce and transport than many other materials. Plastics also make possible green technology like solar panels and lighter cars and planes that burn less fuel. These "unnatural" synthetics, intelligently deployed, could turn out be nature's best ally."

But she takes plastics -- and, it seems, consumers -- to task for wasting this valuable resource on too many single-use throw-away products.

Disposables like bags, straws, packaging and lighters are "essentially prefab litter with a heavy environmental cost," she writes, adding that "...we can't hope to achieve plastic's promise for the 21st century if we stick with wasteful 20th-century habits of plastic production and consumption."

Freinkel seems to be echoing the opinions of some "Plastics Blog" readers who bridle at what they consider unfair attacks on plastics, while at the same time complaining that at least some of the industry's problems are the result of a culture that encourages overuse.

Look at this way: Crusades to outlaw water packaged in PET, or grocery bags made of polyethylene are shortsighted. Bottled water has definite attributes, as do PE bags. But just as shortsighted is our culture that encourages consumers to drink bottled water every day at home or on the job, when they have access to inexpensive and safe tap water, or to accept a PE bag with every single purchase at the grocery store, even when the product is small enough to carry out of the store -- or to put in your pocket.

I have a feeling that not all "Plastics Blog" readers will agree with Freinkel's column -- but also that she's not that far off from expressing the opinions of many in the plastics industry.

We see stories about plastics packaging and sustainability every day. But not on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."

Comedy Central's Stewart opened his March 7 show with a rant against Del Monte Fresh Produce Inc.'s individually wrapped bananas.

He nominated the product for the show's honorary "Pantry of Shame," saying the product was designed "for people who love bananas but hate their biodegradability."

James Epstein-Reeves wrote a well researched item on the issue today for Forbes magazine's "The CSR Blog," which focuses on corporate social responsibility issues.

I won't repeat all of Epstein-Reeves' work here ... check the link for a good Q&A interview with Dionysios Christou, Del Monte Fresh Produce's vice president of marketing.

As the plastics packaging experts on "The Plastics Blog" already know, there's a purpose for the individually wrapped banana -- to extend the shelf life of the product.

Certainly not all bananas need Del Monte's "Controlled Ripening Technology" package. But, used properly, it can help reduce food waste.

I wrote a few weeks ago about the Plastics Are Forever International Youth Summit. You may be wondering, how did it turn out?

According to the Long Beach, Calif., Press-Telegram, more than 100 students from 14 countries attended the event, along with their faculty advisers.

The students received information and training aimed at helping them to reduce plastic pollution in their hometowns.

So you can expects the newly motivated troops to start to take action to get taxes and bans passed in many, many more communities in the coming months.

Plastics News also has a story related to the summit today, on a study showing the extent that ocean fish eat plastic debris.

Here's an interesting reaction to Rodale Inc.'s "Plastic-free February" -- some tips for cutting down on plastics from an industry insider.

Sandy Bauers, environmental reporter for the The Philadelphia Inquirer, wrote a column -- "So much plastic - and so hard to avoid using it" -- on March 7.

Response to the column was strong, she wrote in her Green Living blog on March 9. One note that stood out, she said, was from Craig Blizzard, a polypropylene industry veteran now working as an industry consultant in West Chester, Pa.

He wrote:

First, if one wishes to reduce personal plastic consumption for solid waste reasons, immediately stop consuming things which overuse plastic packaging since not many humans actually consume plastics per se. Glaring examples include soft drinks/beer at the stadium in heavy polypropylene cups, fast food pre-packaged salads in glossy polystyrene plates and lids, windshield wipers in their annoying PVC sleeve packages and TV sets, etc. swathed in polystyrene and polyethylene foam.

Second, if one wishes to reduce personal plastic consumption for personal health reasons such as a fear of any detectable level of plastic additive migration, stop consuming things packed/conveyed in plastics altogether. Every plastic can be made to exfoliate its chemical additives under some set of (possibly extreme) laboratory conditions if that's what the researcher wants to demonstrate. Under normal usage of most things plastic, my scientific sense suggests that our breathing of the exhaust emissions from our >150 million vehicle fleet in North America is likely to be order-of-magnitude more damaging to individual health than any plastic additive migration and that one's use of plastics is relatively riskless.

Third, if one wishes to reduce personal plastic consumption for energy conservation reasons, better and easier to reduce personal auto travel by 5-10%. The energy conservation by that action would likely dwarf the total energy content of the amount of plastics even the "greenest" person could reasonably save by meticulously reducing his/her consumption. Plastics are not a "low hanging fruit" in energy conservation.

Its interesting that Bauers devoted an entire blog post to Blizzard's thoughtful response to her column. Perhaps there's an example here that others could follow.

There's no arguing that a substantial number of Americans want to tax or ban plastic bags. But is it a majority?

In El Paso, Texas, the answer is no. That's according to this story from the El Paso Times, on a scientific poll conducted on March 5-6. The poll has a margin of error of 3 percentage points, according to the story.

The poll, conducted by Reuel Group Inc.,, found that 48.1 percent of poll respondents did not want plastic bags banned, and another 20.2 percent said consumers should have a choice between paper or plastic.

Just under 30 percent supported a ban.

The city of El Paso is considering putting a 10-cent fee on plastic bags, with 2 cents going to the retailer and 8 cents to the city.

Do you wonder why environmentalists think taxes and bans on plastics are a good thing?

I'm sure many readers of the Plastics Blog disagree, but here's a video with Angela Howe, legal manager with the Surfrider Foundation, explaining why the group sponsors its "Rise Above Plastics" campaign, and how it is working on getting more bans and taxes adopted in states and municipalities in 2011.

Plastic packaging manufacturers have some new competition jockeying for attention from consumers who value sustainability.

Ecologic Brands Inc. this week is rolling out a cardboard bottle for Seventh Generation laundry detergent. USA Today wrote about the package yesterday.

Ecologic calls its packages pouches, but they look like bottles. They're made from recycled cardboard and newspaper, and when they're empty they can be torn up and recycled with newspapers. (That's assuming anyone out there is still buying newspapers and recycling them, right?)

The packages still have plastic caps -- so that they look like a regular laundry bottle, according to Ecologic CEO Julie Corbett. "If you change too much, you can end up scaring consumers from buying it," she told USA Today's Bruce Horovitz.

Remember the National Debt Clock in New York? The Uni-Bell PVC Pipe Association is taking a page out of that playbook to highlight the staggering cost of water main breaks.

According to the trade association, every day, 850 water main breaks occur in North America at an annual repair cost of over $3 billion.

To hammer home the incredible waste of water -- and money -- Uni-Bell has launched a new web site, www.watermainbreakclock.com, where you can track the cumulative price tag to taxpayers of the high costs associated with repairs, replacement and more.

"The costs are astounding, not just in repairs, but emergency equipment, depleted water supply, traffic disruptions, and lost work time," said Executive Director Bruce Hollands. "Equally astounding is the fact that some local governments and utilities continue to use the same outdated, costly pipe material that corrodes over a very short period of time."

Uni-Bell members have a stake in the issue, since they hope to replace aging steel and concrete water pipe with PVC pipe, which they say can last in excess of 110 years.

Surfers have been on the front lines on the battle against plastic marine debris. Here's a video about a surfer and shaper who's trying to make boards from recycled plastic.

I noticed the story today on Discovery Communications' Treehugger.com blog. It's the story of Kevin Cunningham in Providence, R.I., who created the Spirare Sustainable Surf Craft project -- bringing together a desire to do something about marine debris with his passion for making surfboards from sustainable materials.

He explains in the video that his materials include post-consumer polystyrene.

Here's a link to Cunningham's project -- he says it will move forward if he can raise $3,200 by April 16.

Apple Computer Inc. may be phasing out a lot of external plastics, with a design ethic focusing on glass and aluminum, but it is still using some resins.

In the hype of the iPad 2 release, there's this information on the product's new cover:

"The innovative new iPad 2 Smart Cover provides protection for the iPad screen while maintaining its thin and lightweight profile. Designed with a unique self-aligning magnetic hinge that makes it easy to attach and remove, the new iPad 2 Smart Cover automatically wakes iPad 2 when it's opened and puts it to sleep when it's closed, and has a soft microfiber lining to help keep the screen clean. The Smart Cover also folds into a stand for typing or viewing videos and is available in vibrant polyurethane for $39 or rich leather for $69 in a range of colors, including a (PRODUCT) RED one which helps support the Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa."

In this video from cnet, Apple's Steve Jobs says the covers "come in polyurethane, which is used to make space suits [audience laughter] ... or leather."

Thanks to Rhoda Miel, who covers design for Plastics News, for contributing this item.

The "Plastic-Free February" project is over. The bloggers who participated all discovered that it's awfully difficult to avoid plastics -- a lot harder than any of them expected.

For a sample of their experiences, check out this week-by-week report compiled by a rotating team of bloggers from publisher Rodale Inc., which sponsored the project.

It's full of stories about the problems they had avoiding plastic packaging and other products, as well as a few of their personal victories when they discovered a hard-to-find product made of an alternative material.

To wrap up the story, Maria Rodale.CEO and chairman of Rodale, posted a final word on the topic today on The Huffington Post, titled "The Top 10 Things I Wished Didn't Involve Plastic."

A few of her examples: Shampoo bottles, condiment bottles, takeout containers, garbage bags, pens and computers.

She actually suggests going back to glass ketchup and mustard bottles. But what about all the extra energy it would take to make and transport glass bottles instead of plastic? Wouldn't that more than offset any supposed benefits of avoiding plastic?

Something about the headline, "Earth-Raping Dictator-Supporting House GOP Brings Styrofoam Back," gave me the idea that this wasn't going to be a balanced look at polystyrene.

Ken Layne from political blog Wonkette.com blasted the U.S. House of Representatives today for its decision to stop using compostable foodservice products in its cafeteria, and go back to using PS.

The story doesn't make the common mistake of calling PS foam foodservice "Styrofoam," even though the headline does.

But Layne jumps right into the blog with a rant against "foamed polystyrene," which he calls "a miraculous invention that manages to be completely awful through every step of its near-eternal "life cycle" -- it is manufactured with petroleum that must be imported from Middle East dictatorships, toxic "styrene oligomers" migrate into the food it holds, it's highly flammable and produces black poisonous smoke, and most of the 25 billion polystyrene cups tossed every year will take more than half a millennium to degrade."

Layne writes that "people with brains" ban PS.

The comment section on the blog is already going bananas. My favorite (?) so far: "Polystyrene cups are the perfect metaphor for the Repubicans (sic): White, lightweight and bad for the environment."

So much for the spirit of cooperation in Washington these days.

A group called the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change is suggesting that families make a sacrifice for Lent this year that will help make the world more sustainable.

The plastics-related suggestion caught my eye -- to give up disposable plastic or paper bags and replace them with reusable cloth bags.

But according to this story from the Catholic News Service, plastics aren't being singled out. The target is consumption and lifestyle, with a goal to focus on "Christian simplicity." And the coalition also has some suggestions that specifically mention paper, too:

• Use cloth shopping bags instead of paper or plastic to reduce the estimated 380 billion plastic bags distributed in the United States each year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
• Replace incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs. The U.S. Department of Energy says that if each U.S. household replaced just one bulb, it would save enough energy to light 3 million homes for a year and prevent 9 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions each year.
• Give up disposable paper products such as napkins and paper towels.
• Use a refillable mug instead of disposable cups. One coffee drinker using disposable cups can generate 22 pounds of waste in a year.

Are you up for debunking some myths about plastics recycling?

Envision Plastics Industries LLC's "Save the Plastics" is rapidly becoming my favorite plastics-related blog. Today the site posted a nice item that analyzes and comments on a well-traveled article from the Ecology Center in Berkeley, Calif., titled "Seven Misconceptions About Plastic and Plastic Recycling."

The folks at Envision Plastics, a major recycler of plastic packaging, is in a good position to comment on the "Misconceptions" article -- after all, they've got first-hand experience.

The blog notes that, despite the global audience that "Misconceptions" has enjoyed, the content of the article is actually more locally driven, "and not particularly accurate across a broader cross section of the country, or even California for that matter."

Here are a few of the seven "Misconceptions," along with Envision's take on the issues:

Misconception #1: "Plastics that go into a curbside recycling bin get recycled. Not necessarily.", says the Ecology Center. This statement is not accurate. Provided that we put the proper plastics in our recycling bins, as requested by our municipal waste authority, they will all be recycled. In Berkeley, they ask for #1 PET bottles and #2 HDPE bottles only. These plastics are in high demand and will be recycled back into plastics products.

The Ecology Center states that "In fact, none of the recovered plastic containers from Berkeley are being made into containers again...". This is not an accurate statement. We buy the #2 HDPE material from Berkeley (and many other California communities) and most of it is converted back into plastic bottles by Graham Packaging, Liquid Container, Consolidated Container, Clorox, Polytainer, Microdyne and other molders on the West coast. It is true that there are other end markets for this material and some of it may become plastic drainage pipe, plastic lumber or other products, but it certainly does not wind up in landfills.

Misconception #2: "Curbside collection will reduce the amount of plastic landfilled. Not necessarily.", says the Ecology Center. This doesn't make sense to us. Our plant in Chino, California saved 344,626,607 plastic bottles from being landfilled in 2010 alone and we are not the only recycler on the West coast.

The Ecology Center argues that more recycling will lead to more demand for plastics products. This is not how demand for consumer products is created; however, demand for recycled plastics currently exceeds supply of curbside collected plastics, so our attitude is, bring it on! We'll recycle it!

Envision doesn't just debunk the Berkeley article. They agree on some points, such as the meaning of the chasing arrows recycling symbol, and on the value of source reduction.

Check out the link for more "Save the Plastics" posts ... and keep up the good work, Envision.

The plastics industry is being called on to help out in the wake of the 6.3 magnitude earthquake that hit New Zealand's South Island on Feb. 22. The priority right now -- locating portable toilets.

This evening Bill Carteaux, president and CEO of the U.S.-based Society of the Plastics Industry Inc., passed along an urgent request from his counterpart at Plastics New Zealand.

"Since the devastating earthquake, the public heath focus has been on clean drinking water -- but sanitation remains a huge obstacle during the recovery efforts," Carteaux wrote. "If you manufacture portable toilets and would have an inventory available to ship overseas, please contact me tonight."

Given the urgent nature of the request, we're sharing it with Plastics Blog readers right away, as well as those of you who follow Plastics News via Twitter and Facebook. Post a reply to the blog, or send an email to editorial@plasticsnews.com, and I'll forward it immediately to Bill Carteaux and SPI.

In the meantime, Plastics News and the Plastics Blog will look for other opportunities to alert readers to ways that they can help. If you have a suggestion that you'd like to share with others, post it in the blog comment section.

After plastic carry-out bags are banned, the next target may be the produce bags that consumers use to protect and transport fruit, vegetables and bulk products from grocery stores to their homes, according to one anti-bag activist.

The news was revealed in this story from the Santa Cruz Weekly. The proposed ban isn't the point of the story -- it's primarily a feature on singer/songwriter Jackson Browne's well-documented stance against plastic bags and water bottles.

Here's a taste of Browne's thoughts on plastics:

"The world is literally filling up with things that are designed to be used once and which never go away," Browne told the Santa Cruz Weekly. "Plastic bags are blowing around the Sahara desert. Camels are dying of starvation with their guts full of plastic." Browne says personal friends of his who have surfed on every continent have reported plastic bags washed up on beaches in Antarctica.

Browne will be honored for his high-profile anti-plastics stand on Feb. 23, when the environmental group Save Our Shores gives him an Ocean Hero award.

(Feb. 23 has also been designated as Jackson Browne Day in Santa Cruz, "to honor the veteran singer's anti-plastic campaign," the story says).

Laura Kasa, executive director of Save Our Shores, told the newspaper that after single-use grocery bags are banned, produce bags may become the group's next target.

Most industries are short-sighted. They put off investing in products that could save energy, even when the payoff is proven and relatively fast.

Case in point, the trucking industry. According to this story from Scientific American (reprinted from Climatewire), the U.S. Department of Energy claims that if every long-haul truck in America would install a set of plastic fairings in front of the wheels under the trailer, it would cut fuel use 7-12 percent.

That would save 1.5 billion gallons of fuel a year.

The fuel savings would pay for the part within six to 18 months, according to Mitch Greenberg, president of SmartTruck, one of the Greenville, S.C., companies that developed the product.

S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. has spent millions on becoming a model of sustainability -- everything from using renewable energy, changing the formulation of products like Saran wrap, and launching recycling efforts.

So I was quite surprised today to see this report from The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on a lawsuit accusing the consumer products company with greenwashing.

Specifically, the suit questions the Racine, Wis.-based company's use of a proprietary "Greenlist" logo on its products.

The complaint, which seeks class-action status, says the Greenlist seal is misleading, because S.C. Johnson itself is the party judging the products' environmental attributes.

The Journal Sentinel's Rick Romell reports that the company isn't backing down.

S.C. Johnson says Greenlist criteria was reviewed by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. It also won an award from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and it claims that complying with the Greenlist goals has helped the company eliminate nearly 48 million pounds of volatile organic compounds from its products in the last five years.

Given the company's commitment to sustainability, I think the lawyers have targeted the firm with this suit. Yes, S.C. Johnson has deep pockets, and it makes a attractive target because of the high profile it has taken on sustainability issues.

But S.C. Johnson has walked the walk, and it would be a mistake to think they'll throw money at this lawsuit to get it settled.

We're on Day 8 of our "Plastics-Free February" watch, and I can finally report that the effort has generated an acknowledgment of the benefits of plastics.

I almost feel guilty. Yesterday I posted an item complaining that no one involved in the project was even questioning whether trying to live without plastics was a worthy goal.

"The universal assumption is that plastics are something that consumers should avoid," I wrote. "But I haven't seen any serious thought about the pros and cons of different materials."

Today, Rodale Inc., the magazine publishing company that cooked up "Plastics-Free February," took up the gauntlet.

Emily Main, online editor for Rodale.com, wrote a guest item for Maria Rodale's blog on The Huffington Post, headlined "Is Plastic Really That Bad?"

Regular Huffington Post readers may be surprised (the site often includes contributions that slam plastics over chemical safety issues), but Main took a careful look and concluded that plastics actually have benefits -- even plastics packaging!

Main wrote that after a visit to the grocery store on Sunday, she realized that it was very difficult to avoid buying anything that wasn't wrapped in plastic.

That got me thinking. Is plastic really that bad of a material? There must be some reason it's become the packaging material of choice for everything from crackers to contact lens solution. And, as it turns out, there is. Back in 1969, Coca Cola commissioned the very first life cycle analysis on packaging materials to determine whether the company should stick with its returnable glass bottles, switch over primarily to aluminum cans, or go with plastic bottles. The plastic bottles won out because, the analysis found, they used the least amount of oil and natural gas of the three alternatives. Glass is too heavy and requires more trucks to ship, and aluminum is extremely energy-intensive to manufacture.

Main goes on to cite other examples where plastic is superior to alternative packaging -- or to no packaging at all. She cites a study by Food Review stating that in countries where food packaging is minimal or nonexistent, food waste is as high as 50 percent.

Main doesn't ignore issues related to plastics packaging, including the still-in-the-spotlight chemical safety and marine debris problems. In the end, she concludes that plastics have benefits, but some products are grossly overpackaged.

I think most Plastics Blog readers will agree with that conclusion.

We're a week into "Plastics-Free February," and as expected the project is generating some attention -- including from some Plastics Blog readers, who are pointing out some chinks in the effort.

As a reminder, the project is sponsored by Rodale Inc., the publisher of magazines including Runner's World, Men's Health and Prevention.

Rodale's staffers are taking a stab at minimizing their use of plastics this month -- primarily in single-use disposables, packaging and food preparation/storage. They've also recruited a significant number of bloggers to participate. The rules are:

1. No buying or acquiring new plastic.

2. No cooking with plastic or storing food in plastic.

3: Minimize all other plastic use.

Judging from the number of Twitter posts with the #noplastic hashtag, "Plastics-Free February" is generating a fair amount of attention in the world of social media.

I see a few trends.

First, no one is questioning whether trying to live without plastics is a worthy goal. The universal assumption is that plastics are something that consumers should avoid. There are plenty of stories about bloggers substituting a product made of paper or some other material for plastic. But I haven't seen any serious thought about the pros and cons of different materials.

Second, they're discovering that living without plastic these days is just about impossible. Even minimizing it is very inconvenient. Bloggers are finding that they can find food without plastic packaging. But that often means lifestyle changes -- like buying different products or shopping at specialty stores.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface. Packaging and single-use disposables are the main target of "Plastics-Free February," but really living up to all the goals -- including no buying or acquiring new plastic and minimizing all other plastic use -- requires lifestyle changes that few are willing or able to accept.

Some Plastics Blog readers pointed out that readers of Rodale's magazines would have a tough time even making adjustments to their hobbies and leisure activities.

"I'd just love to see the subscribers to Runners World attempt to do their aerobic thing sans plastics," one wrote. "I was in a running shoe store on Saturday and there were polyesters, polypropylenes, polyethylenes, polyurethanes, polyamides and poly- this that and everything else on display throughout the store!"

Another pointed out that the latest Men's Health magazine has an article about the best way to cook a steak -- which includes putting the meat in a Ziploc bag and cooking it slowly in hot water first.

"I bet that [article] gets more readers than their blog does," the reader wrote to me.

I agree, the average Men's Health reader probably is more interested in cooking a delicious steak than in finding an alternative to his plastic toothbrush.

I'll keep watching the "Plastics-Free February" blogs for more insight, and I encourage more feedback from readers.

A Quebec school district came under fire last week after a teacher punished a 6-year-old boy for bringing a sandwich to school wrapped in plastic.

According to a report from the National Post, Marc-André Lanciault and Isabel Théorêt's son, Félix, was excluded from a drawing for a stuffed animal because his sandwich was wrapped in a Ziploc bag.

"If we want to teach people about the environment, I can understand that," Marc-André Lanciault told the newspaper. "But surely there's a better way than to penalize kids. The goal wasn't achieved anyway. At the end of the day my son doesn't know why he shouldn't use a Ziploc bag. It's not only the bag, it's the whole idea that we're being brainwashed from everywhere. They told us Ziploc bags are bad, so we've stopped thinking about it and just started applying the rule."

The case -- and the resulting publicity -- has sparked a debate about plastics, personal choice, environmental responsibility and greenwashing.

Canadian radio commentator Charles Adler weighed in today with a column in the Toronto Sun, headlined: "Enough greenwashing, Plastic haters need to keep their smug little hands off our children."

Adler didn't hold back.

He wrote that the boy "is without a doubt being indoctrinated at the earliest possible age to hate all things that flow from the petrochemical industry. Could there be a more enlightened approach to rescuing the planet from Big Oil than to scare the living daylights out of the children?

"Memo to environmental fundamentalists: Please keep your sticky fingers off our children. We want them to learn how to think for themselves. We don't want them to be indoctrinated with fear and loathing of whichever people or objects you wish to dismiss or denounce."

Plastics proponents often say that educating young people is a key to the industry's future. But what message are children getting about plastics?

Looks like it's time for more bloggers to try to live "plastics free." Magazine publishing company Rodale Inc. has declared this "Plastics-Free February," and they have eight bloggers preparing to write about the effort.

The publisher is pushing readers to drop plastics for personal health benefits. That's in keeping with Rodale's overall tone -- its titles include Runner's World, Men's Health and Prevention magazines.

As usual, "plastics free" doesn't really mean plastics free. No one is talking about doing without electricity, computers, plumbing, transportation or medical care. The aim is primarily at single-use plastic and packaging.

Rodale's "Plastics-Free February" rules are:

1. No buying or acquiring new plastic.

2. No cooking with plastic or storing food in plastic.

3: Minimize all other plastic use.

I'll keep an eye on the bloggers' progress for any interesting reports.

Bottled water sales suffered during the Great Recession, and some pundits predicted it would never come back -- the victim of thriftiness and environmentally enlightened consumers.

But perhaps they wrote the epitaph a bit too soon.

Convenience Store News reported yesterday that bottled water sales were up 4.2 percent in 2010, and are likely to grow another 3 percent in 2011.

Where's all the growth coming from? If you think it's all the fancy lemon- and berry-flavored waters that you've noticed in your local grocery, guess what -- you're wrong.

According to the experts quoted by Convenience Store News, the fastest growth is in sales of old-fashioned plain water.

Former Obama administration environmental adviser Van Jones will stir up the plastics industry with this speech recorded at the TedxGreatPacificGarbagePatch conference, held in Los Angeles in November.

His talk, "The economic injustice of plastic," links the ideas of social justice and the environment.

In his view, having an economy where throwaway plastic products are available leads to a society that also considers poor children "disposable."

Plastics have "horrific" impacts on the planet -- and also on people, Jones says.

Recycling makes consumers feel better about themselves, but he claims plastic isn't actually recycled -- it's burned, he says, in developing countries.

Some of this may seem ridiculous to an audience of plastics industry readers. But that does not mean it will be ignored.

Already, the Discovery Channel's Treehugger.com blog has linked to and posted the video.

A Toyota dealer in North Carolina is highlighting the company's use of eco-plastics in his own PR campaign.

A news release from Toyota of Sanford highlights the use of a bioplastic -- which Toyota has dubbed Ecological Plastic -- in some 2011 model year vehicles.

The Ecological Plastic is produced using less petroleum for manufacturing and additionally will limit the vehicles overall carbon emission. This development will contribute to Toyota's overall goal of going green and not hurting the environment.

It's interesting that this dealer finds it worthy enough to put out a news release on the material. One of my colleagues at Automotive News noticed it today, and I imagine some sustainability-minded car buyers will stumble across it online as well.

PlasticsNews.com posted my latest column today about plastics and marine debris, along with a great cartoon by Rich Williams.

The column concludes that the plastics industry "has an important role in preventing more plastic from fouling the oceans."

What's being done now? Steve Russell, vice president of plastics at the American Chemistry Council posted a blog item yesterday on the topic, "Tackling Marine Debris in 2011."

Russell writes about plastic makers' commitment to finding marine debris solutions, and ACC's involvement in an upcoming event, the 5th International Marine Debris Conference (5IMDC).

"5IMDC presents a tremendous opportunity to deepen our understanding, meet with researchers and other experts, talk about best practices, and find new ways to work together on real solutions," Russell writes.

"Some of the things we look forward to sharing include successes we've had with public-private partnerships in California. For example, for the past three years we have worked in California (including with Keep California Beautiful, California State Parks, Caltrans and the City of Woodland) to place nearly 700 recycle bins throughout the state. Those bins diverted over 45 tons of plastic and over 105 tons of other recyclable materials from the waste stream, and importantly, prevented them from entering the marine environment as litter."

Check out Russell's post for more details and links.

Get ready for more negative stories about plastics, as the documentary film "Plastic Planet" opens tomorrow in some U.S. markets.

Austrian director and author Werner Boote is behind the project -- this review from The Hollywood Reporter notes that Boote's grandfather was "an early plastics manufacturing executive [who] delivered lengthy lectures -- shades of The Graduate -- extolling [plastics'] virtues to his young grandson."

Boote wasn't convinced. From the trailer, it looks like the focus of the movie will be on some of the most controversial issues the plastics industry has faced in recent years: marine debris and litter, and chemical safety (University of Missouri professor Frederick vom Saal is on screen talking about bisphenol A and polycarbonate.)

More from the Hollywood Reporter's review:

The filmmaker takes a wide-ranging approach to his topic, traveling to many far-flung locations and interviewing scores of subjects ranging from plastics industry executives to experts in such fields as biology and genetics. Needless to say, none of the latter have anything very positive to say about the way plastics have come to permeate modern society.

Take a look, you might see someone you know. I think I recognize some exhibits from the 2007 K show in Dusseldorf.

Oregon State University Professor Angelicque White made global headlines this week with her report criticizing the media for grossly exaggerating the size of the "Great Garbage Patch."

The Green Living Blog from UK's Guardian newspaper took a closer look at the issue with a post today, "Which is the bigger eco-villain: plastic or paper?"

Blogger Sylvia Rowley says plastic clearly poses a threat to wildlife, and suffers from its visibility in marine debris and litter.

"However, in some cases, plastic is environmentally the better option," she writes, because plastic, if recycled, has a better carbon footprint than materials like cardboard.

Nevertheless, she cites the example of a UK company, Riverford Organics, that tried to switch its packaging from cardboard to durable plastic boxes, only to face a backlash from its customers.

Founder Guy Watson told the Guardian that the company decided to stay with cardboard because of the perception that it was better. Riverford Organics did not want to risk losing customers who believed plastic was environmentally unfriendly.

"You have to be quite courageous to fly in the face of people's intuitive judgement," Watson said, "and some might say commercially foolhardy." (Now he's investigating using bamboo, instead.)

Manufacturers can't expect many customers to step up and make the case that plastics are the superior choice. Publicity about studies like White's at Oregon State may help.

But until the plastics industry makes progress on its recycling efforts, and its image problem, potential customers like Watson will have a tough time carrying that burden on their own.

Are you tired of "the new normal," "social media," and trying to "monetize" everything? Welcome to the club.

The business world is always a bastion of buzzwords. Advertising Age's "Book of Tens" feature recently put together a list of the worst business buzzwords of 2010, "Jargoniest Jargon We've Heard All Year."

"Tweet" and "2.0" didn't make the list, but there are plenty of other favorites. Here's a sample:

THE NEW NORMAL
A catchall for the dismal post-Great Recessionary world. Let's face it, this feels normal to almost no one and good to even fewer people. In marketing, where rules and conditions of social media, mobile and other digital marketing evolve constantly, it's particularly meaningless. Or, maybe that's the ... new ... normal -- aieee!!!

SUSTAINABILITY
A good concept gone bad by mis- and overuse. It's come to be a squishy, feel-good catchall for doing the right thing. Used properly, it describes practices through which the global economy can grow without creating a fatal drain on resources. It's not synonymous with "green." Is organic agriculture sustainable, for example, if more of the world would starve through its universal application?

AT THE END OF THE DAY
This pernicious weed of language takes six words to say what "ultimately," or perhaps better still, nothing at all, could convey better.

Thanks to blog reader Mark Sofman for the link, and the suggestion.

America may be the land of frivolous lawsuits, but England is host to a county council that's suing a supermarket chain over "excessive packaging."

Elisabeth Rosenthal of The New York Times wrote a story about the case on Saturday, and followed up with a post in the paper's Green blog yesterday.

According to the story, the suit was brought by the Lincolnshire County Council against Sainsbury plc, which packages its Taste the Difference Slow Matured Ultimate Beef Roasting Joint in plastic wrap, atop a plastic tray, under a clear plastic cover surrounded by a cardboard sleeve.

Interesting, since Sainsbury has gotten quite a bit of publicity for its effort to reduce single-use plastic packaging, particularly with its reusable cotton "I am not a plastic bag" bags, which it sold for $10.

Packaging is one of those topics where everyone feels like an expert -- like the weather. So the topic seems to have struck a nerve, especially with the timing around Christmas, when so many consumers are struggling to un-pack things like toys and electronics.

Check the comments posted on Rosenthal's blog for a taste of what consumers think of the packages that some Plastics Blog readers have a hand in creating.

Todd Wynn, vice president of the libertarian Cascade Policy Institute, has a thoughtful column about plastic bag bans on OregonLive.com.

"Plastic Bags: It's time to get beyond 'ban, ban, ban,'" argues that plastic bags are not the environmental nightmare that some environmentalists make them out to be. Litter and marine debris problems are not the result of plastic bags existing -- they are the result of bags not ending up in the proper place -- landfills, trash cans and recycling bins, Wynn says.

The problem is littering, yet the only solution proposed is an outright ban.

The argument doesn't make much sense anyhow. Plastic doesn't just exist in bags. It is in a whole host of products that the world consumes. What's next? Banning all plastic on Earth?

It is unfortunate that supposedly well-intentioned advocacy organizations put all their efforts into outright consumer bans. These organizations could work towards creating public awareness of a perceived problem and organizing a grassroots movement to use alternatives voluntarily.

The only way to effect meaningful change is to change culture, which requires voluntarily winning hearts and minds.

The column doesn't have any reader comments yet, but I imagine that will change soon. The bag ban issue is heating up in Oregon. I'll be checking back on this debate.

Single-use plastics are the subject of a pretty entertaining song parody set to the tune of "Empire State of Mind."

The song, "Plastic State of Mind," starts with the typical grocery store scene -- a shopper buying a few staples is asked if he wants paper or plastic.

Suddenly, the entire scene becomes a music video, with rapper/activist AshEL Eldridge and singer Jenni Perez taking the parts made famous by Jay-Z and Alecia Keys in "Empire State of Mind."

Environmental activist group Green Sangha is behind the parody -- I discovered it thanks to the Rise Above Plastics blog.

The video does go too far by implying that plastic bags are toxic. That term is thrown around so much that it's starting to lose its meaning.

Still, the video is catchy and entertaining. It does a good job of reinforcing the message that consumers should use durable reusable grocery bags (I have a half dozen sitting at home, but, like the hapless grocery customer in the video, I rarely remember to bring them to the store.)

If you buy a Barbie doll for a Christmas present, how many trees should you plant to offset the carbon footprint?

TinyGreenBubble.com reported today on Barbie's carbon footprint, thanks to research from the California College of the Arts Design Strategy program.

The post doesn't answer the tree question, unfortunately. But it does include a bit of detail about Barbie's chemical makeup (she's got a PVC head, nylon hair,an ABS body and a thermoplastic elastomer waist).

It also notes that every Barbie consumes 3.2 cups of oil -- or 1.127 watts of energy.

TinyGreenBubble isn't a fan of Barbie (or plastics, it seems).

In the past couple of days I've received word of a couple of new plastics-focused blogs, plus I received results from a big resin company's experiment with social media.

The new blogs first.

Lavergne Group, a company with a well known project to recycle ink cartridges for HP, has unveiled a blog focused on recycling-related issues and the company's capabilities. Lavergne added the blog in a recent redesign of its web site. The company also added a Facebook profile, and it plans to add Twitter and YouTube sites in the near future.

AMAMCO Tool, a Duncan, S.C., custom tooling provider, has also made the leap into blogland with CustomCarbideTools.Com, a web log devoted to information about efficient machining of carbon fiber composite parts.

It's interesting to see more companies dipping their toes into social media. The biggest plastics-related move into this area in 2010 had to be Dow Chemical Co.'s ambitious effort at K 2010, the "Stronger, Together" project.

Midland, Mich.-based Dow built a portal for its efforts at www.dowstrongertogether.com that linked its Twitter, Facebook and YouTube pages. The company updated the sites frequently before and during K 2010 -- I'm sure that was a key to the successful effort -- and it also did quite a bit of promotion of the project.

At the show, the company even had a staffer doing daily video reports from Dusseldorf.

How did it all work? Simon Dibb, who was involved with the project at marketing-PR firm Porter Novelli, said Dow was "pleasantly surprised" by the post-K metrics, and it is now evaluating the various channels to determine how to continue to use them to serve the online community it has built.

Key metrics to date include:

• 6,300 YouTube views of K-specific Dow videos, some featuring Dow managers expressing what Stronger, together means to them, plus the daily news updates (daily news videos accounted for 3,850 of the total video views).
• 1,771 page views on Dow's social media web portal www.dowstrongertogether.com
• 146 Dow at K 2010 Facebook fans, with 75 comments/likes generated in 4 weeks
• 129 Dow at K 2010 Twitter followers (including 20+ trade media)

Not huge numbers, to be sure, but Dow felt it had an opportunity to be a first-mover in social media compared to its rival resin suppliers.

Plastic bag ban proposals continue to pop up anywhere and everywhere. This week the city of Long Beach, Calif., took a step toward adoping a ban, while a proposal surfaced 1,700 miles away in Arkansas.

The Long Beach City Council on Dec. 7 voted 6-2 to instruct the city attorney to draft an ordinance that would ban plastic bags. Local news reports say the proposal will be similar to a ban recently adopted by Los Angeles County.

The Long Beach Press-Telegram is reporting that the ordinance would ban plastic bags beginning Aug. 1 at large stores, and at smaller stores starting Jan. 1, 2012.

The City Council is scheduled to vote on the proposal early next year.

Of course if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has his way and the state of California passes a ban, the debate could be moot. But he's a lame duck, so it may be unlikely that he'll get a ban passed before Gov. Jerry Brown takes over.

Meanwhile in Arkansas, Republican state Sen. Denny Altes filed "The Reusable Shopping Bag Act" this week. It would require large stores in the state to provide only paper bags and to sell reusable cloth bags.

Fiji Water Co. LLC has reopened it bottling plant on Fiji's main island of Viti Levu, after temporarily shutting it down to protest a new 15-cent-per-liter tax on bottled water.

The company posted a brief statement about the decision on its blog:

Following discussions today with Fijian officials, Fiji Water will reopen its bottling plant, effective Wednesday morning, Dec. 1, at its regular start-up time of 8 a.m. Through our discussions, we have also agreed to comply with Fiji's new water tax law.

Moving forward, FIJI Water is committed to working with the Fijian government, and remains dedicated to helping the country's economy and its people.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today called on the state Legislature to pass a ban on plastic bags, possibly as early as December.

A bill that would have banned single-use plastic bags failed in the state Senate this summer. But Schwarzenegger said the state needs to reconsider in order to "terminate" plastic pollution.

"Of course we fell short a few votes, but we said, 'We'll be back,' and we are back again. And maybe in December we can do it. Who knows. And if we don't get it done in December, we'll get it done next year. We're going to try over and over again. Because we have seen in the past that when you don't give up, eventually you can be successful."

Check out the video below. Among other things, he criticizes the American Chemistry Council, saying that outside forces can say a ban would be too costly, but that does not take into account the costs that plastic bags create for shoppers, for local communities and for wildlife.

Fiji Water Co. LLC, a company that's long faced the ire of some environmentalists, might be looking for a new aquifer.

President and Chief Operating Officer John Cochran announced Nov. 28 that the Los Angeles-based company would shut down its factory in Fiji today, after the government there announced that it would impose a 15-cent-per-liter tax on water bottled at locations where more than 3.5 million liters per month are extracted.

Fiji Water, which currently pays 1/3 of a cent per liter, is the only bottled water producer in Fiji affected by the tax.

Cochran added:

As a leading exporter, Fiji Water has contributed greatly to the Fijian economy. We represent more than F$130 million in export revenue for the country and employ nearly 400 Fijians at our facility. Our investment in Fiji has created millions of dollars in value through direct employment and with our supplier network. We currently pay millions of dollars in duties and income tax to the government. We also contribute over F$1.8 million dollars annually in royalty payments to the Yaqara Pastoral Co. Ltd. and another F$250,000 annually to a trust that supports the six local villages surrounding our facility.

In addition, our company and the Fiji Water Foundation have worked tirelessly to help improve the quality of life for the Fijian people, including an annual investment of F$1 million to bring clean water to local villages, improve education, and provide access to health care services for those in need.

We consider the government's current action as a taking of our business, and one that sends a clear and unmistakable message to businesses operating in Fiji or looking to invest there: The country is increasingly unstable, and is becoming a very risky place in which to invest.

Fiji Water remains willing to work through this issue with the Fiji government, as it would be our preference to keep operating in Fiji.

Mother Jones, which has been critical of Fiji Water's business plan, is reporting that Fiji Water might have a back-up source of water in mind.

Stewart and Lynda Resnick, owners of Fiji Waters, already own the Spring Fresh brand of bottled water in New Zealand, and "Spring Fresh's website now uses many of the same selling points as Fiji Water, including a claim that the company's operations are 'carbon negative,'" according to Mother Jones.

Today is a good day to check out some other plastics-related blogs.

The ICIS Chemicals Confidential blog has an entertaining post: "Will Royal Wedding be good for plastics demand?" The answer, from blogger Barbara Ortner, is a tongue-in-cheek "yes."

Injection moulding machines across the world are poised for a plastic souvenir bonanza, following yesterday's announcement of the Royal Wedding.

Amongst the acres of coverage about the design of the engagement ring and the wedding dress, and how they will inspire all of next year's brides to buy the same, there is so far little coverage of the containers full of plastic knick-knacks which will be heading for the impressionable markets of Europe and the US.

Britain's Guardian does have a story about the global rush to make souvenir mugs, plates, paperweights and other "collectables" to commemorate the wedding.

(If you haven't heard about the upcoming wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton -- please don't look to Plastics News for additional coverage.)

Also from the blogosphere today, Alex Tullo in The Chemical Notebook has a fun post wrapping up his coverage from Dow Chemical Co.'s recent investor day.

The post, "Odds And Ends From Dow's Dog And Pony Show," shared with readers "some impressions and tidbits that won't make it into" Chemical & Engineering News.

The top two:

1. Dow CEO Andrew N. Liveris is not without his talents. CEOs of chemical companies often bring unique skills to their jobs. Jon M. Huntsman, for instance, is one of the industry's best negotiators. Liveris is at his best when he is moving his lips. He is a salesman of first rank. When you ask him a tough question, he acts as if he woke up that morning hoping someone would ask him that.
2. Even Andrew Liveris can be stumped. A reporter from Michigan Public Radio asked him about hypocrisy of investing in solar cells and lithium batteries in the U.S. while pursuing coal-to-chemicals in China. Liveris wobbled to his feet muttering things about best practices, Responsible Care, and planting lots of elm trees.

Check out the link for the rest of Alex's thoughts and observations.

The plastics industry's recycling record is the main focus of a multi-part report from the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.'s CBC News in Winnipeg, Manitoba, titled "The Predicament of Plastics."

Not a lot new here -- they reveal that most plastic that residents in Winnipeg put in their blue bins heads to China, where processors make durable goods like Barbie dolls and flyswatters.

The report also quotes from a Canadian Plastics Industry Association newsletter in a story titled "Plastics industry battles negative image."

There's also a story on plastic pollution, "Plastic waste polluting Manitoba lakes."

The "story comments" sections for the report are filled with reader opinions -- both on the pro and con sides of the plastics industry's environmental record. According to the site, additional comments are welcome until 11:59 p.m. on Nov. 18.

Compostable, biodegradable polylactic-acid bags may be too noisy for U.S. snack food fans. But Frito-Lay has decided that Canadians are willing to put up with a loud bag in exchange for the environment.

Still think it's too loud? Then you can get a set of earplugs from the company!

Check out this advertisement from the company about the plan -- it's interesting they call it a "public service announcement."

And if you want more information about SunChips packaging and PLA, check out the upcoming Sustainable Plastics Packaging conference, scheduled for Dec. 8-9 in Atlanta.

JoAnn Hines, consultant and Packaging Diva, plans to speak on the topic: "When green goes wrong: What happened with the SunChips compostable packaging failure?"

Plastic marine debris will be the focus of a summit meeting for high school students on March 11-13 in Long Beach, Calif.

The Plastics are Forever International Youth Summit is being organized by the Algalita Marine Research Foundation -- a group known for its research on plastic marine debris.

Right now the group is asking students to come up with solutions to plastic waste problems in their towns. About 100 students will be selected to attend the summit, along with filmmakers, scientists, ocean researchers and "media experts" who will train the students to become expert on reducing plastic in their communities. Submissions are due by Nov. 30.

I spotted information about the summit thanks to Southern California Public Radio, which did an "Everyday Heroes" story about a local student and environmental activist who plans to attend the meeting.

The plastics industry spent about $2 million on lobbying in California between July 1 and Sept. 30 -- as the state legislature was considering a bill that would have banned many single-use plastic bags.

More than half of that total came from Hartsville, S.C.-based bag manufacturer Hilex Poly Co. LLC, according to a report from The Sacramento Bee, based on recently released data from the California Secretary of State.

In addition to Hilex's $1.08 million, the American Chemistry Council spent about $942,000 on lobbying in that three month stretch. ACC was interested in other legislation too, including a bill that would have tightened restrictions on bisphenol A.

Both the bag and BPA bans failed. But with all that money floating around, you can be sure the legislature will take them up again next year.

A group called the Plastic Pollution Coalition has enlisted some celebrities -- including Daphne Zuniga, Jack Johnson, Benicio del Toro, Ed Begley Jr. and Jackson Browne -- to create short videos that encourage people to refuse to use disposable plastic bags, cups, utensils, and straws.

Check out the videos below. They're not slick advertisements. Just low-cost quickly edited sound bites where the celebrity probably wasn't paid, but just gave a little tip about how consumers can avoid single-use plastic.

As much as I enjoyed "Spaceballs," I don't think these are the sorts of celebrities that will appeal to young people ... so perhaps the target audience are in the 35-65 age group.

Can the plastics industry respond with celebrities willing to talk about the energy-saving or health & safety benefits of single-use plastics? Somehow I think the lineup of singers and actors willing to take that gig will be more sparse.

Usually Plastics News reporters get to ask questions at trade shows, but at K 2010 one exhibitor turned the tables, interviewing Frank Esposito as part of a social media project.

Dow Chemical Co.'s Erin Kuhl interviewed Frank -- PN's senior reporter who covers materials companies -- for Dow's social media project that I blogged about a few weeks ago.

In the interview (see below), Frank talks about sustainable products and show attendance.

PN readers know Frank already has plenty of on-camera video experience -- he hosts our regular weekly Material Insights webcast.

Here's a common question -- what kind of plastic is "greenest." A researcher at the University of Pittsburgh has compared a variety of plant-based polymers -- along with some traditional commodity thermoplastics.

The results indicate the biopolymers are not necessarily better for the environment than traditional plastic materials -- mainly because conventional plastics can be environmentally less taxing to produce.

The analysis was conducted by Michaelangelo Tabone, who did the study as an undergraduate student in the lab of Amy Landis, a professor of civil and environmental engineering in Pitt's Swanson School of Engineering.

The research team first performed a life-cycle assessment on each polymer's preproduction stage to gauge the environmental and health effects of the energy, raw materials, and chemicals used to create one ounce of plastic pellets. Then they checked each plastic in its finished form against principles of green design, including biodegradability, energy efficiency, wastefulness, and toxicity.

Conventional plastics took the top spots in the life-cycle assessments -- polypropylene was No. 1, followed by high density polyethylene and low density PE. A biopolymer polyhydroxyalkanoate -- placed No. 4.

According to the researchers, bio-based plastics scored poorly because of the pollution they create during the manufacturing process.

The team attributed this to agricultural fertilizers and pesticides, extensive land use for farming, and the intense chemical processing needed to convert plants into plastic. All four biopolymers were the largest contributors to ozone depletion.

Once in use, however, the biopolymers "cleaned up." Looking at the green design criteria, bioplastics took all the top positions: Two varieties of polylactic acid took the No. 1 and No. 4 spots, and two varieties of polyhydroxyalkanoate tied for No. 2.

Biodegradability, obviously, was a big advantage for the bio-based resins on the green design scale. And, using that as a criteria, conventional plastics took a beating. PP, for example, sank to ninth place as a "sustainable" material, judged by the green design criteria.

Their research will be published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.

Unless you're a tool builder for a packaging manufacturer, you probably don't consider plastic bottle caps objects of art. But Brooklyn, N.Y.-based artist Aurora Robson has managed to take the lowly bottle cap and turn it into a thing of beauty, in a large-scale exhibit that opened Oct. 15 in Philadelphia called "Be Like Water."

The project uses thousands of bottles and caps, collected by the schoolchildren, to create what Philadelphia Daily News columnist Ronnie Polaneczky calls "ethereal, delicate, crystal-like forms that gitter and sway on suspended filament. Walking under them is like gliding beneath dangling ice sculpures."

When the exhibit is finished, the plastic will be dismantled and recycled.

The Wall Street Journal tackled bioplastics as part of a special report on the environment today.

The story offers a decent overview on bioplastics for Plastics Blog readers who need some help getting their arms around the topic -- which, understandably, has generated a lot of headlines in the past couple of years.

The story asserts that while bioplastics currently make up just 0.2 percent of the 350 million metric tons of plastics consumed annually, the volume could jump 30 percent annually over the next 10 years.

That growth will depend on continued and growing interest by consumer product companies, which are using bio-based resins in packaging and some products. It will also depend on the price of natural gas and oil, because bio-based materials tend to be more competitive with conventional plastics when the cost of energy is high.

The WSJ report also includes a nice slide show of products made from bioplastics, including packaging, foodservice and durable products.

Gov. Jim Doyle was at TecStar Manufacturing Co. in Germantown, Wis., today to announce that the state was giving the company a $3.75 million low-interest loan, which it will use to buy injection molding machines for producing solar panels.

TecStar, a subsidiary of MGS Manufacturing Group Inc., said it is adding machinery and workers in order to make components for local customer ZBB Energy Corp. in Menomonee Falls, Wis.

Plastics Blog readers will recall that President Obama mentioned the project in a speech he made at ZBB in August.

According to The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's "Plugged In" business blog, the total cost of the project at TecStar is $15 million, and the facility will add 186 jobs -- it currently employs 170.

Add the Town of Telluride, Colo., to the list of U.S. municipalities with bans on single-use plastic grocery bags.

According to The Telluride Watch, the Town Council voted 5-2 on Tuesday to approve a ban, making it the first community in Colorado with such a law.

The law takes effect on March 1, and like many other bans it excludes bags used for meat and produce. The Telluride ban also does not apply to prescription drug bags or newspaper bags.

To encourage residents to use durable reusable bags, the Town also is requiring grocery stores to charge a 10-cent-per-bag "advance recovery fee" on paper bags.

According to the Watch's report, one local business owner asked the Town Council to delay implementation of the law and instead put the decision before voters, but the suggestion was rejected.

You might recall that "The Plastics Blog" reported back in 2008 that Telluride had been taking a different approach to the bag issue -- a friendly competition with nearby Aspen, Colo., to see which town could get residents to use reusable bags instead of plastic.

But now Telluride instead is joining the trend of municipalities and counties around the country considering -- and in this case adopting -- a local ban.

You should expect more resort towns in Colorado to follow suit.

Bag It Intro from Suzan Beraza on Vimeo.

California gets most of the attention related to plastic bag bans, but North Carolina actually passed a state-mandated ban that takes effect today.

The Virginian-Pilot newspaper in Norfolk, Va., has a pretty thorough feature story about the Carolina ban.

The ban applies to retailers on the Outer Banks -- specifically, businesses in coastal Currituck, Dare and Hyde counties.

Retailers can continue to use bags they already have in inventory, but they can't buy any more. Plastic is still permitted for meat, fish and produce. Shoppers are encouraged to bring reusable bags from home -- they actually get a discount on purchases if they do.

If they don't, then retailers must offer paper bags with at least 40 percent recycled content.

The bag ban on the Outer Banks is driven by environmentalism, and by tourism.

A spokesman for state Sen. Marc Basnight, who proposed the law, notes: "A littered-up Outer Banks is not what will continue to attract visitors from around the country."

California's Legislature failed to pass a ban on plastic bags on Aug. 31. But you should expect more municipalities and counties around the country to consider local bans in the coming months.

Five years ago, consumer product company Johnson & Johnson set some sustainability-related goals that it hoped to achieve by 2010.

Let's check in and see how J&J did on the plastics-related targets -- much of it related to trying to eliminate PVC packaging.

J&J's "Healthy Planet 2010" project set minimum requirements for using post-consumer plastics, glass and metals in its Consumer segment, as well as a goal to reduce use of PVC packaging across the company.

On the PVC front, J&J looks at primary packaging (which comes into direct contact with the product) and secondary or tertiary packaging (which does not come into direct contact), such as bottle cap seals.

In the company's latest report updating progress on sustainability goals, J&J notes that "validating alternatives to PVC packaging is time-consuming and expensive," but added that "we continue to make progress."

In the Consumer business, J&J has eliminated 100 percent of the PVC in primary packaging, accounting for 2,490 tons of material. It has also elimated 92 percent of the PVC from its Consumer unit's secondary and tertiary packaging, for 884 tons of material. The remaining 82 tons are in bottle neck bands, and J&J said it is evaluating alternatives.

In the Medical Devices and Diagnostics unit, the company has eliminated 100 percent of the PVC from its secondary and tertiary packaging.

The Pharmaceutical unit has seen slower progress: it has eliminated 55 percent from the PVC in its secondary and tertiary packaging, or 19 tons.

Procter & Gamble Co. made a splash with its announcement this week of sustainability goals, including many that will have an impact on the types of plastics packaging it uses in the future.

In P&G's case, the company plans to eliminate all of its PVC packaging within two years.

"Not in my backyard" is likely the cry of some residents of Clinton, Iowa, as some residents have filed a lawsuit against Archer Daniels Midland Co. complaining about the company's new plant that makes Mirel bioplastics.

The plant opened in March. According to this report from the Quad City Times, 47 plaintiffs who own or rent homes near the plant filed a suit in U.S. District Court in Davenport, Iowa, complaining about noise, odor, light, dust, traffic and vibrations from the plant.

The plaintiffs want damages, and they're asking the court to make ADM stop operating the plant from until the company can address the problems.

I expect the court will encourage ADM to minimize its impact on the neighborhood -- without shutting it down.

In the meantime, all the other depressed communities that would like to have a company invest hundreds of millions of dollars and bring 100 new jobs to their town can sit back and imagine how nice it would be to be in Clinton, Iowa, right now.

Robert Sarnoff, a film maker who specializes in socially relevant issues, recently sent me a link to his latest video, "Green, An AmeriCan Dream."

The video takes a look at the "pickers" who collect plastic and aluminum containers in Brooklyn, N.Y., and bring them in to collect the deposit. Sarnoff calls it "the underbelly of our economy."

I asked for the story behind the video, and he shared this:

"When I came across this Brooklyn street army lined up in the pouring rain under the train tracks, sparks cascading down along with the drops, rust loosening, falling, as they recycled containers, redeemed chits, reclaimed their lives, I was smitten."

"Taken with the whole process, I followed these 'pickers' collecting plastic bottles, crunching, blowing, to get a good scan, bagging, securing the containers with bungey cords and locks, crushing the large colorful bags into carts, wheeling them to recycling centers."

"Hardworking, diligent, minding the order of things, of the machines that were their gold mines, fixing, scraping, cleaning the mechanisms."

"To witness these workers who are a vital piece in the container collection infrastructure is an eye-opener. To realize that they clean the streets, beaches, parks, while saving the land and oceans is refreshing."

Sarnoff told me a good documentary allows the viewer to gain access to a world he/she never knew existed.

Anyone who's lived in a major city knows these people exist -- but I admit that I've never had such an intimate look at the lives of the 'pickers' -- the footsoldiers of the U.S. recycling infrastructure.

I hope you enjoy the video below. Sarnoff says there is interest in it becoming a complete 60-90 minute piece.

Frederick vom Saal is one of 10 recipients if this year's Heinz Awards.

The awards, presented by Teresa Heinz and the Heinz Family Foundation, recognize extraordinary achievements in environmental issues.

Vom Saal is a University of Missouri professor and long-time leader in the field of research into bisphenol A safety. Here's an excerpt from the Heinz Award web site explaining his role in the issue:

Dr. Frederick vom Saal's groundbreaking research has significantly impacted public health policy as he has uncovered the risks associated with exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), a commonly used chemical ingredient in consumer products, such as baby bottles, receipt paper, food and soda cans. ...

Frederick vom Saal has been one of the leading scientists in demonstrating that human health problems may be preventable by reducing exposures to certain common contaminants, including one, bisphenol A, for which he is, according to many, the world expert. His efforts have borne fruit in the United States and elsewhere around the globe.

Heinz Awards recipients receive a $100,000 cash prize. The awards were established by Teresa Heinz in 1993 to honor the memory of her late husband, U.S. Sen. John Heinz, a Republican who supported environmental causes.

Teresa Heinz is currently married to U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.

Plastics News readers know MBA Polymers Inc., the California company that's developed technology to separate and recycle plastics -- including engineering resins -- from durable products like computers.

Now millions more around the world know about MBA, as the company was featured on Sept. 18 by op-ed columnist Thomas Friedman in The New York Times.

Friedman's column, "Aren't we clever," highlights an oddity that Plastics News has previously covered: Although MBA developed its technology in the United States, right now it does almost all of its plastics recycling in Europe and Asia.

Why? Because even though the U.S. generates more electronic waste than any other country -- and more auto shredder waste than what's created in all of Europe -- there's no infrastructure or incentive for MBA to recycle those materials here at home.

"I employ 25 people in California and 250 overseas," MBA founder Mike Biddle told Friedman. "I am in the E.U. and China because the above-ground plastic mines are there or are being created there ... I am not in the U.S. because there aren't sufficient mines."

Some communities in Southern California are taking a low-tech approach to reducing plastic marine debris -- they're installing expensive screens on storm drains.

According to this story in the Los Angeles Times, 16 cities are installing the stainless steel screens on nearly 12,000 catch basins -- a project that officials expect to stop 840,000 pounds of debris from reaching the Pacific Ocean each year.

The screens cost up to $4,000 per catch basin -- and Charles Moore with the Algalita Marine Research Foundation is suggesting that the plastics industry should pick up the tab.

"You can't put this external cost to the throwaway society onto the municipalities and taxpayers," he told the Times. "They're asked to do all that work, when really, the plastic industry itself needs to be held responsible."

The screens aren't going to completely stop plastic marine debris -- far from it. According to the story, they won't stop small fragments of plastic, which will escape through the 5-millimeter mesh. And during heavy rains, the devices will swing open to avoid flooding.

Still, if the project is successful at reducing marine debris, expect to see other communities follow California -- and don't be surprised if they make the case that the plastics industry should be responsible for the expense.

A leading plastics recycler, Envision Plastics Industries LLC in Reidsville, N.C., started a new blog yesterday that looks promising.

The company, which has long stressed that North American recyclers need more material, said the blog will address three key areas for plastics recyclers:

• Educate on current issues in post-consumer recycling (PCR)
• Provide clarification or additional information on issues related to PCR that may not have been presented accurately or been told the complete story by parties with vested interests
• Introduce and elaborate on benefits of using PCR

The blog (called "Save the Plastics") is already off to a good start -- the first post is titled "3 Reasons Why NC's 2009 Ban on Plastic Bottles to the Landfill is Crucial for Business Success."

Here's a taste, starting with a quote from Scott Mouw, environmental supervisor with teh state's Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance:

In simple terms, the disposal bans are precisely and primarily intended to divert highly marketable recyclable materials away from the waste stream and into the stream of commerce. We have some early indications that the legislation is having that effect and will have extensive data from local governments by late fall that indicate the actual situation.

The next blog post topic: "California's Plastic Bag Ban Legislation - What are the impacts so far?"

Stay tuned, and welcome to blogland.

Here's a twist that may muddy the waters in the debate over plastic bag bans -- its a question about the safety of reusable bags.

The Wegmans Food Markets chain in Rochester, N.Y., announced Friday that it will stop selling two reusable shopping bags designs because testing that indicates that they contain elevated levels of lead.

The bags -- decorated with green pea and 2009 holiday designs -- are made in China. The supermarket chain has stores in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Virginia and Maryland.

A consumer group urged other grocery chains to test their bags for heavy metals.

Jim Kerstein, CEO of composite bridge manufacturer Axion International, believes there's an urgent need to start using recycled plastics in construction applications.

Kerstein wrote a passionate column on the topic for GreenTechMedia.com, headlined "Observations on Eco-Industrial Engineering -- One word: plastics."

A few excerpts:

• Incorporating more plastics into automobiles was possible in the 1940s -- Henry Ford was a proponent -- and the shift would have reduced manufacturing costs and increased carmakers' profits. But automakers were slow to evolve.
• America doesn't have 50 years to adapt to the idea of recycled plastic as a building material. "Couple concerns about the environment with almost unanimous agreement that the nation's infrastructure is in desperate need of repair, and you have what would seem like a perfect storm to drive market acceptance of new composite plastics that are capable of replacing legacy building materials," he wrote.
• "...the private sector is so focused on the bottom line that unless you're extremely competitive in the short term, long-term benefits have little value."
• Also, "being green doesn't seem to be very relevant when it comes to the decision-making process. While it is icing on the cake, a green solution is what sells the cake."

Recycling, litter, producer responsibility and related issues are on the table in Madison, Wis., where the state legislature's special committee on single-use plastics met for the first time a few weeks ago.

Rep. Spencer Black, chairman of the committee, said in a news release that the panel's job is to "find ways to keep more plastic out of our landfills as waste and out of our landscape as litter."

""Plastic is used widely because it is a very useful and convenient material for agricultural, industrial and commercial purposes. But its widespread use also poses a problem, both as litter and as a major source of waste for landfills," he said. "Plastic, as a petrochemical product, contains a valuable resource that we should seek to use again instead of using it once and throwing it out. Working with business in a cooperative manner, I believe we can draft legislation that will benefit both the environment and the economy."

The committee heard from local and national experts, including representatives from the American Chemistry Council and the Association of Postconsumer Plastics Recyclers.

(Check this PDF for the minutes of the meeting.)

Black said the panel will meet again in October, and he hopes to finish its work with two additional meetings.

Yesterday I blogged about how California residents feel about their legislature failing to pass a ban on plastic bags. Today, we'll let columnists from several California newspapers weigh in.

One common theme: The American Chemistry Council won this battle with a strong lobbying effort.

Patty Fisher of the San Jose Mercury News attributed the Senate's "no" vote to "the lobbying blitz of the American Chemistry Council."

I think she's right on target when she says the debate will now shift to local communities. "Before long, there will be individual ordinances all over the state," she wrote in a column today, "The bag ban debate? There's only one way to make it go away."

Steve Lopez of the Los Angeles Times wrote "It took an army of lobbyists to kill California's ban on plastic bags." ACC spent millions opposing the bill, he wrote, adding: "It would have made neighborhoods cleaner and waterways safer for wildlife, but Sacramento is often where good ideas go to die."

John Bogert of the Torrance, Calif., Daily Breeze let legislators have it with both barrels. His column, "Plastic bag lobby shows politicians come cheap," draws a bright line between the contributions given to politicians by the ACC and its members, and the bag ban vote.

But what really bothers me isn't that elected officials appear to sell out. No, what gets me is how they aren't open for competitive bids. C'mon, $1,500? A politician will wag his little doggie tail for an amount a single concerned citizen could raise outside a post office with a tin can and a photo of a sweet otter smothered in a grocery bag?

That's outrageous! The least they could do is open up for online bids so we can all have a chance at being heard. Fact is, I would have paid $1,500 for a vote in favor of a bill to stop this one tiny assault in a massive war on our own planet.

It's not a scientific poll, obviously, but if you're interested in how California residents feel about the state Legislature's failure to pass a ban on single-use plastic bags, check the Los Angeles Times' "LA Now" blog.

Reader comments in blogs are always worth reading. Here are a few that represent a variety of positions:

I am so sad to hear big industry won out over the environment once again. We could have set a benchmark for the nation! I refuse plastic and take my bags to the store every week. The person who commented about the 100's of uses for their plastic bags needs to consider that the pastic bag doesn't last forever and eventually ends up in a land fill or in the ocean... wanting to protect the environment is not a lefty-loons idea, it should be everyones goal!

Work on the budget! That's the ONLY item on which the legislature and the governor should be working. Other than that, the only law they should pass right now is a new law suspending the legislature's ability to entertain any new legislation until after the annual budget has been completed and signed. Of course, not that they would follow it. They certainly don't seem bothered that state law requires a budget balanced and on time. If California goes Republican, this will be the reason.

People should care enough about their State to take personal responsibility for its environment and take their own re-usable bags to the store with them. The cut in cost for the stores could be passed on to the shopper through lower prices.

Doesn't matter how many jobs it kills. These things need to go, and move the jobs over to a biodegradable bag company.

Great news, indeed. Banning plastic bags is an attempt to take over the world. Everyone knows that. Didn't Glen Beck just have a rally to declare this a one bag nation?

Good save California. Everyone knows that cloth or canvass bags are inferior and don't have 100s of uses. Besides they're anti-freedom.

Conservative thinking has got our backs. Continue to pollute the earth, as long as powerful industry lobbyists get their way.

Here the state is falling down over our heads and these bozo's are worrying about plastic bags ! What a disconnect ! Lets get people in there who can see the big picture.

This is ridiculous. Job killer? Bag factories can easily be retooled for other purposes, and plastic bags would still be available. Will 5 cents a bag really sink us economically? No. But it will help us change our habits and use less bags. For the people who say they re-use them, 5 cents for a bag you use for many purposes is a deal. The ACC are the real culprits in this.

Thank goodness. The last thing consumers need is another tax every time they buy something. The last thing businesses need in a recession is a new tax and another impediment to selling their merchandise. The nanny-state just won't give up.

It's tough for politicians to do what citizens want when citizens themselves can't agree on issues. The electorate is so polarized these days, it's impossible to make everyone happy.

If I was considering a wager, though, I'd say there's enough support for a bag ban that we'll see this legislation proposed again next year.

Working together, can plastics and agricultural researchers help create a polylactic acid resin that's capable of handling hot-filled liquids?

That's the aim of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service, which is reporting that USDA chemist William J. Orts is working with Lapol LLC, of Santa Barbara, Calif., in an effort to make corn-derived plastics more heat-tolerant.

The team is developing a 90 percent corn-based modifier that is fully biodegradable that can be blended with PLA to make it more heat-tolerant.

The story quotes Randall L. Smith, chief operating officer at Lapol, who says there currently are no commercially available heat-deflection temperature modifiers for PLA.

Smith said ARS and Lapol are seeking a patent for their invention.

There's a group of consumers who aren't in love with plastic packaging and gadgets, and social networking web sites are helping them share information and ideas.

The latest? Perhaps it's the Plastic Crap Wall of Shame Facebook page, created by Beth Terry of FakePlasticFish.com fame.

Terry started the "Plastic Crap" site in July. The mission:

To pull back the curtain and reveal this plastic "convenience" shit for the inconvenient, unsustainable mess it really is.

Upload and tag your photos. Post your links. Include a company address so we can write to them. This page is open to anyone to participate.

I stumbled across the "wall" today via a link from Siel Ju's Mother Nature Network blog.

Siel calls the wall "a fun way to rage against plastic waste."

As of this writing, the wall has just over 1,100 people who "like" it (using the terminology of Facebook), and a pretty active "wall," mostly filled with examples and photos of plastic products that someone, somewhere, doesn't like.

Instead of resorting to bag taxes and bans, some communities and retailers have tried voluntary efforts to reduce bag consumption. Let's check on the status of two -- one small-scale effort, and one on a very large scale.

On the small side, an IGA grocery store in Lennox Head, Australia, announced this week that it is bringing back plastic bags, after 12 months of being bag-free.

The store manager told The Northern Star newspaper that the decision was made due to overwhelming customer feedback.

"Due to customer feedback over the past 12 months we have reintroduced customer choice," the manager told the newspaper. "We have boxes, green bags, paper bags for 17 cents and reusable, biodegradable plastic bags."

Meanwhile, in Britain, groceries are reporting dramatic success with a voluntary effort.

Since the program started four years ago, British retailers say they have cut the number of plastic bags used by 4 billion annually.

Some 6.1 billion carrier bags were handed out in the first five months of 2010, a 43 percent drop from the 10.6 billion handed out 2006, according to the British Retail Consortium.

The Daily Mail -- which is sponsoring a Banish the Bags campaign -- reported that BRC said the figures are a "ringing endorsement" of the voluntary approach taken by supermarkets.

A designer in the United Kingdom is developing a plan to collect and recycle chewed gum and turn it into a plastic that can be molded into new products.

Gross, I know, but interesting.

The designer is Anna Bullus, who, according to her biography, left a job at Chase Furniture in 2008 to set up her own company, Gumdrop Ltd., "to tackle the global problem of gum litter."

Her web site is filled with statistics about the problems caused by gum litter, including the cost of cleaning it up that burdens big cities like London.

For example, she claims that Britain creates, on average, 7,000 metric tons of used gum each year.

More "gum facts" from her site:

• On average 30,000 pieces of gum are irresponsibly discarded everyday on Oxford Street in London.
• If everyone in the UK stopped irresponsibly discarding their gum on Oxford Street today, it would still take over 4 months to clean the existing gum off the street.
• Cleaning chewing gum off the streets in the UK, on average, costs three times the price of a piece of gum.
• Three and a half billion pieces of gum are disposed of irresponsibly each year in the UK.
• The British Government spends £150 million each year on cleaning gum off the UK's streets.
• Nine out of ten city paving stones have gum stuck to them.

Bullus has a solution to the problem: using recycled gum to make a gum-derived plastic that she calls "Bullus Recycled Gum Polymer," or BRGP.

Right now, in several pilot projects, BRGP is being molded into brightly colored pink bins where consumers can toss their used gum. (Not exactly closed-loop recycling, but let's not go there...)

When the bins are full, both the bins and their contents are collected and recycled into new BRGP.

I'm guessing the bins smell sort of fruity.

Eventually, Gumdrop Ltd. hopes to develop other applications for BRGP.

For Plastics Blog readers outside California, here's the advertisement that the American Chemistry Council prepared to fight AB 1998, the bill that would ban plastic bags.

The ad is tough on the state Legislature, accusing it of focusing on a relatively minor issue (banning plastic bags) while it failes to act on more important problems.

The ad also says the ban would be bad for the economy, a burden on consumers, and that it would kill manufacturing jobs.

The North County Times in Escondido, Calif., recently editorialized against the proposed California plastic bag ban with a column that blasted the legislative "nanny state" trend.

"... if plastic grocery bags can be banned, what other popular consumer items will the nanny state try to take away from us? After all, if plastic grocery bags are bad, then plastic trash bags can't be much better. Or perhaps the gurus in Sacramento will decide that we all have to purchase our movies and music digitally to keep CDs, DVDs and Blu-Rays out of our landfills," the editorial asserts.

"Keeping plastic out of our landfills (and more important, our ocean) is a good idea, so be a good steward and recycle that plastic. And offering tax credits for those who invest in research into biodegradable or recyclable alternatives to the many plastics would be a wise government policy indeed.

"But micromanaging our lives and imposing what amounts to a regressive tax on the poor and middle class -- while fundamental government tasks like passing a budget remain undone -- is, to put it as kindly as possible, irresponsible."

For more on the "nanny state" argument against plastic bans, check out this funny story from the San Francisco Chronicle, which notes that Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado is using a similar tact against San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom.

Maldonado sponsored a booth at the state Republican party convention with a table of products "banned in San Francisco," including plastic water bottles.

"With a pen and piece of paper and an executive order, he bans Pepsi and Coke," Maldonado told The Chronicle. "You know what? If I don't like Pepsi and Coke, I just don't drink it. But if Gavin doesn't like it, he bans it for everybody."

A video that mimics a nature channel documentary is getting attention in California, where the state Senate is preparing to vote on AB 1998, which would ban plastic bags at some retailers.

The "mockumentary" is narrated by actor Jeremy Irons, and it follows the "migration" of a plastic bag from a grocery store to the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

The project was created by advertising firm DDB Los Angeles, working with Heal the Bay. DDB's Regie Miller told Advertising Age's Karen Eglof that the team wanted to create a fun video that would engage consumers.

"You can lecture and scold people all you want, but these fist-shakings rarely get passed around," Miller said.

Al Evans noticed some calls to ban or tax plastics products, so he wrote a letter to Stuart, Fla.'s TCPalm.com asking "Why, when plastics yield so many benefits?"

"Having worked for the plastics industry for 17 years, I feel compelled to respond to all those opposed to plastics in any form," he wrote.

"Take a look in your kitchens and consider the products this material has replaced, as well as the interior and exterior of your appliances, flooring, furniture, all at significant savings because of their light weight and convenience."

"In construction products, think about plastics pipe and fittings, vinyl siding, and roofing materials, etc. The greatly reduced labor costs of handling plastic pipe alone are very significant."

Evans goes on to highlight the benefits of using plastics in automotive, packaging and medical applications.

It's rare to see anyone from the industry sit down and write a letter defending plastics. Perhaps Evans' effort will inspire more of the same.

Did you ever try to sneak a chip without anyone hearing? Apparently it's just about impossible with the new Sun Chip bags from Frito-Lay.

That's according to a story from Page 1 of today's The Wall Street Journal: "Snack Attack: Chip Eaters Make Noise About a Crunchy Bag."

I love the subhead on this one: "Green Initiative Has Unintended Fallout: A Sack as Loud as "The Cockpit of My Jet."

Brad Rodgers, Frito-Lay's North American manager of sustainable packaging, fingers the biobased plastic, polylactic acid, as the cause of the very loud packaging.

The new polymers have a higher "glass transition temperature," which is when a polymer goes from a harder, glasslike state to a rubber state. Because the transition to rubberiness happens a bit above room temperature, the bag is "kind of crispy and crunchy," says Mr. Rodgers.

Don't believe the Sun Chips bag is really all that loud? Check out the video and judge for yourself.

Potato Chip Technology That Destroys Your Hearing from heathaplexVISION on Vimeo.

Duro Bag Manufacturing Co. was OK with the city of Brownsville, Texas, banning plastic bags. But now that the city may extend the ban to paper bags, the company is threatening to close its plant and leave town.

Plastics Blog readers may remember that earlier this year, Brownsville became the 12th U.S. city to ban single-use plastic grocery bags.

At the time, we connected the dots and pointed out that Brownsville was home to a big Duro Bag plant that employs 120 and makes about 9 million paper bags a day. The company touts itself as the world's No. 1 paper bag maker.

When the plastic ban was adopted, a Duro official told The Brownsville Herald that the ban was "for the good of the community, for the good of the people and the environment."

But now the tables have been turned.

According to the Valley Morning Star, an amendment to the plastic bag ban, proposed by city's Environmental Advisory Committee, would remove language in the original ordinance that specifically exempts "recyclable paper bags" from the ban.

City Commissioner Edward C. Camarillo told the newspaper that the change is not aimed at banning paper bags.

"Nobody is trying to ban paper bags," he said. "We are not banning paper bags."

But that's not how Duro is reading the latest developments. The newspaper says that Chris Klein, Duro's environmental director, thinks the revision is clearly aimed at banning most paper bags.

"Company officials said the company would have no choice but to move if paper bags were banned," the story says.

What happened to bag bans being "for the good of the community, for the good of the people and the environment"?

President Obama mentioned injection molder/mold maker MGS Manufacturing Group Inc. in a speech today at ZBB Corp. in Menomonee Falls, Wis.

ZBB makes batteries used to store electricity from solar cells and wind turbines.

In his speech today, Obama said he was visiting the plant "to jumpstart a homegrown, clean energy industry."

"Because of the steps we've taken to strengthen the economy, ZBB received a loan that's helping to fund an expansion of your operations. Already, it's allowed ZBB to retain nearly a dozen workers. And over time, the company expects to hire about 80 new workers. This is leading to new business for your suppliers, including MGS Plastics and other manufacturer here in Wisconsin.

He added: "And ZBB is also planning to take advantage of a special tax credit to build another factory in southeastern Wisconsin, so we can create even more jobs and more opportunity. And Eric is confident that you can expand because you're seeing rising demand for advanced batteries. And all this is part of steps we've taken in clean energy -- steps that have led to jobs manufacturing wind turbines and solar panels, building hybrid and electric vehicles, modernizing our electric grid so that we have more sources of renewable energy but we can also use it more effectively.

"We expect our commitment to clean energy to lead to more than 800,000 jobs by 2012. And that's not just creating work in the short term, that's going to help lay the foundation for lasting economic growth. I just want everybody to understand --just a few years ago, American businesses could only make 2 percent of the world's advanced batteries for hybrid and electric vehicles -- 2 percent. In just a few years, we'll have up to 40 percent of the world's capacity."

Does your family buy a lot of takeout pizza? If so, this plastics-related innovation might be for you:

According to a report from WANE TV in Fort Wayne, Ind., a pizza shop in Convoy, Ohio, this week started to offer its customers plastic pizza boxes.

Knights Pizza manager Ronnie Reidenbach said switching from cardboard can help the environment, because plastic boxes can be reused up to 500 times.

The box itself costs customers $12.95. But after they buy it, every time they reuse it they get $1 off their pizza, Reidenbach said.

I suppose that's also a good way to keep customers from buying pizzas from other restaurants.

Every so often, I come across a plastics-related idea that's so ridiculous that I try to ignore it, rather than sharing it with Plastics Blog readers.

The "Recycled Island" is just such an idea.

You may have seen stories on this project. Whim Architecture, a Dutch firm, has suggested using plastic waste floating in the Pacific Ocean to create a massive floating island.

The island -- check out the colorful illustration -- would use 44 million kilograms of plastic waste to create 3,861 square miles of "sustainable living space," where islanders could live on fishing and agriculture.

The aim is to create a floating environment for 500,000 people, powered by solar energy and wave motion.

When I first saw news reports about "Recycled Island" in June, I tried my best to ignore them. Seriously, no one is going to use recycled plastic to build a 3,861-square-mile island for 500,000 people in the Pacific Ocean.

This is not the answer to the plastics industry's marine debris problem -- it's a pipe dream.

But the project continues to generate headlines around the world. So I'm going on the record and saying -- enough. Please.

To help support my case -- that "Recycled Island" should be known as "Ridiculous Island" -- consider today's blog post from Miriam Goldstein, a doctoral student at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

Her post, "'Recycled Island' not a cure for plastic trash in ocean," notes that there are "a number of issues with this rather romantic plan."

The main problem is this: The vast majority of plastic bits (>90%) are smaller than a pencil eraser, and are spread out enough to be mostly invisible to the naked eye. It is therefore extremely hard to remove the plastic without catching a lot of ocean life. ...

The "Recycled Island" folks may be able to build a giant island out of recycled plastic - I am not an architect and I have no idea if this is feasible. (Though I hope they know that there are hurricanes in Central Pacific...) But I do know that it would be very, very difficult to remove a significant percentage of the plastic without catching a ton of zooplankton. And catching and killing tons of marine life would not be a good way to meet the criteria of the project.

Which happens to be to save marine life.

I could say a lot more about how little is known about the impacts of plastic in the North Pacific Central Gyre, or about the ridiculous notion that adding a giant land mass would "return more balance" to the open ocean - but I've got to sleep sometime. So to summarize, I do not think Recycled Island is feasible because it would be environmentally damaging to collect enough plastic in the North Pacific Central Gyre to build their enormous island.

Hear hear.

Projects like "Recycled Island" may help focus attention on the marine debris problem, which could be a good thing.

But there's also a risk that some sector of the public will think, "Hey, we don't need to worry about this any more, because I read a story about some Dutch conservationists who are building an island with all of our plastic waste."

Creating an island out of recycled plastic may be "romantic," or at least visually exciting. But the real solution to the marine debris problem is to stop creating marine debris.

After my post yesterday about the bag ban debate in California, Plastics News staff reporter Mike Verespej pointed out another column on the topic worth sharing with blog readers.

Kevin Kelly, president of the California Film Extruders and Converters Association, wrote an opinion piece for the San Jose Mercury News headlined "Banning plastic bags will kill California jobs, won't help the environment."

It's a strong column, which you'd expect from Kelly, a former BusinessWeek reporter, and now CEO of Emerald Packaging Inc., a family-owned firm in Union City, Calif., that makes printed plastic produce bags.

Kelly says the immediate impact of a bag ban would be the loss of jobs:

Today, plastic bag manufacturing employs thousands of Californians, including the 175 workers at my factory in Union City. These good-paying manufacturing jobs -- many of my workers make more than $20 an hour with health and dental benefits -- are at risk if this bill becomes law. Several thousand more of our residents working for suppliers to the industry could also be on the way to unemployment, and their families to public assistance.

Not to worry, says Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Woodland Hills. She insists that there won't be job losses because companies that produce plastic bags will "retool" to make reusable bags.

What a joke. The type of reusable bag that Brownley wants can be competitively made only in China because of labor cost. Today, China and other low-wage Asian countries make virtually 100 percent of the reusable bags in the United States. If Brownley has a secret business plan for allowing domestic companies to compete with low-wage Chinese firms that face almost no regulation and are underwritten by the government, she should detail it. Until then, simply flipping the switch to produce reusable bags is not a realistic option.

The truth is Brownley has made her peace with sacrificing jobs during the worst labor market since the Great Depression in exchange for a supposed environmental benefit. The tragedy is that benefit won't materialize.

Kelly makes some good, common-sense points about why banning T-shirt bags would not result in the reduction in bag use -- despite what proponents of the ban are predicting.

Kelly asserts that, for hygenic reasons, meat, fish and produce would need to be wrapped separately in plastic bags. On top of that, reusable bags must be washed periodically, requiring water, energy and polluting soaps.

In addition, consumers who currently use "single-use" bags to line their garbage cans and to pick up pet waste would have to start buying those bags, he says.

Check the link for more of Kelly's thoughts on the issue.

The debate is heating up on a proposal in California that would ban some plastic grocery bags.

Assembly Bill 1998 would ban grocery stores from giving out plastic bags and require customers to pay at least 5 cents for each paper bag.

Let's take a look at some of the viewpoints expressed about AB 1998 on various news-oriented websites today.

Thomas D. Elias, a syndicated columnist who writes about California state issues, is in favor of the ban/tax. His column today, "Plastic bag fee is a tax you don't have to pay," cites three reasons: "Oil, crowded landfills and the persistence of plastic."

Plastic comes from oil; each plastic bag not used is a small step toward energy independence. Meanwhile, using fewer paper bags would contribute to reducing greenhouse gases by keeping more trees intact.

Plus, many landfills are near capacity and the more trash piled into them, the greater the pressure to create new ones farther and farther out from where urban residents actually produce their trash. Then there's the ubiquitous nature of plastic bags: What swimmer hasn't washed up against one at an ocean beach; who hasn't seen them blowing in the wind?

But here's the real reason the so-called bag tax and the partial plastic bag ban are good ideas: This is one tax you don't have to pay. Reuse existing plastic or paper bags and there's no charge. Use cloth or rattan bags, backpacks or some other container, and you'll also avoid any levy.

Elias has a bias in favor of paper bags that isn't fully explained. He says: "Paper bags are neither as pernicious nor as persistent as plastic. They can be used several times if their bottoms stay dry and they decompose in landfills."

Is he aware of the lifecycle studies that give an edge to plastic over paper? I don't see the logic behind treating them differently.

Tim Shestek of the American Chemistry Council is opposed to the ban-tax bill.

In his column "Give Recycling a Chance: California shouldn't ban plastic bags," Shestek calls the proposal "a nearly $1 billion hidden grocery tax," and suggests that it would eliminate the jobs of nearly 500 Californians who make bags.

Shestek writes:

As you consider this issue, keep in mind that this year, the Vacaville Police Department has to cut nearly $1 million from its budget. A budget cut of this size takes uniforms off the streets. But fear not -- AB 1998 will create its own force of "bag police." They won't keep our streets safe, but they'll be sure to fine any mom and pop store giving out grocery store bags -- up to $10,000. It's just another layer of misguided government bureaucracy.

We need jobs. We need teachers and real police. We need a state budget. Lawmakers should focus on these urgent problems facing Californians, not "paper or plastic?"

This looks like ACC is taking a page out of its successful playbook from Seattle, where it emphasized the cost of the bag tax to consumers and convinced voters to reject a proposed 20-cent fee on both plastic and paper bags last year.

On top of that, ACC is stressing that the industry has made an effort in California to recycle plastic bags -- and the Legislature should give that a chance to succeed rather than pulling out the rug and banning plastic bags.

Recycling creates jobs, after all, and if consumers can keep their bags and recycle them too, perhaps that can be a long-term solution to the state's marine debris and litter problem.

This is shaping up to be an interesting debate.

If your company is serious about sustainability, check out how injection molder Cascade Engineering Inc. treats the subject.

The company puts out an annual "Triple Bottom Line" report, which measures its environmental and social goals -- something that's fairly unique to the firm's DNA. Here's a link to a copy of Cascade's 2009 report (warning, it's a big PDF file), which looks like something that a far larger company would create.

The report includes information on a variety of programs, like its Welfare-to-Career program (with 95 percent retention, which is a "down" year for Cascade), ways it encourages its employees to get and stay healthy, and graphs on its water consumption rate, recycling efforts, and energy usage.

Just about anything that could be quantified is listed here. There's lots of information in there for companies looking at measures of sustainability, and for those looking at "social" costs.

Cascade made headlines today with news that the Grand Rapids, Mich., molder is investing $2.8 million in its Cascade Renewable Energy division, and expects to hire up to 183 more people for the unit during the next five years.

The Plastiki -- the all-recycled-PET catamaran that's been sailing across the Pacific Ocean since February -- has reached its destination in Sydney, Australia.

The last 200 nautical miles of the 10,000-nautical-mile journey were made with the help of a tow, after the main sail was damaged off the Queensland coast.

Captain David de Rothschild told the Sunshine Coast Daily: "To date we have made a number of routine and unplanned stops during the voyage and this tow and stop will be no different."

For more background, including a video and lots of links, check these earlier Plastic Blog posts that featured the Plastiki:

Plastiki plug for Seretex

Plastiki almost ready to go

Video on how the Plastiki was built

Another voyage to the garbage patch

Get ready for the Plastiki

Add Mark and Melanie Rummel to the list of bloggers who say they're trying to live a plastics-free lifestyle.

The newlywed couple from Texas has a goal of buying nothing made of plastic for the next year, and they've set up a blog, nonewplastic.com, to share their story.

Susy Solis from the NBC affiliate in Dallas/Fort Worth has a story on the couple that sheds some light on the 4-month-old experiment.

According to the story, the Rummel's are continuing to find new ways to use less plastic --- but they say living completely without plastic is almost impossible.

"For us, it's more about, 'This is how we see a sustainable way of living, and that's how we want to live,'" Melanie Rummel said.

Here's an excerpt from their blog -- one of my favorite entries, called "I cried for cheese (and other food experiences)."

The other day, Mark and I went to our beloved Whole Foods to get groceries. As always, we made our way to the cheese counter and munched on the samples, bemoaning our inability to find plastic-free cheese. Then, I had an idea. I asked Brian behind the counter if there was a certain day they cut the wheels of cheese so we could get some not wrapped in plastic. He explained to us that they cut different wheels every day. Then, he asked if there was a certain cheese we would like that he could cut fresh for us right there. Heck yeah! I asked him about the cheese I'd already taken several samples of, a sharp cheddar, and he pointed out to me that even the wheel doesn't have plastic on it! Mark and I agreed to get a pound of the cheese.

We watched Brian get the cart to carry the large wheel of cheese to the counter. He peeled away the canvas it had been shipped in and used a wire cheese cutter to cut it open for us. As soon as he cut the wheel, he used a tool to dig out the first bite and gave it to us to taste. Several months ago, Mark and I took a Tour of Italy's Wine and Cheeses class at Whole Foods, and we learned that the cheese tastes the best within 20 minutes of the wheel being opened. It certainly was incredibly delicious!

After it was cut, Brian agreed to put it in our cloth produce bag. After weeks of not buying cheese, I was so thankful, I cried a little.

There are also quite a few posts about their efforts to potty-train their cat -- all to avoid the plastic components of kitty litter bags!

Remember that Town Meeting in Concord, Mass., where citizens voted to ban bottled water? It turns out residents didn't have the authority to make that decision, so bottled water sales are legal again in Concord.

That's the story from the Concord Patch website. Betsy Levinson posted a story there today, "Selectmen Advance Bottle Dilemma: Board agrees on a strategy to cut down on plastic containers."

According to Levinson's story, after the Town Meeting passed the article -- which would have banned the sale of plastic water bottles beginning Jan. 1 -- it went to the state attorney general.

The state AG declined to approve the article, saying it was not enforceable -- there was no civil or criminal consequence of violating the rule.

That left Concord's town selectmen in a pickle. Should they pass a law that they could enforce? Or just let the matter drop?

Chairman Jeff Wieand seemed to just want the issue to go away.

"Most people are not willing to ban the sale of plastic water bottles," Wieand said, according to the story. He suggested taking no action.

"We don't do anything; we haven't admitted defeat," he said. "But there would be nothing for the media to talk about. ... The best outcome would be if the issue didn't come up again."

In the end, the selectmen decided to develop a strategy to voluntarily use fewer plastic bottles.

Meanwhile, Virginia also took a similar step today, when Gov. Bob McDonnell reversed a directive that banned state agencies and institutions from buying single-serve plastic water bottles.

One group charged that McDonnell made the move at the request of a major water bottler in Virginia. But The Washington Post's Virginia Politics blog seems to think that charge is all wet, pointing out that the company in question mostly sells water in 5-gallon containers.

After decades of R&D -- but little commercial progress -- the world seems to be on the cusp of a green car revolution.

And the market that's moving the fastest just might be China.

Yang Jian, managing editor of Automotive News China, wrote a good column on the topic yesterday, "China Inc. moves full speed to embrace EVs"

"Even for a person like me who covers China's auto industry on a daily basis, I can't help feeling amazed at how fast the government is moving to encourage development of 'green' cars," Yang wrote.

"Late last year, the Chinese government was still unsure which powertrain technology to support to help domestic automakers leapfrog the international competition.

"But this year, it chose to subsidise plug-in hybrids and 'pure' EVs, then quickly mobilised all its resources to prepare the country for the age of the electric vehicles."

Now China has created pilot subsidy programs for plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles. The city of Shenzhen -- a leading auto center -- has kicked in its own subsidies. And China's central government has directed China's two electric utilities, three largest oil companies and major electrical equipment makers to build EV charging stations across the country.

"The Beijing government is running - not walking - to keep pace with the auto industry," Yang wrote.

China's advantage appears to be central government control, which appears to be fully supporting investment in EVs.

But keep in mind, U.S. companies have some obvious competitive advantages that should help them stay ahead of Chinese automakers and suppliers.

Singer-songwriter Jackson Browne has long had a political streak, and today he made headlines in the U.K. for comments about bottled water.

Browne has a column on the Daily Mail's website titled "I Blame bottled water for the oil spill!"

He links the BP oil spill to the marine debris issue, pointing out that according to some estimates, "the amount of oil used to produce plastic every day is the same amount as the oil that is spilling into the Gulf of Mexico every day from the damaged Deepwater Horizon drilling rig."

Browne then ties marine debris to bisphenol A safety, charging that plastic water bottles are made from BPA, "a known 'endocrine disruptor', which can mimic the body's hormones and can have side effects."

Despite the level of detail in the column, there's no evidence here that Browne knows that BPA is a precursor to polycarbonate, or that most plastic water bottles are made from PET, not polycarbonate.

In fact, he writes that last year his touring production company "decided to eliminate plastic water bottles from the list of things we are provided in the venues we perform in. Now we carry two five-gallon coolers, and each of the band and crew carries a stainless-steel water bottle."

It is more likely, of course, that those five-gallon coolers are made from polycarbonate than the single-serve bottles they replaced.

My favorite snippet from Browne is what he has to say about recycling:

The plastics industry insists that all we have to do is recycle. But why should we bear the cost and responsibility of recycling it? Why should we buy the stuff and then pay to dispose of it? In the case of the oceans, we will never be able to clean them up faster than the rate plastic is going in.

The answer is to stop producing it, to stop buying it. A few years ago I was on a remote beach in Spain and spent the day cleaning it up with another guy there, a German. It was mostly plastic. He muttered that the locals didn't appreciate the natural beauty of the place.

Both of us assumed it had been thrown away there carelessly, perhaps dumped there. But now I don't think so. I can see now that it had all washed up there. Humans are slobs.

There's no way around it. We are slobs. I know surfers who travel the world and ride the planet's most remote waves. They say there are plastic bottles washing up in Antarctica, in Patagonia, and all of the most distant and pristine beaches in the world.

Interesting take. Is that a popular opinion among environmentalists, that the public can't be trusted to recycle, so the answer to litter problems is to stop manufacturing products?

In my regular searches for news about plastics, I tend to see a lot of comments from celebrities about plastic packaging. I read them all, but I share very few with readers of the blog.

But Browne touches on so many issues in his column today, I made an exception.

Washington, D.C., has generated more than $1 million in revenue to date from its 6-month-old tax on plastic and paper bags.

The Christian Science Monitor reports that Washington collected about $150,000 from the 5-cent-per-bag tax in January -- the first month -- and revenues have increased each subsequent month, reaching $226,000 in May.

Revenues totaled $942,000 for January through May, so they've certainly topped $1 million by now. The funds are earmarked to clean up the Anacostia River.

The headline on the Monitor's story, "Plastic bags: Untapped tax gold mine?" is sure to attract attention.

So is it a "gold mine"? Not exactly.

While nearly $1 million is not chump change, in the context of that city's $6.1 billion general fund budget, it's no windfall, either. Perhaps the more significant result of the measure is that plastic bag use decreased sevenfold in the city after its implementation. Only 3 million bags were distributed in January (the first month of the tax) compared with 22.5 million per month in 2009.

The same was true in Ireland - the only country to institute a plastic bag tax, back in 2002. Plastic bag use dropped 94 percent within weeks of its passage.

The story quotes an expert from the Tax Foundation, who says that no matter how much money the tax generates, supporters will claim it a success.

If the tax brings in a lot of money to clean up the river, supporters will applaud. If it brings in little revenue, they'll say the tax is successful because it's discouraging people from using single-use bags.

There's no mention here of the Tax Foundation's report that I previously blogged about, "Bag taxes disappointing in debut."

Pete Grande, president and CEO of Command Packaging in Vernon, Calif., wrote a powerful defense of plastic bags in an op-ed column published today on the Los Angeles Times Web site.

Headlined "The unintended consequences of a plastic bag ban," Grande writes that if California adopts a ban on plastic bags, consumers would switch to environmentally unfriendly paper bags, and the state would lose jobs.

"Simply put, the phrase 'Ban the bag' is a sound bite, not a solution. It's a proposal that will make legislators feel good rather than do good. In fact, it will do much harm," Grande wrote.

Here are the facts. First, the ban will have an immediate impact. I disagree with those who say that banning plastic bags won't be effective. I believe it will be effective -- at killing jobs. At my factory alone, 200 people will lose good-paying jobs almost immediately. This comes at a time when our state budget is running a $19-billion deficit and when our state economy has an unemployment rate higher than 12%. Obviously, this is not the time to be pursuing regulatory policies that will kill jobs and hurt our economy.

Second, this ban will not only be bad for the economy, it will be bad for the environment. Studies demonstrate that plastic bags leave a lighter footprint on the earth than paper bags. Yet the proposed law would promote more paper bags and harm our ability to recycle. Ironically, stores and consumers shifted to plastic bags was because of environmental concerns about using paper bags. Now, in a complete reversal, we are on the verge of passing a law that will greatly increase the use of paper bags, thus destroying trees and increasing emissions of greenhouse gases, the leading cause of global warming. Is that smart environmental policy?

The goal of the bill may be to reduce first-use bags, but the net effect is simply a replacement of plastic bags with paper bags. And that's bad news for anyone who cares about the environment. An Environmental Impact Report by Los Angeles County acknowledges that if plastic bags are banned, 85% of consumers would switch to paper bags instead of reusable bags. We have seen this to be true in places where plastic bags have been eliminated, including San Francisco, Whole Foods and Trader Joe's. And what would this switch to paper bags mean for global warming? According to the figures in the report, 85% of Californians switching to paper bags would be the equivalent greenhouse gas emissions of between 250,000 and 550,000 more cars on the road every year. That's because life-cycle analysis calculates that paper bags result in more than three times the greenhouse emissions as plastic bags.

Grande writes that he opposes the excessive use of packaging, including plastic bags, and he urges readers to reuse or recycling bags, and not take more bags than they need at the store.

"That's the right way to curb plastic bag use. The wrong way is with a piece of legislation that ignores the facts and stirs fears. Any solution to this issue must be grounded in reality and deal with the fact that a ban on plastic bags will lead to job losses and more paper bags that will negatively affect the environment.

"Let's not ban the bag; let's bag the ban."

Grande's column is a response to the LA Times' own editorial on the topic, published June 24, which supported a state ban on plastic grocery bags.

"Banning plastic grocery bags" made the case that plastic bags "are a nuisance to the land, sea and animals. The state Senate should stand up to the bag industry and ban them by passing AB 1998."

The state Senate's Environmental Quality Committee took a step toward that goal yesterday, when it approved the Assembly bill.

Next up: the Senate Appropriations committee, then the full Senate.

Here's one of those stories that just doesn't sound right, courtesy of the Canton, Ohio, Repository:

Amish World adds furniture made from recycled milk jugs

PLAIN TWP. -- Amish-built outdoor furniture made from recycled plastic milk jugs is now available at Amish World, 3939 Everhard Rd. NW.

The "poly lumber" furniture is equivalent in weight and size to traditional hardwood patio furniture. The company says it has a 20-year warranty and will withstand all types of weather.

This is odd on so many levels:

• There's a store called Amish World.
• They sell products made from recycled plastic.
• They have a Web site.

Appliance maker Electrolux AB says it wants to make vacuum cleaners from plastic waste harvested from the world's oceans.

The project, called "Vac from the sea," would solve two problems, according to the company's video (see below).

First, it would help clean up the garbage patches. Second, it would boost the supply of recycled plastics that durable goods makers could use.

"The supply of sustainable raw material, such as recycled plastic, is crucial for making sustainable appliances, and assisting consumers in making their homes greener," Hans Stråberg president and CEO of Electrolux, says on a web page explaining the project.

"I therefore hope you will join us in raising awareness about the threat plastic poses to marine habitats, and the urgent need for taking better care of the plastic that already exists."

Electrolux isn't new to using recycled plastic. In the past few months, we've had a couple of stories about their Ergospace Green project, a canister vacuum made using 55 percent recycled plastic.

In that case, the material was supplied by MBA Polymers Inc. of Richmond, Calif.,, which uses automotive shredder residue as the raw material.

So while Electrolux's "vac from the sea" project sounds a little wacky -- how can a company mold a product from a feedstock that's so contaminated? -- this is a company that has a track record for using hard-to-recycle materials.

I expect they'll find a way -- and the right partners -- to make this work.

The New York Times has a story today about Jean Hill, the 82-year-old activist -- critics call her "a retiree with too much time on her hands" -- who managed to make it illegal to sell bottled water in Concord, Mass.

"Where Thoreau Lived, Crusade Over Bottles" manages to paint a portait of a city where a single citizen, through persistence, successfully convinces the majority of voters in her community to ban water bottles.

"I'm going to work until I drop on this," Hill told Abby Goodnough from the Times. "If you believe in something, you have to persist and you have to have a thick skin."

Plastic is clearly the prime target here -- the story notes that Hill started her crusade after her grandson told her about the Pacific garbage patch. She complains that millions of plastic water bottles were disposed of daily, and most are not recycled.

The International Bottled Water Association, rather than the plastics industry, is the leading industry authority quoted in the story. IBWA spokesman Tom Lauria says: "Some people in the industry kind of respect her because of her age and her vision ... but we believe that vision is distorted. There are far worse products to pick on than water."

Cable TV's Sundance Channel is airing "Addicted to Plastic," a documentary by Ian Connacher.

Sundance describes it as "an international odyssey revealing the disturbing long-term effects of the most ubiquitous and versatile material ever invented. From water bottles and Styrofoam cups to toothbrushes and garbage bags, in less than a century the pervasive presence of plastics has marked every ecosystem and all aspects of human activity. Visually compelling, entertaining and thought provoking, ADDICTED TO PLASTIC is both a wake-up call and an inspiring consideration of possible recycling or down-cycling solutions."

The film is the result of three years of filming in 12 countries on 5 continents, including two trips to the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, according to Bulfrog Films.

The film details plastic's path over the last 100 years and provides a wealth of expert interviews on practical and cutting edge solutions to recycling, toxicity and biodegradability. These solutions - which include plastic made from plants - will provide viewers with a new perspective about our future with plastic.

In the eastern time zone, Sundance will air the film tonight at 8:30 and 11:45 p.m., then again on Sunday at 10:30 a.m.

Bioplastics are a hot topic among recyclers -- especially biodegradable resins. Are processors paying attention?

Dordan Manufacturing Co. Inc., a thermoformer in Woodstock, Ill., has been studying the issue for some time, and today Chandler Slavin, the company's sustainability coordinator, posted a thoughtful item on the topic.

"Bio-based plastics, environmental considerations," on GreenerPackage.com, compares bioplastics like PLA to conventional resins like PET.

"Taken together, one would assume that the 2005 Ingeo PLA is a more sustainable option than traditional plastics, as manifest through this study," she concludes. "However, it is important to take into account the other dimensions discussed above, such as end of life management, complete biodegradation, and sustainable sourcing. By understanding the advantages and disadvantages of bio-based resins from an environmental perspective, packaging professionals can make informed material selections and truly comprehend the ecological ramifications of their packaging selections and designs."

It's nice to see a processor taking the time to do the research into the pros and cons of using bioplastics, and I know that Dordan isn't alone. I get a few phone calls a month from processors with questions about what materials are "most sustainable," and I know others at Plastics News get the same question.

As I wrote back in January, I think most processors are willing and able to adapt to their customers' materials-related sustainability goals -- they just need information and guidance.

Processors are flexible about using recycled content, or bio-based resins, or switching from one virgin material to another. It all depends on cost, performance and what the customer wants.

Congratulations to Bob Moore, CEO of Intelligent Global Pooling Systems Co. LLC (iGPS), who was named Florida's Entrepreneur of the Year in the emerging industries category by Ernst & Young.

Wait, you're thinking -- iGPS is a pallet firm. How does a pallet maker qualify as an "emerging" industry?

Moore took one of the most basic products in the world and revolutionized it by making all-plastic pallets embedded with RFID tags. The company's pallets are lightweight, strong and reusable, and are easy for customers to track.

Moore received his award on June 10 in Orlando. Now he will compete in the Ernst & Young national competition in November in Palm Springs, Calif.

CNN posted a video yesterday that's got all the stereotypes of a bad story about plastics rolled into less than 4 minutes.

• It starts with a clip from "The Graduate."
• The story pretends to be about a woman who is living "without plastics," but it's clear that she's living without plastic packaging.
• The clip is part of a "Toxic America" series.

The story, "One woman's mission to be plastic-free," is about Jean Healge, who made some drastic lifestyle changes about 2 years ago because she was concerned about the chemicals used in plastics.

She bakes her own bread now, for example, and makes her own toothpaste. Healge also buys most of her grocery staples from bins and from farmers' markets, and she doesn't store anything in plastic containers.

It's interesting to see the lengths that consumers need to make to avoid plastic packaging. But I was really hoping that someone would point out in the story that although there wasn't much plastic in her refrigerator, the refrigerator itself was clearly, at least in part, made of plastic.

Also, she pointed out there she did have a couple of plastic bottles in her refrigerator -- one for ketchup, one for mustard. That surprised me -- you can't find any ketchup or mustard in glass bottles anymore? I'll have to look the next time I'm in the store.

peHUB.com, a web site for private equity investors, says there are promising investment opportunities being created by "plastics paranoia" -- namely, capitalizing on the public's fear of bisphenol A.

Senior writer Alexander Haislip posted a column today headlined "Plastics Paranoia Poses VC Profit Potential." He writes that even if some of the studies critical of BPA may not be correct, "doubt certainly opens up opportunities for competition. After all, BPA production is a $6 billion a year business -- and both investors and entrepreneurs should see this as a big fat opportunity."

But working with plastic is not without its challenges. For investors, it means getting garlic, crucifixes and holy water to tread into the badlands of materials science, where companies are quietly killed in the crib when their science projects fail to yield real products. It means having to work Dow, Dupont and dozens of other major chemical companies, learning to license effectively and optimizing the OEM process. And it means pulling products out of laboratories, hand-holding scientists and engaging non-techie executives and entrepreneurs.

Talk to the investors who are putting their money into plastics and you'll hear variations on the same theme: Tomorrow's biggest successes are going to be driven by materials. "The big gains will come from manipulating molecules instead of manipulating bits," says Martin Lagod, co-founder of Firelake Capital Management, which invests in both private and public companies focused on materials science and energy, water and information technologies. "This is going to be a major trend that's going to play out over the next 10 to 40 years."

Typically I think by the time the financial press discovers a business opportunity, it's too late for investors to cash in.

But with peHUB urging investors to take a look, processors, compounders and material suppliers can expect to see more interest from venture capitalists.

CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta will air an hour-long investigative story that will focus on PVC manufacturing plants and the communities that surround them on June 2 at 8 p.m. EST.

The report, according to anti-PVC activist group the Center for Health, Environment and Justice, will look into "the environmental health and justice problems plaguing the community of Mossville, Louisiana. Nestled amidst an alarming cluster of chemical plants, Mossville is home to more PVC chemical plants than anywhere else in the entire country, and has been dubbed the Vinyl Manufacturing Capital of America."

CHEJ is urging its supporters to watch the show, and to use it to draw attention to its PVC-Free campaign in schools and elsewhere.

For a taste of CNN's previous coverage of PVC manufacturing in Mossville, check out this story from February, "Toxic towns: People of Mossville 'are like an experiment'"

Frito-Lay North America Inc. is spending a lot of money and effort to let the public know that its SunChips snack chip bags are "fully compostable." But one community decided this week that the bags may not be quite compostable enough.

The Regional Municipality of Niagara, Ontario, announced May 18 that it will not accept the bags in its Green Bin program because the film takes too long to degrade in the community's composting plant.

"The Sun Chips bags are made of polylactic acid, which is a corn starch-based product similar to that which is used in the compostable liner bags that are accepted in the Region's organics program. Both products compost under the right conditions, however, the Sun Chips bags have three layers of and compost in about 14 weeks, while the bin liner bags are a single layer and break down in three to four weeks," Andrew Pollock, director of waste management services, said in a news release.

"The Walkers' Gore Composting Facility, which processes the Region's Green Bin material, produces compost in eight weeks. As such, the Sun Chips bag may not fully break down in the composting process. Bags that do not fully break down would be screened out and landfilled.

"Walkers and the Region are currently conducting a controlled test to determine if the bags will break down in the eight-week Gore composting process. Once this test is completed, staff will determine if the Sun Chips bag can be accepted in Niagara's Green Bin program. Currently, only compostable bags carrying the Biodegradable Products Institute logo are the only compostable plastic item accepted in the Region's Green Bin program. In the meantime, the Niagara Region is reminding residents to continue to place all chip bags, including Sun Chip bags, in the garbage."

Frito-Lay has gotten quite a bit of positive press for its SunChips packaging, which the snack giant called the world's first 100 percent compostable chip bag.

If this community sticks with this decision, it's likely to go down as another case that will confuse consumers in the ongoing debate about the merits of packaging degradability.

When Plastics News writes about sustainability, we naturally tend to focus on materials-related issues, and most frequently about packaging.

Carbon footprint plays a role, too, as well as energy savings, either from the reduced transportation costs that lightweight plastics bring to the table, or insulating properties of plastic building products.

But sustainability means many things to others, as this post from FastCompany.com indicates.

The item, "Sustainability Faceoff: Coca-Cola vs. PepsiCo," does look at packaging, but that's just the beginning. How about issues like:

• Where does the company source its sweetener?
• How is its worker safety record? Do employees participate in wellness programs?
• Do workers own a share of the company? How much does the CEO earn compared with the worker bees?
• Does the company buy products from minority-owned and women-owned suppliers?

And the bottom line -- that's important to having a sustainable business, too. How profitable is the company?

It's interesting to see this big-picture approach. I expect most plastics companies will continue to have their customers like Wal-Mart or Procter & Gamble define what's sustainable -- but there's a lot more to the equation than a typical packaging scorecard.

What do taxes on plastic bags accomplish? Not much, according to the Tax Foundation, a non-profit Washington think tank.

According to the group, supporters exaggerate the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, landfill deposits and litter that bag taxes will accomplish. On top of that, the revenue that bag taxes generate for states and municipalities has been disappointing.

"Even when pitched more honestly as taxes, they are likely to fall short of ambitious environmental clean-up goals. Also, bag taxes cause unintended effects, such as stimulating bulk purchases of plastic bags, perhaps of a type that would cause equal environmental damage. And bag taxes invariably get caught up in the political process in which special interests in business and government are served more than the public's interest," the group said in a report released today.

"Whether assessed theoretically or practically, bag taxes are not a promising development in tax policy."

The Tax Foundation said bag taxes, in theory, should fall into the category of pigouvian taxes -- named for British economist Arthur Pigou -- which are set to depress purchase of a product in order to benefit society.

"Government-imposed charges for bags are best described as pigouvian taxes, though it is not clear how much environmental benefit the citizens will receive if fewer bags are used. The tendency, as in Seattle, is for public officials to greatly exaggerate environmental benefits. And with the likelihood of inter-governmental transfers, bag taxes may just be another way for a state or city to grab general revenue."

Nevertheless, don't expect to see the bag tax trend go away. While mainstream environmental groups are spending more time on global warming, there are too many grassroots groups calling for bans and taxes on plastic bags than you can count -- and new efforts seemingly popping up every week. (Here's one in Austin, Texas).

Richard Stein, a professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, penned an eloquent defense of plastics, which was published today on the Web site of The Valley Advocate in Northhampton, Mass.

Stein wrote the letter in response to an article that the newspaper published in its Food/Dining section on May 6, "Back to Basics: It's easy (and smart) to keep the kitchen (and the world) plastic-free."

The original article cited issues including bisphenol A and phthalate safety, and marine debris, and urged readers to live plastics-free.

Stein responded with a letter that the newspaper titled "Plastics not all bad." Drawing from his experience and long career in the plastics industry (Stein was a 1994 inductee into the Plastics Hall of Fame), he tackles some of the repercussions of living "plastics free."

I read your article on alternatives to plastics ("Back to Basics," May 6, 2010) with interest. I agree that there are problems with the use of plastics, but like with so many other things in life, plastics have their positive and negative aspects, and one should balance these in making decisions.

Modern electronics are possible because of the use of plastics in constructing circuit cards. While this has given rise to some problems, would we be willing to give up television or Internet? When I was young, milk bottles were made from glass, but such bottles have mostly disappeared because of the advantages provided by plastics in weight savings (leading to less fuel for washing and delivery) and less harm resulting from cuts occurring with breakage (which caused a serious injury to our milkman). Also, it takes much energy to make and recycle glass.

I have a letter from the former Director of Bell Labs commenting on the great economic savings and environmental gain in replacing lead-sheathed phone cables with plastic ones. I recently had a colonoscopy and I am thankful that it was possible to use a flexible plastic catheter for this rather than a rigid glass tube. There is concern about conventional plastics requiring petroleum for manufacture, but this process uses less than 5 percent of the petroleum supply while about 90 percent is used for fuel. The saving of fuel resulting from the weight saved by using plastics as a substitute for metal in vehicles and aircraft more than compensates for the petroleum needed to make the plastics. I do not think it desirable to use degradable plastic since the energy content of the plastics is lost upon degradation.

There is rightful concern about health damage arising from trace material leaching out of plastic used for food containers and bottles. One example is phthalates. I was involved, about 60 years ago, in the introduction of phthalates, which permitted the use of plastic film to avoid water damage to rifles during Pacific landings in World War II. I suspect the lives saved by this were many. My point is that plastics have their place and can help our lives, but they must be used properly.

As one of the founders of the world-renowned polymer program at UMass-Amherst, I became concerned with environmental problems arising from improper disposal. I helped produce a documentary video about this, Troubled Waters, which showed on more than 100 Public Broadcasting System TV stations. It advocated proper disposal procedures, some of which have been adopted (such as recycling soda bottles), without which the problems would be much worse.

It would not be beneficial to go back to glass for food containers, but it is essential that there be education and regulations to assure that [plastic containers] are used properly. We must educate our legislators to do this.

My plea in general is not to encourage an attitude of technology versus the environment. We must learn how to use technology properly to help the environment. As an example, the use of plastic membranes for reverse osmosis can replace boiling as a means for concentrating maple sap for syrup. The same can be used for desalinating seawater to produce fresh water, which is becoming increasingly scarce. This is already being used in regions such as Cape Hatteras and the Near East and on cruise ships, and will be more widely used when technology can reduce costs sufficiently.

It's rare to see such a thorough, balanced and thoughtful response to a news column on plastics.

The Plastiki isn't just raising awareness of marine debris, it's also helping to publicize, and commercialize, a new composite sheet made out of recycled PET.

The Plastiki -- the boat made out of PET soda bottles that David de Rothschild is sailing from San Francisco to Australia -- managed to get a plug today for the composite sheet product.

The plug came from The New York Times Green blog.

Blogger Sindya N. Bhanoo writes that "after 38 continuous days at sea, the crew anchored at Christmas Island on April 27 for a few days' rest before the next leg, a 20- to 30-day voyage to Fiji." While the crew is in port, he traded emails with skipper Jo Royle, and put together a Q&A interview for the blog.

The plug? It comes in Royle's answer to this question: "Did you have any harrowing moments in those 38 days sailing the Pacific?"

We have arrived after sailing for nearly 40 days across some of the most remote ocean in the world with no visual fatigue in the super structure of the Plastiki. This is a great achievement for the project and proves that Seretex -- a fully recyclable self reinforced PET [polyethylene terephthalate] -- is a smart material to replace the use of more toxic and less recyclable plastics used to manufacture anything from garden furniture to bus stops to the interior of cars. The Plastiki is the first product to be built from Seretex.

Seretex didn't ring a bell with me, so I did some checking.

This web site describes it as Seretex srPET, short for self reinforced PET, "a revolutionary product that will change the way we build composite structures. This replacement for typical fiberglass/epoxy products is much safer and easier to work with. It can be made from 100% recycled content and can then be recycled again at the end of it's life. Your next tennis racket or pair of skis might be derived from drink bottles and when you are done with them recycled again into a jacket or sweater. This is the future, be part of it."

This earlier Plastics Blog post included a video that featured the Seretex material, although the story doesn't mention the material by name. The material is created by taking a polyester fabric made from recycled PET, applying heat and pressure, to create a rigid board.

I'm sure we'll hear more about Seretex after the Plastiki completes its voyage to Australia. Interesting that SmarterPlanet LLC is apparently using this eco-focused voyage to prove the durability of a recycled-content product.

Here's a nice headline for plastics packaging makers: "Marks & Spencer's mini wine range goes a shade greener with plastic bottles."

The story comes from British national daily The Guardian, in a report about U.K. retailer Marks & Spencer converting "its entire range of 25cl still wine bottles from glass to environmentally friendly plastic, meeting growing consumer demand for lighter and 'unbreakable' containers."

More from the story:

The new bottles are 88% lighter than glass bottles, less energy is required to manufacture a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottle than a glass bottle and the lightweight bottle reduces distribution emissions. The company estimates that the switch will save it 525 tonnes of packaging a year.

Marks & Spencer has already converted its standard-sized 750ml wine bottles to plastic. But the story points out that the mini-bottles are popular on picnics. The retailer sells about 100,000 mini bottles a week, and sales are up 26 percent over the same period a year ago.

Bioplastics are a hot story in the business press right now, but one recent report probably left viewers scratching their heads.

Fox Business did an Earth Day segment on bioplastics, interviewing Steve Davies, marketing manager at Natureworks LLC.

Check out the interview below. The anchors are poorly prepared. If they have a list of questions, you can't tell. They don't appear to be paying attention to what Davies is saying -- they're both reading their laptops while he talks, and then ask questions that barely make any sense when he pauses.

Davies does a nice job staying on point, especially given the circumstances. He's prepared, even though the reporters are not. He really holds together the 5-minute segment, unless you're interested in whether one of the Fox reporters can eat plant-based tableware, or if the other will get a free pair of shoes after the interview is finished.

I think most TV reporters do a good job. They handle many stories each day on a wide variety of topics, often covering issues and companies where they don't have a lot of expertise. That said, this report is disappointing.

I don't bring this up to slam these reporters. I'm not sure if the poor interview is their fault, or their producers', or the result of a technical problem.

But since I often counsel Plastics Blog readers that they should get their message out, including by doing interviews with journalists, this is an example of how an interview could go wrong if you don't prepare in advance.

This interview easily could have degenerated into a story that left viewers with the impression that all plastics, including bioplastics, are toxic. Davies is able to gently deal with that misconception and guide the reporters back to the point of the story, without getting into an argument.

The Wall Street Journal featured three start-up companies with plastics connections over the weekend: e-book company Plastic Logic, recycler TerraCycle Inc., and plastic wine closure maker Nomacorc LLC.

The trifecta features the companies in different sections -- there's no connection between the stories, just a coincidence that all three have significant plastics connections.

The Plastics Logic story is in the Journal's Technology section. The story, "First Plastic E-reader Was Fruit of Cambridge Spinoff's Labors," highlights how it took five years for the company to commercialize its plastic-circuit technology, which makes possible the company's Que Pro Reader -- the first e-reader made of plastic electronics.

TerraCycle is featured in a story in the Small Business section, headlined "Start-Up Seeks Profits in Mounds of Garbage."

The story notes that TerraCycle is in a critical stage right now. "The company's warehouses are jammed with about one billion wrappers and other garbage for which it had no big customers," the story notes, so the company "desperately needs more orders." The company is trying to ink some deals right now with big retailers like Wal-Mart.

Finally, the paper's Food & Drink section has a nice feature on Nomacorc, the Zebulon, N.C., company that's carved out a niche making plastic stoppers that compete with cork. According to the story, the company produced 1.4 billion plastic "corks" last year, and plastic stoppers now account for about 20 percent of the market. (Natural cork accounts for 69 percent, and screw caps account for 11 percent.)

The company has succeeded by applying plastics technology to the stopper market. Early plastic corks were made of solid plastic that were "difficult to insert and extract and can leave gaps around the edges that are prone to leaks." But Nomacorc succeed by making corks using two types of extruded plastics:

A firm inner core that would hold the shape of the cork and a spongy exterior that would fit better. The new corks had the feel of natural cork and were easier to remove with a cork screw, which addressed a key consumer objection. Not only that, but they could be printed to look like cork or made in fanciful colors. Nomacorc holds 30 patents on its products and the techniques to make them.

Interesting that these companies are all featured on the online.wsj.com site today. Beyond the obvious plastics connection, perhaps these stories, and these companies, do share something else in common -- the business truism that it takes time and money for new companies to get established, even when they have an innovation that seems like an obvious winner.

Last week Sarah Newman posted an item on The Huffington Post about "anti-plastic heroes" -- a list of 10 "artists, activists, politicians and even corporations who are offering inspiring ways to cut plastic consumption."

Newman charges that plastics are "suffocating our planet," and that "we are smothering our planet in plastic waste." Some of the "Ten Anti-Plastics Heroes" have been featured before in The Plastics Blog -- the No. 1 hero, for example, is Beth Terry of Fake Plastic Fish.

For her part, Terry says she's not anti-plastic:

I'm pro-living beings. Plastic is not destroying the Earth. The Earth will be around long after we and all the other living creatures have ceased to exist. And the plastic will have become just another geological layer. But the creatures on the Earth now... we are all suffering because of the misuse of the materials available to us, and that's why I do my work.

Misuse of materials -- that's an interesting take on the problem, and perhaps a common ground where environmentalists both inside and outside the plastics industry can establish a dialogue.

I saw Newman's and Terry's Earth Day-related posts last week, but was inspired to revisit them after seeing a recent post, and some comments, on the Society of the Plastics Industry's Inc.'s "In the Hopper" blog.

The post, "Earth Day and Plastics," highlighted numerous ways that plastic contribute to a more sustainable world.

That's about as far from Newman's post as you can get.

SPI's Barry Eisenberg made a convincing case that plastics help to enable many environmental innovations -- like windmills, solar cells, and more efficient aircraft and automobiles.

But is that missing the point? Critics of plastics (at least most of them) don't dispute that plastics offer benefits to society.

Beth Terry posted a comment in response that said in part:

While I sincerely appreciate that plastics have made many of our advanced technologies possible, I cannot fail to notice that the article omits some of the most troubling forms of plastic -- those which are opposed by me and members of the Plastic Pollution Coalition: Single Use Disposable Plastics as well as plastics used to contain food and beverages.

Single use disposables are the biggest form of litter polluting the planet and are almost completely unnecessary. Bringing our own reusable bags, bottles, and containers with us helps cut this unnecessary source of pollution, as do bans and fees on disposable bags and other containers.

Plastic food containers, whether disposable or durable, can be hazardous to our health. We all know that plastics can leach the chemicals added to them, especially when subject to heat and rough handling. But how many of us actually know what those chemicals are? Phthalates, BPA, lead, antimicrobials are just some of the chemicals that can leach from certain plastics. But as you know, there are a whole host of chemicals added to affect plastic's qualities, and manufacturers are not required to disclose any of them.

U.S. law requires labeling of all ingredients on food products. Unfortunately, the chemicals that can leach from the plastic containers are not included in those ingredient lists. So how can consumers truly make informed decisions? Are your members willing to disclose the "recipes" for their products, or will they forever hide behind claims of proprietary information?

It's fine to be proud of your contributions to sustainability, but how about also addressing the ways in which plastics play a part in polluting the planet?

Eisenberg responded with a defense of plastics, to be sure, but he acknowledged that "industry needs to do more."

For decades, our industry has been a leader in finding innovative solutions to a variety of societal problems. Currently, overall sustainability and developing products with an enhanced environmental profile are targets squarely in our crosshairs. We agree that we absolutely must drive waste from the packaging value chain. Frankly, initiatives to cut plastic waste not only yield improved sustainability but are also cost-effective for companies. The packaging industry has been focused on reducing the amount of packaging necessary for a long time. But certainly industry needs to do more. Innovative solutions that augment physical recycling - including waste-to-energy and biobased/biodegradable materials -- are becoming more prevalent.... Beth, we appreciated your recent Earth Day blog post. Particularly when you wrote, "We are all suffering because of the misuse of the materials." We couldn't agree more.

Manufacturers of single-use plastics have their own take on product sustainability. As Eisenberg mentions, they point to benefits of plastic packaging including energy and material savings.

Newman, Terry and Eisenberg didn't settle the pro-plastics vs. anti-plastics debate on Earth Day 2010. But at least Terry and Eisenberg found a little bit of common ground.

I don't think it will be enough that Newman won't be updating her "anti-plastic heroes" list on Earth Day 2011, though.

Today is the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, and it seems like plastics are in the spotlight more than ever this year.

Not necessarily in a bad way, either. In addition to all the stories and columns in the media that give the typical "avoid plastics" advice, I'm seeing quite a bit of coverage today that give plastics a more postive spin.

PlasticsNews.com has a story on a new plastic bag recycling awareness campaign in Florida, which included a kick-off event today with Gov. Charlie Crist. The effort will encourage consumers to reuse and recycle bags. If it is successful, it might hold off a proposal to tax and eventually ban plastic bags in Florida.

Many companies like DuPont Co. and Sunny Delight Beverages put out news releases on Earth Day to highlight what they consider to be their best environmental messages.

The most interesting Earth Day twist I spotted today comes from Greenwich, Conn., where the Time newspaper is reporting that the filmmakers behind "Tapped," a documentary that's critical of the bottled water industry, will screen their film tomorrow (April 23) in Greenwich, the home to Nestle Waters North America Inc.

The twist? Nestle Waters President and CEO Kim Jeffery plans to attend the screening and follow it with a presentation of the company's side of the issue.

Here's a relevant section of the Time's story:

Jeffery said he didn't want a screening of the film in his community to take place without having the opportunity to defend the company.

"When somebody attacks that business, the reputation we have in Maine, and blames me for the fact that recycling isn't as good as it could be in America, I'm going to fight it," Jeffery said. "We've worked very hard to do things the right way over the years. I didn't want to let this go unresponded to in my town."

Appearing in person, rather than just issuing a press release complaining about the film, is the type of move that we've come to expect from Jeffery.

Enjoy the debate, Greenwich residents, and Happy Earth Day.

Adweek.com has an interesting story about green marketing that starts with a plastics-related example.

The story is "True Green? Determining what's really green is tricky. Marketing it is even trickier." It leads with an example from Neil Grimmer, co-founder of Nest Collective, an Emeryville, Calif., company that makes organic baby food.

The company packages its Plum Organics brand in what Adweek describes as "micro-thin [plastic] container that's devoid of Bisphenol A."

Competing baby food brands in glass jars use nine times as much fossil fuel to transport and take up to 14 times the amount of landfill space. By contrast, Plum's disposable pouch is eco-friendly, competitively priced and convenient to use. So, what's the problem?

It's plastic. And in the minds of most consumers, that's not "green." Sure, Plum could try to explain statistics about landfill space and weight-transport/carbon-usage ratings, but that's a lot to cram onto a 4.2-ounce bag. "These things are hard to talk about," Grimmer says. "There's nothing sexy about a landfill."

The story points out that frequently plastic packaging is "a lot more ecologically friendly" than alternative materials, but marketers are faced with a difficult task -- explaining the advantages of plastics to consumers -- including some who have preconceived notions that plastics = bad for the environment.

Visit your local supermarket and you'll see hundreds of products purporting to be eco-friendly. But without a third-party monitor, a twisted dynamic emerges: Much of what consumers assume is green is actually not, and those brands that really are green are often left to make a complex and technical pitch that people don't understand or just don't hear. As eco-marketing consultant Jacqueline Ottman puts it, "The consumer is very confused about what's truly green and what isn't. Marketers are confused themselves. Some products can be green in one instance and not in another. So it's all potentially confusing."

Sure, companies like Nest Collective could spend their marketing dollars convincing customers that their plastic packaging is sustainable. But why should they?

That's a message that's the responsibility of the plastics industry -- both the materials suppliers and the processors/converters that make the packaging.

Don't hold your breath waiting for an effective campaign. The attitude these days seems to be to let Wal-Mart decide what's sustainable...

David Ropeik, author of the "How Risky Is It, Really?" blog on Psychology Today's Web site, has an interesting post yesterday about bisphenol A safety.

The post, "Bisphenol A. Balancing Fact and Fear as We Face a Risk," notes that uncertainty, plus some common concerns about the safety of chemicals and the trustworthiness of the chemical industry, make this an issue where the public is naturally worried.

"BpA is a CHEMICAL, and just because it's in that category it rings alarm bells. It's a product of the less-than-trusted chemical industry, another category that automatically triggers concern," Ropeik writes.

"BpA is human-made, and that makes a risk scarier than if it's natural. (Soy is powerfully estrogenic too. Nobody's demanding that the FDA regulate that!) The risk of BpA, if there is one, is imposed on you via food containers. It's not something you choose, and an imposed risk always evokes more worry than if it's voluntary. BpA is undetectable by our senses, which makes it harder to do anything about, and the less control we feel we have about a risk, the more afraid we usually are. And the science of BpA is uncertain. The fewer facts we have about a risk, the scarier it usually is."

Ropeik cautions against banning BPA until manufacturers have time to develop, test and convert to alternative materials.

If we rush to ban BpA, for example, will its replacements produce their own dangers? (We replaced carcinogenic solvents in the electronics industry with chlorofluorocarbons that turned out to destroy stratospheric ozone, which protects us from cancerous rays from the sun. D'Oh!) If we rush to ban BpA from containers of baby foods, can the infant formula industry convert to other ways besides cans to provide all the liquid formula moms need? Not without a lot of time to make that conversion (which some companies are working on already, foreseeing such a ban).

I think Ropeik is being a little simplistic with that last point. BPA safety has been an issue in some circles for more than a decade. But progress on creating alternative materials didn't accelerate until public concern grew and regulators and legislators started to take a closer look at the issue.

So if alternatives are needed, what incentives do manufacturers have to create them unless the public demands them in the first place?

Nonetheless, this is an interesting post from an unlikely source, and I'm sure we'll be hearing more from Ropeik in the future.

I've previously blogged about the journalism awards that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has received for its coverage of bisphenol A safety. Today Fast Company magazine joins the parade, with a first place award from the Association of Health Care Journalists' annual awards for excellence.

David Case of Fast Company won for his Feb. 1, 2009 report, "The Real Story Behind Bisphenol A."

The major contribution this story made to the BPA debate was its effort to show the similarities between the chemical industry's defense of BPA safety and the tobacco industry's earlier efforts to discredit research on tobacco dangers. Case's report noted that some of the same organizations that chemical makers are using now were once key players in the tobacco industry's effort.

The AHCJ judges wrote this about Case's report:

Our trust in science was shaken after reading Fast Company's investigation of BPA. The writer, David Case, makes a compelling argument that commercial interests - in this case plastic manufacturers - distort science and manufacture doubt in order to keep their products on the market. With its detailed revelations, the piece ultimately shows us how all industry can try to co-op science to serve a profit-making agenda. And our government, sadly, may be more complicit than we know. Excellent reporting, good storytelling, and some truly brilliant sidebars add up to a winning entry.

TV Week has a report about the AHCJ awards, which notes that Case said he first started reporting on BPA a decade ago.

He pitched the story "many times to editors over the years, but it wasn't ripe yet."

So he took his box of notes and cassette tapes with him on every move -- to San Francisco, Washington, Philadelphia and New York, each time debating whether to toss it. In mid-2008, his diligence paid off with an assignment, but it took another nine months to pull it together.

"The story involves several very determined groups of people trying to keep BPA on the market, one of the biggest industrial chemicals out there," said Case of the challenges. The other, he said, was making sure everyone understood the science.

As I've pointed out in the past, it's worth keeping track of which plastics-related stories win big journalism awards. Those issues tend to stay in the public and legislative spotlight for a long time.

New York newspapers like the idea of boosting the city's plastics recycling efforts.

PlasticsNews.com reported last week on the proposal, dubbed Local Law 19, ("NYC may accept all rigid plastics for recycling"). The proposal would be the first significant expansion to recycling in the city since the program was introduced in 1989.

Under the proposals, the city will open a new recycling facility in Brooklyn capable of accepting all rigid plastics, not just the PET and high density polyethylene containers currently accepted. In addition, access to recycling bins in public spaces will double in the next three years, and city-wide textile recycling and household hazardous waste collection programs will be offered.

Today two leading publications in New York editorialized on behalf of the plan.

Crain's New York Business called the plan "A real boost for recycling," and said in part:

The record of recycling in New York City has not been particularly impressive. Before 1989, when curbside recycling was mandated, it was left to scrappy entrepreneurs and environmentalists to collect bottles and newspapers. The new municipal program represented a leap forward, but it was surpassed long ago by other cities' efforts. Mayor Michael Bloomberg's ill-fated suspension of the recycling effort in 2002 in order to pare the budget broke the program's momentum and ultimately cost more than it saved.

New Yorkers eventually returned to the habit of recycling, but we still aren't very good at it. Our mentality, after decades of unlimited trash collection, is that government should haul off whatever is plopped on the curb, no questions asked. ...

Now the good news. The City Council has come up with a belated but welcome solution: All rigid plastics shall be recycled. Give us your tired, your poor, your Chinese takeout containers! Old socks, too. They and other unwanted clothes can be dropped into special bins to be installed citywide--a promising way to capture recyclable textiles, which make up 10% of the waste stream.

Legislation has been introduced and is expected to pass next month. We urge Mr. Bloomberg to sign it into law without too much tinkering.

Adding materials to the city's recycling load won't increase collection costs, because recycling trucks are now returning from their routes half-empty. Meanwhile, trucks collecting regular garbage will have less to pick up, so the Department of Sanitation could wring some savings out of that. But the real economic and environmental benefits will come from diverting more plastic and clothing from landfills to the recycling market. That's the kind of trash talk all New Yorkers want to hear.

The New York Daily News also editorialized in favor of adding more plastics to the city's recycling effort. The column, "Just one word: Plastics: Plan to simplify recycling sounds like a good idea," laments that "Trash recycling is one of the overbearing hassles of life in New York City: You can do plastic bottles or jugs that have a 1 or a 2 on the bottom, as long as the mouth isn't wider than the bottom. Got that? And remember, no yogurt containers!"

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn says she has a better way. Pretty much all household plastic can be recycled, Quinn says, and it can be done economically. She contends that recycling it would cost the city less than shipping it out to landfills with the waste.

The Sanitation Department says it will have to examine Quinn's proposals to see if the economies hold up. If we can recycle more while spending - and hassling - less, that's great. If not, toss the idea with the trash.

Here's hoping New York can achieve a cost-effective recycling plan that can significantly boost the volume of material that residents can recycle.

The plastics industry has long made the case that most (if not all...) plastics are recyclable. Here's an opportunity to prove it. Let's not drop the ball.

Patty Fisher of the San Jose Mercury News has discovered that Stephen Joseph, counsel for the Save the Plastic Bag Coalition and SaveThePlasticBag.com, is a quotable character.

Fisher writes in her column, "The environmentalist who wants to save the plastic bag," that she called Joseph to get "the other side" in a column that she planned to write "trumpeting the joys of life without plastic."

But the column took on a new spin after she talked to Joseph.

She discovered that Joseph seriously considers himself an environmentalist. (As I've written before, many people in the plastics industry feel that way about themselves, although that's sometimes hard for outsiders to believe.)

The difference with Joseph is that he has a platform, with the Save the Plastics Bag group, and he can come off as refreshingly convincing.

"When I was first approached by the plastic bag manufacturers, I thought it was a joke," he told Fisher.

But he felt that there were virtues to plastic bags -- yes, even environmental-related virtues, having to do with energy savings.

Joseph felt the answer to plastic-bag related litter and marine debris problems was a massive recycling campaign.

"But the environs stopped us," he told Fisher. "They didn't want to recycle them, they wanted to ban them altogether. There was this religion about it. It didn't matter what you said, they wouldn't listen."

Joseph is a quotable character, eh? We discovered that a few years ago, when Plastics News staff reporter Mike Verespej started to talk to Joseph about a plastic bag recycling project called Stripes2Stripes.

"I have never gotten involved in an industry so lacking in leadership as this one," Joseph told us at the time. "This industry has gotten so used to not being represented by a competent trade organization that it has hypnotized itself and convinced itself it is doing the right thing."

He added: "This industry needs to be better organized, fight for what it believes in, and address the problems instead of saying that it is the environmental activist's fault. But they would rather just do public relations and feel good exercises."

Joseph is up to his neck in being involved now. Is his work starting to make a difference?

While he managed to entertain Fisher, the columnist with the Mercury News, it doesn't look like Joseph converted her to side of plastics bag advocates.

Fisher writes in her column, "Joseph may be clever and passionate, but he's on the losing side of this battle. The state is forcing cities to cut down on waste that litters our waterways, and plastic bags make an easy target. Eventually, the state will ban them and we'll all be carting stuff around in reusable bags."

Thanks to Novachem blogger Frank Van Haste, who sent me a link to a post that he wrote about Fisher's column today titled "This is refreshing."

Van Haste writes: "kudos to the Mercury News' Ms. Fisher for her open mindedness and willingness to speak truth rather than parroting the conventional wisdom of the day. She still believes that the days of single-use bags are numbered, but she declines to condemn plastic bags reflexively -- good for her!"

We've often seen studies comparing certain products made from plastic and traditional materials -- like soft drink containers and grocery bags. What about food wrap -- what's the most sustainable choice? The Green Lantern blog from The Washington Post's Web site takes a look at that question today, and plastic ends up with a pretty good report card.

Nina Shen Rastogi writes in "Aluminum foil or plastic wrap: Which is better for the environment?":

Judging by conversations the Lantern has had with her colleagues, most people seem to believe intuitively that aluminum foil is better for the planet, maybe because plastics are made from fossil fuels and we've heard so much about how they're polluting the oceans. Plus, foil can be rinsed and reused with relative ease, or sometimes even recycled at the curb, while plastic wrap is usually thrown away.

But as we discussed in our analysis of beer containers, aluminum has a heavy manufacturing footprint. It takes a whole lot of energy to mine bauxite ore from the Earth and then process it: Producing a ton of aluminum ingots requires 170 million British thermal units of energy and spits out about 12 tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent.

By comparison, producing a ton of low-density polyethylene (LDPE) pellets requires just 17 percent as much energy and generates 12 percent as much greenhouse gas. (Consumer cling wrap used to be made out of polyvinyl chloride, a substance reviled by many environmentalists, but now it's nearly all LDPE or its tougher cousin, linear LDPE.)

For the answer, Rastogi turns to an online tool called Compass from the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, which packaging designers can use to compare the environmental impacts of their products.

When comparing one square foot of aluminum foil and one square foot of LDPE, aluminum "was the loser in nearly all the metrics Compass assesses, including fossil fuel consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, human health impacts, aquatic toxicity and potential for eutrophication."

Using recycled aluminum helps to narrow the gap, as does reusing the aluminum foil.

These results are sure to surprise many Post readers, who likely assume that aluminum is always the environmentally superior choice in packaging.

The sceptics at Mother Jones magazine took a look at plastics packaging, recycling and biodegradbility as part of a special report on the environment titled "Waste Not Want Not."

The report isn't brand new, but I just noticed it today thanks to a link from the Surfrider Foundation's Rise Above Plastics blog.

One part of the special report attracted my interest. It is a sidebar headlined "Do Biodegradable Plastics Really Work?," and it quotes Ramani Narayan, a professor of chemical and biochemical engineering at Michigan State University and a frequently-quoted expert on topics involving degradability and packaging.

Mother Jones senior editor Dave Gilson asked Narayan six questions:

1. Just how long does it take for conventional plastics to completely break down?
2. But broken down plastics are better than litter, right?
3. What about biodegradable plastics?
4. Can biodegradable plastics break down in landfills?
5. How do I avoid fake biodegradable plastics?
6. So what's the best way to get rid of biodegradable plastic?

Here are some of the highlights.

On biodegradable plastics:

They're pretty neat: Microorganisms can convert biodegradable plastics into water, carbon dioxide, and biomass -- with no nasty chemical leftovers. However, there is a lot of confusion surrounding these ecofriendlier plastics -- some of it intentional. "This word 'biodegradable' has become very attractive to people trying to make quick bucks on it," explains Narayan, who helped develop biodegradable corn-based plastic. Some companies, he says, are making conventional plastic that degrades quickly and then throwing around claims about biodegradability that are unproven or just too good to be true.

What's the best way to get rid of biodegradable plastic?

"The public thinks that biodegradability means 'If I throw it away, it will completely go away,'" says Narayan. "They don't even know what 'going away' means." Real biodegradable plastic should be sent to a commercial composting facility, where it will spend its final days being eaten by microbes. But here's the catch: In 2007, only 42 communities nationwide offered compost collection. (Seventeen were in California.) And though some biodegradable plastics can be recycled, no curbside recycling program will take them. So before you buy biodegradable plastics, make sure you can help them "go away" the right way.

This makes sense, and many experts in plastics and packaging would agree with Narayan.

But it assumes that consumers pay attention to whether a package is recyclable or biodegradable. It assumes that they'll properly dispose of their single-use plastics -- collecting and sorting items based on whether they should ultimately be recycled, composted, or landfilled.

But in the real world, where litter and marine debris are big problems, biodegradable plastics are also going to find their way into the waste stream, the recycling stream, and into the environment.

Since the "best way" to dispose of them isn't an option for most consumers, what does that mean for the future of biodegradable plastics?

Bisphenol A safety is part of an April Fools' joke today being pulled by the staff at OnMilwaukee.com.

The joke is on the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which has focused on BPA in its "Chemical Fallout" series.

OnMilwaukee.com has noticed the volume of BPA coverage coming from its friends at the Journal Sentinel, so the topic is the focus of attention in its bogus April Fools' story, "Report: Journal Sentinel pages contain Bisphenol-A."

According to the story, an independent lab in Iceland tested the news pages and found trace amounts of BPA.

Some of the snippets:

• JS editor Marty Kaiser is quoted saying: "The only thing I can say is that we stand by the reporting in each of the 3,500-plus stories we have published on this topic over the past three years."
• When absorbed by the eyes [BPA] can cause readers to believe that dozens and dozens of daily wire stories were instead written by the staff of the newspaper.
• Stanley Snuffington, "spokesman" for the pretend Plastic Bottle Manufacturers of America, gleefully notes "This is like Christmas, New Year's and Mardi Gras all rolled into one day. These sanctimonious bastards have been up in our grill for three years and now they're getting a dose of their own medicine."
• Brick Bradford, a "spokesman" for the Food and Drug Administration, threw in a comment: "The last time I thought about Iceland, I was listening to a Bjork CD in the '90s. This seems like a pretty legitimate study, but you never know for sure."

All in good fun, right? I didn't laugh out loud, but it is amusing.

Time magazine posted a long special report on its Web site today about environmental toxins, headlined "The Perils of Plastic." The story focuses on government regulation of the chemical industry, with an Earth Day spin.

As scientists get better at detecting the chemicals in our bodies, they're discovering that even tiny quantities of toxins can have a potentially serious impact on our health -- and our children's future. Chemicals like bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates -- key ingredients in modern plastics -- may disrupt the delicate endocrine system, leading to developmental problems. A host of modern ills that have been rising unchecked for a generation -- obesity, diabetes, autism, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder -- could have chemical connections. "We don't give environmental exposure the attention it deserves," says Dr. Philip Landrigan, director of the Children's Environmental Health Center at New York City's Mount Sinai Medical Center. "But there's an emerging understanding that kids are uniquely susceptible to environmental hazards."

The story then sets up the coming Washington debates about BPA safety and the Toxic Substances Control Act.

Now that health care reform has passed, Congress will have time to focus attention on TSCA and chemical safety. Time magazine is right to frame the debate for its readers and give them the background necessary to understand the issue.

However, the story could have used some more details to help readers understand exactly which materials they're talking about -- rather than painting plastics with a broad brush. And the sub-headline that equates plastics and toxins seems more like something from Greenpeace than from a news magazine.

Washington, DC, collected $149,432.27 in January from its tax on plastic and paper bags, according to the district's Office of Tax and Revenue.

January was the first month of the 5-cent-per-bag tax on plastic and paper carryout bags.

D.C. Councilmember Tommy Wells, who supported the measure, said businesses are handing out 50-80 percent fewer bags as a result of the tax.

"While it's difficult to project the annual results based on just the first month's experience, the report shows that residents are making great strides in reducing disposable bag use," Wells said in a news release on his Web site.

He said the numbers suggest that residents are beating projections in how quickly they start to use fewer dispoable bags. The District's Chief Financial Officer estimated last year that residents use about 270 million disposable bags per year, or 22.5 million bags per month.

The new report suggests that residents used a little less than 3 million disposable bags in January.

That could also mean the CFO's estimate was unrealistically high, or that January was a slow month for retail shopping in Washington. But no matter how you compare the numbers, it's evident that the tax is having an impact.

"I'm thrilled with these initial results," Wells said. "Not only are we reducing the number of disposable bags entering our environment, but we also have new resources flowing to help with the cleanup and restoration of the Anacostia River."

The 7.0-magnitude earthquake that devastated Haiti in January, killing 200,000 people, has left the survivors with a less serious headache, but one that the plastics industry might be able to solve: how to get rid of thousands, if not millions, of used PET bottles that once contained donated drinking water.

"The country has been destroyed and, with so many people needing aid, nobody has thought about what to do with the waste, including the PET containers," Carline Seide-Murphy, president of the Haitian Community Development Project, told Stephen Downer, Plastics News' correspondent in Mexico City, in a recent telephone interview.

HCDP is a New York-based, prize-winning environmental protection organization, comprising principally Haitian expatriates.

Seide-Murphy contacted Plastics News to ask for help in finding a PET recycler willing to collect and process the PET waste.

The Caribbean island's population, she said, has been left with "an overwhelming amount of plastics to throw away and no one seems to know what the do with them [the PET bottles]."

HCDP normally works with a Haitian recycler, but Seide-Murphy said she has not heard whether the local recycler is in a position to continue with the type of service it was giving before the quake.

"I'm waiting for a response on their status... [but] I haven't heard anything yet," she said in an email.

Downer gave Seide-Murphy the name of one PET recycler, with operations in the U.S. and Mexico, and volunteered to pass on any other information.

In 2008 HCDP was awarded the Energy Globe World Award for its efforts to clean up the environment in Port-au-Prince, Haiti's capital.

Haiti's population before the earthquake was 9.7 million, according to the World Bank.

A group of 30 California college students used part of their spring break to clean up the beach in Santa Clara, Calif. -- and advocate a ban on polystyrene foodservice products.

The Santa Cruz Sentinel has a story about the students today. Reporter Romain Fonsegrives wrote that the cleanup was part of something called the Wave of Change Tour 2010, organized by California Public Interest Research Group.

"Students wanted to spend their spring break making a difference," said Coreen Weintraub, statewide oceans campaign coordinator for CalPIRG.

Today the students plan to hold a press conference in Sacramento and meet with legislators to push for three bills: a ban single-use PS take-out containers, and bans on smoking and the use of plastic bags in California state parks and on state beaches.

The group is taking a David vs. Goliath attitude toward the effort.

"There are full-time lobbies from the chemical and plastic industry over there to tell them to keep polluting," said Sean Caroll, an organizer for the research group at UCLA, told the Sentinel.

Yesterday the blog featured a simple video critical of plastic water bottles. Today I'll feature a similar message. This time, though, the topic is plastic bags, and the film by director Ramin Bahrani is much more polished.

"Plastic Bag," an 18-minute film, tells the story of a plastic bag (voiced of German director/ actor Werner Herzog) as it goes on a journey that includes a trip to the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

The Treehugger.com blog featured the film today, calling it "the best film about a plastic bag you'll ever see."

Annie Leonard, a sustainability proponent known for The Story of Stuff project, has a new video that blasts the bottled water industry, called "The Story of Bottled Water."

The 8-minute video, posted below, tackles a few plastics-related issues. It criticizes the low recycling rate for PET water bottles, the fact that some of communities sell used bottles to overseas recyclers, and that many bottles are "downcycled" rather than used to make new bottles.

Leonard also tosses in a shot directly at the plastic bottle industry, noting that while tap water is usually safe to drink, "In many places public water is polluted, thanks to polluting industries like the plastic bottle industry."

This is a simple video with a powerful anti-plastics message. The industry -- including plastics recyclers -- might quibble with some of the facts. But this is, boiled down to the basic talking points, the argument that critics are making against bottled water.

Federal grants are always interesting -- Sen. William Proxmire made a reputation for himself lampooning them with his "Golden Fleece" awards, and newspaper humorist Dave Barry has enjoyed years of material thanks to federal pork projects.

I can't help it, but that's the first thing I thought of when I read this story from Maine.biz, a Web site for a Portland, Maine-based business newspaper.

The story, "Potato plastics group pushes for R&D support," notes that a group called the Sustainable Bioplastics Council of Maine, made up of manufacturers, agricultural groups, nonprofit organizations and University of Maine researchers, is seeking $1.25 million in federal funds to help commercialize plastics made from potatoes and wood chips.

The groups want to use potato starch to make PLA resin.

The story notes that supporters polled 1,000 businesses in Maine that use plastic, and "more than 90 percent of the respondents says they would use bioplastics if they were available, and two-thirds says they would pay a premium for plastics made from Maine potatoes."

That's an interesting statistic. I wonder how many of those people currently pay a premium for french fries made from Maine potatoes.

Perhaps the good folks in Idaho better get their congressional delegation on the phone, pronto.

I enjoy a good story about a massive construction/renovation project, and this is a pretty good one. Window manufacturer Serious Materials Inc. is working with Johnson Controls Inc. on replacing all of the windows in New York's Empire State Building.

Serious Materials has put together a special Web site devoted to the project. One of the highlights -- the project will not create tons of waste that will head for landfills.

The project calls for reusing all of the existing glass, and creating super-insulating glass units in a dedicated processing space located on site, in the Empire State Building.

The existing glass of the building's 6,514 double-hung windows, more than 26,000 total panes of glass, will be removed from the window frames, separated, and cleaned. New super-insulating IGUs will be produced using the old glass panes, new spacers, suspended coated film, and special gas fill. These new IGUs then will be re-installed.

According to the companies, the new windows will increase the thermal performance of the building's windows by up to four times.

The window upgrade process is one of eight measures that are expected to reduce energy use by 38 percent, save $4.4 million per year in energy costs, and save 105,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide over the next 15 years.

While Serious Materials makes vinyl windows, the plastics angle here is less obvious. The new windows will feature a layer of suspended coated film, which the company said improves insulation without the weight and design limitations of triple-pane glass.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has been honored again for its "Chemical Fallout" series, including coverage of bisphenol A safety.

Meg Kissinger and Susanne Rust will receive $10,000 and the Roy W. Howard Award for public service reporting. In a news release announcing the award, the foundation said the Journal Sentinel investigation has "spanned three years and forced federal regulators to reverse opinions and eventually declare bisphenol A ... dangerous to fetuses, infants and children."

This is a repeat win for the duo. Last year, Scripps Howard gave them the Edward J. Meeman award for environmental reporting.

Rust and Kissinger also were finalists for the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting for the series.

As I've pointed out in the past, it's worth keeping track of which plastics-related stories win big journalism awards. Those issues tend to stay in the public and legislative spotlight for a long time.

The Journal Sentinel has devoted a lot of reporting firepower to BPA safety, over a long period of time. The effort has drawn attention to an issue that had been simmering on the regulatory back-burner for more than a decade.

I compare this to the Los Angeles Times "Altered Oceans" project, which won a Pulitzer Prize in 2007. Before that, few people had heard about the marine debris problem.

Since then, the plastics industry has had to spend a lot of time dealing with plastic bag bans and taxes, and growth and competition from biodegradable materials.

Chemical catalysts rarely make big news, but today's an exception. In a paper published in Macromolecules, a journal of the American Chemical Society, researchers at IBM and Stanford University said they have discovered a new way to make plastics that can be continuously recycled by substituting organic catalysts for the metal oxide or metal hydroxide catalysts most often used to make the plastics.

The news is generating headlines, in part because the Associated Press and other wire services jumped on it this morning.

The New York Times Green Inc. blog has a good report on the study, quoting Chandrasekhar Narayan, from IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif.

Narayan says the catalysts are cheap, and can make polymers that are durable, recyclable, and biodegradable.

"It's really a new class of polymers," he told the Times. "I think it's going to revolutionize synthetic chemistry."

Watch PlasticsNews.com for more information about the technology.

Here's a story I've been watching for (and I assume some Plastics Blog readers have been too): Archer Daniels Midland Co. has started production at its starch-based polymer plant in Clinton, Iowa, according to a report in the Clinton Herald.

Jason Nevel's story says that after four years of construction, the plant may begin shipping commercial goods next month. The newspaper quotes plant manager John Morrison, who said test runs have been conducted since December, and the plant will be in full operation this summer.

At full capacity, the plant will produce 50,000 tons of Mirel-brand polymer annually, using ADM's wet corn mill as a feedstock.

"To be part of a new plant that's first-of-its-kind in the world is really a lifetime opportunity for most of us," said Kevin Moore, ADM bio-products general manager.

The plant will make Mirel for Telles, a joint venture between Metabolix and ADM.

The Sea Life Aquarium at the Legoland Resort in Carlsbad, Calif., has a new exhibit aimed at raising children's awareness of plastic marine debris.

The project is called "Beach Trash, A Whale of a Problem." First grade classes from a local elementary school worked with environmental artist Teresa Espaniola to turn create a life-sized gray whale mosaic -- all made from plastic trash that the collected on the beach.

Megan Malaska, education specialist for the Aquarium, calls it "a life-changing project for these children. I have no doubt they will be life-long stewards of the ocean."

Hats off to the aquarium for raising awareness of this problem, starting with its young audience. Educating the public about marine debris is a key step in fixing this problem.

Pretty soon, you won't be using paper money in Canada.

Bank of Canada announced yesterday that starting in 2011, it will begin to issue a new series of bank notes printed on a polymer material.

The new notes will incorporate security features that will "significantly increase their protection against counterfeiting." In addition, the plastic notes will last longer than the cotton paper currently in use, "resulting in lower overall production costs and reduced environmental impact."

Other countries have been using polymer banknotes for years, including Australia and New Zealand.

When will we see polymer dollars and euros?

Here's a radical idea: a sustainability committee in one California city, concerned about litter and marine debris issues, wants to start a "massive public education" program instead of banning products like plastic bags.

That's the recommendation of the South Lake Tahoe Sustainability Commission, according to this story from the Tahoe Daily Tribune.

Commission Chair Kirstin Cattell told the Daily Tribune's Adam Jensen that the board wants to make a positive impact on the environment.

The panel decided to stress education after also considering two more onerous options: putting a fee on disposable plastic containers, or banning the products.

South Lake Tahoe is aware of the potential legal hurdles of those alternative paths, so it decided to try education instead.

The commission plans to meet March 17 to get public input on the plan.

It will be interesting to see how education works, and whether recycling plays a role.

Recyclers definitely can use more material -- that message came through loud and clear at the Plastics Recycling 2010 conference in Austin, Texas, that I attended.

I hadn't really thought of it this way before, but product bans could be a big problem for recyclers -- they need more material, not less.

Recyclers should play a more vocal role in opposition to product bans. That could raise public awareness of the fact that these products that many people want to ban are, in fact recyclable, and there's a pretty good market for them right now, in North America.

If education fails, you can be sure that there will be pressure in South Lake Tahoe to look at taxes and bans instead. (And there will be continued pressure from Sacramento to ban plastic bags statewide.)

Marine debris is a serious issue, but here's a story that's a little more lighthearted. From NBC's Today show, a video of a diver in Florida removing a plastic ring from around the neck of a nurse shark.

Reminds me of Seinfeld...

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Beth Terry, author of the Fake Plastic Fish blog, is in the news today, with a story and video on KGO-TV, the ABC affiliate in San Francisco.

The focus is Terry's effort to minimize the amount of plastic in her life.

According to Teresa Garcia's story, Terry consumed only 3.7 pounds of plastic in 2009 -- she knows because she saved it all in a bag. That's about 4 percent of the national average of 88 pounds per person a year.

The video includes a quick list of tips for others who would like to live without plastic, such as using stainless drink containers, reusable wood utensils, metal razors, and even a glass straw.

Blog readers will recall that Terry made headlines back in 2008, when she convinced Clorox Co. to set up a system to accept used Brita water filters for recycling.

Terry also wrote a letter to the editor that Plastics News published on Feb. 22. Her letter argued in favor of plastic bag taxes and bans.

It's interesting that in the 20 years since Plastics News started publishing, the plastics critics who have been prominent in the media have changed.

In the "old days," news reports likely would have quoted people like Richard Denison at Environmental Defense Fund, or Rick Hind at Greenpeace.

Today the spotlight instead is on people (and groups) like Beth Terry, David de Rothschild and the Surfriders Foundation.

It's an indication of how much plastics litter and marine debris have become local issues -- while at the same time interest has spread so quickly around the world.

Ethylene tetrafluoroethylene is making architectural headlines again, this time in the design of a proposed new US Embassy in London.

The Los Angeles Times' Culture Monster blog had a nice review of the design this week.

Here's what blogger Christopher Hawthorne had to say about the plastic feature:

The embassy's cubic form will be wrapped on three sides in ETFE -- a transparent polymer and the same flexible material used on the outside of the Water Cube swimming arena for the 2008 Beijing Olympics -- that will not only shade the building but also hold flexible solar panels. (The north side, facing the river, is left uncovered.) The roof, meanwhile, will be covered with an array of solar panels that will hide mechanical equipment while producing electricity.

In a phone interview Monday, KieranTimberlake's James Timberlake said the goal is a building that creates more energy on balance than it uses.

Ultimately, the embassy's success as a piece of architecture will largely depend on how the ETFE scrim operates visually. If the architects can manipulate it to curl or bend dramatically away from the boxy form underneath or to reflect light in novel ways, the building will likely carry a sculptural power to go with its operating efficiency. If not, it may fade into the skyline, resembling a well-tailored but conventional office building.

If this all sounds familiar, it may be because not only did the Water Cube feature ETFE, but so did the design for a new rail hub in Anaheim, Calif.

Like the US Embassy, part of the goal of using the material was environmental -- the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center was seeking a LEED Platinum rating from the U.S. Green Building Council.

PET recycling is getting a lot of media attention today, thanks to Nike's decision to use recycled polyester to make the soccer uniform shirts for all nine Nike-sponsored teams in the 2010 World Cup.

Teams from Brazil, the Netherlands, Portugal, United States, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Serbia and Slovenia all will wear shirts that are each made from up to eight PET bottles.

The news gives a nice bit of public recognition -- all around the globe -- to PET recycling. Check out these stories from London's Daily Mail, and from Fast Company magazine.

And USSoccer.com calls the jerseys the "most environmentally-friendly and technologically-advanced uniform ever produced." (I hope that will translate into an appearance in the championship game).

Does making a few dozen shirts from recycled PET have an impact on the environment? Well, don't forget that many fans will want to buy a replica shirt for their favorite team, and Nike is making those from recycled polyester, too.

According to Fast Company, that means Nike expects to use about 13 million bottles to make jerseys for fans, or about 558,000 pounds of PET.

Here's another one of those posts where you have to click through to see the photos.

The io9 blog has a photo gallery post today titled "Nothing Is Ever Junk When It Can Be Reembodied." It features the work of sculptor Sayaka Ganz,, who created beautiful horses that appear to be emerging from a wall.

When you get close to the sculptures, you realize they are are made entirely from junk plastic, like discarded packaging and foodservice ware.

Ganz had this to say about her work:

I find discarded objects from peoples' houses and give them a second life, a new home. For my sculptures I use plastic utensils, toys and metal pieces among other things. I only select objects that have been used and discarded. The human history behind these objects gives them life in my eyes. My goal is for each object to transcend its origins by being integrated into an animal form that seems alive.

The comments on the blog are also worth a look. So far, at least, there are no attacks on the plastic material -- only praise for the pieces.

Thanks to Plastics News staff reporter Rhoda Miel, for pointing out this item.

Sarah Schmidt, a reporter for the Canwest News Service, took a close look behind Canada's 2008 decision to ban polycarbonate baby bottles, and found that the decision was very controversial.

After looking at more than 5,000 pages of documents from Health Canada covering the two weeks leading up to the announcement, Schmidt wrote that she found "some unease within Health Canada about this precautionary approach to BPA."

The story, "Decision to ban BPA in baby bottles was controversial: Documents," notes that David Butler-Jones, Canada's chief public health officer, initially plannted to offer tips to consumers on how to use baby bottles properly to reduce BPA exposure of infants, and he planned to commit to "exploring options to restrict the amount of bisphenol A found in baby bottles."

But the government changed course and decided to move forward with a ban after a "gruelling five-hour dry run" with top political officials.

This is a very interesting story, but should come as no surprise. I think it's fairly common for government regulators to move slowly on big policy changes like this BPA ban.

The bottom line is that bureaucrats are unlikely to make a drastic switch without support -- or pressure -- from politicial leaders.

Polycarbonate packaging has received most of the attention related to bisphenol A safety.

But a story from The Washington Post today puts the spotlight on metal can manufacturers.

While plastics processors have alternatives to polycarbonate that they can use to make baby bottles and sport drink containers, according to the Post report, metal can companies are having problems finding alternatives to epoxy liners.

"Major U.S. foodmakers are quietly investigating how to rid their containers of Bisphenol A," the story says, but the goal is "taking years to reach, costing millions and proving surprisingly elusive."

One person, identified as a source at a major U.S. food company, told Post staff reporter Lyndsey Layton: "We don't have a safe, effective alternative, and that's an unhappy place to be. ... No one wants to talk about that."

Organic food company Eden Foods Inc. managed to get one can supplier to switch from epoxy resin to an oleoresin liner, but that cost about 2.2 cents more per can, and didn't work with acidic foods like canned tomatoes.

For its part, the North American Metal Packaging Alliance stressed that epoxy-lined cans are safe, and they help protect consumers from serious food-borne illnesses.

What's the state of the bottled water market?

A year ago, we reported that the economy and environmental pressure were putting pressure on the bottled water sector, and the days of double-digit annual growth was over.

Further proof of the trend comes today with the release of Nestle SA's 2009 financial results. The financial press is reporting that the company's water business is struggling.

But Martin Gelnar, writing for The Wall Street Journal's "The Source" blog, says there's still hope for the sector:

Public opinion may be against Nestle and other bottled water companies, but it is likely that environmental concerns will calm over time.

Potentially more important is the fact that such discussions have little impact in emerging markets, where demand is expected to rise substantially in the next few years.

Meanwhile, bottled water companies are working hard to reduce their environmental impact. Check out our report on the International Bottled Water Association's study of beverage packaging, which found:

• The average PET bottled water container weighed about 19 grams in 2000; by 2008, the average amount of PET in each bottle declined to about 13 grams.
• During the eight-year period, more than 1.3 billion pounds of PET resin was saved by the bottled-water industry through container lightweighting.
• In 2008 alone, the bottled water industry saved 445 million pounds of PET by reducing bottle weights.

The Feb. 8 issue of Plastics News includes an editorial against legislative bans and taxes on plastic bags. [I'm the author, the column is headlined "Do you need a bag? Yeah, make it plastic." And, as usual, the cartoon from Rich Williams is brilliant.]

But Plastics News isn't alone in editorializing against bag bans this week. The Gazette Times in Corvallis, Ore., has a column headlined "Trust market to kill plastic bag use."

Sure, that headline doesn't scream "pro-plastic." But the columns have some parallels.

Both criticize legislative efforts to ban or tax plastic bags. The Corvallis column is aimed at a proposal from two Oregon legislators -- Portland Democrat Mark Hass and Central Point Republican Jason Atkinson -- that would ban plastic bags.

Hass told the Oregonian newspaper that plastic bags contribute to litter, are hard to recycle, hurt marine life and are made from fossil fuels. That's all true.

It also is true, however, that the bags can be recycled. (It's also true, for what it's worth, that 85 percent of the plastic bags used in the United States are made in this country, and that some 4,000 Americans are directly employed in their manufacture.)

The best approach here, we believe, is to continue with efforts to persuade consumers to move to reusable bags. We trust that the market will follow consumer preference. We don't need to use a heavy-handed approach such as a ban or a surcharge on the plastic bags. That's a pain for consumers -- and it could potentially hurt retailers, who frankly don't need any additional worry right now.

I like the approach -- encouraging the public to stop being wasteful, without resorting to passing a law to require it. It echoes my column, where I wrote that bag taxes and bans aren't the answer, but I don't object to non-legislative efforts to get people to cut down on bag consumption.

Remember the Plastiki -- the boat made out of old PET bottles that David de Rothschild plans to sail from California to Australia, to raise awareness of marine debris?

The Plastics Blog first discovered the project almost two years ago. Now, finally, the voyage is almost ready to get started.

Carl Nolte of the San Francisco Chronicle reports that Rothschild took the 60-foot-long catamaran out for a shakedown cruise on Feb. 3, and the actual voyage should get started next month, weather permitting.

Some interesting snippets from the story: the boat's twin hulls are made of 12,500 PET bottles, which are filled with dry ice.

Nolte says the boat is "no beauty," describing it as looking "like a kid's science project."

Let's hope it's sturdy enough to safely carry its 8-member crew on the long haul to Australia.

"Paper or plastic" has become a cliche, but with retailers trying to cut down on plastic bag usage, consumers should get used to a new phrase at the checkout: "Do you need a bag?"

Getting asked that question doesn't bother me, but it sure set off Carol Midgley, a feature writer and columnist for The Times. She recently wrote a funny column for the London paper headlined "Saving the planet or just toying with us?"

Midgley was buying some figurines at The Disney Store, and the clerk asked if she preferred to pay 5 pence for a carrier bag, £1.50 for a "re-usable" carrier, or skip using a bag entirely.

"Now hold on a minute, matey," she wrote. "I don't mind doing my bit; I know that charging for bags might be the only way to cure humanity's preposterous wastefulness. But I draw the line at being lectured on plastic overuse by a chuffing toy retailer."

She added later: "Being urged to be eco-conscious by any toy shop is like being chided for your caffeine intake by a crystal meth addict."

Delightful stuff. Thanks to Plastics News' correspondent in Mexico City, Steve Downer, for pointing it out today.

Every once in a while I come across something that's blogworthy just to share the photos. That's the case today in a post from the Treehugger.com sustainability Web site, which posted an item today headlined "Amazing House Made Entirely of Plastic Bottles from Argentina."

The walls of the home are made from 1,200 PET bottles, and its roof is made of more than 1,300 Tetra Pack cartons. It also has 140 compact disk cases in its doors and windows, 120 bottles in its couches, and another 200 bottles in a bed.

There's also a pretty cute children's play-house, also made of PET bottles.

The owner, Alfredo Santa Cruz, said he made the buildings to show the value of materials we throw away.

"Domestic waste can be transformed into useful stuff. We developed our own technique, which allows people to build a house that's perfectly functional at a very low cost and with their own hands. This is not just a project, but a reality," he said.

With Avatar breaking box-office records, USA Today's Elizabeth Weise wondered what's happening to all the 3-D glasses worn by moviegoers.

According to her calculations, about 75 percent of people who've seen Avatar saw the 3-D version, which works out to 42.1 million pairs of glasses worn so far -- and another 935,834 every day.

But there's no sustainability problem here. All four of the companies providing glasses have recycling programs in place.

Actually, in this case, reuse is a more precise term than recycle. The glasses suppliers say their products can be collected, washed and reused hundreds of times.

One supplier said they have glasses "that have been used and washed thousands of times without degradation ... There's no need to throw them away. They're very environmentally friendly."

Ohio ranks No. 2 in the U.S. in terms of plastics industry jobs, so when Gov. Ted Strickland talks about polymers, it's potentially important.

Here's what Strickland had to say about plastics in today's "State of the State" address:

"Ohio is a soybean state. We are a corn state. We are a logistics state, situated right in the heart of it all. And we are the polymer state.

"All these things make us the ideal location for an advanced biorefinery that converts farm output into food, fuel and biopolymers.

"Toothbrushes, cell phones, printer cartridges -- there's a list of products as long as my arm that are made today from petroleum-based plastic that could be made from biopolymers.

"And I'll tell you this, there is nothing more important we could do for the security and sustainability of our nation than base our economy on the output of Midwestern farmers instead of Middle Eastern oil barons.

"So to the companies drawing up plans to build a biorefinery -- bring those plans to us. Because with our agricultural output, our knowhow, and our location, we are sitting on a treasure and we will do everything in our power to tap it."

Clearly Strickland would like to have a big bioplastic plant in Ohio.

But the Buckeye State has plenty of competition on that front.

At this point, Iowa is the leader. Telles, a joint venture owned by Metabolix and Archer Daniels Midland Co., already has a commercial-scale plant capable of making Mirel-brand corn sugar-based polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) resin in Clinton, Iowa.

Today Strickland sent a message to future potential bioplastic projects: Ohio will pull out all the stops to get you to locate there.

The Earth911.com blog posted a story today on the plastics industry's role in increasing the sustainable attributes of consumer products, including packaging.

Earth911.com staffer Jennifer Berry called me last week with some general questions about what's new in plastics that consumers can expect to see in coming months. As a result, the blog quotes me a couple of times, along with Fred Roselli, spokesman for Coca-Cola Enterprises.

I'll highlight one of my points here. We chatted about various materials that plastics processors are using to meet customers' sustainability goals -- recycled-content resins and bio-based plastics, for example. I pointed out that processors are sampling a variety of materials now, and they're ready to use whatever customers -- and, ultimately, consumers -- demand.

Here's what I said:

"When I think about plastics processors changing materials, they're flexible. They can shift to what their customers want. They're willing to use recycled content, etc. It all depends on cost[,] performance and if that's what the customer wants."

I've never heard of Milly Zantow before, but according to the Wisconsin State Journal in Madison, Wis., the 86-year-old was a pioneer of post-consumer plastics recycling in the United States.

In a story posted Jan. 17, and a related video, Zantow tells how she and her friend Jenny Ehl "cashed in their life insurance policies, bought a commercial plastics grinder for $5,000 and started E-Z Recycling, what some believe was the first business of its kind in the country."

That was in 1979.

Zantow got the idea after a visit to Japan in 1978, where she saw plastics being recycled. She wondered why there were no such companies, or recycling infrastructure, in the United States.

Plastics packaging was just beginning to take off. Remember, this was before plastic bottles even had resin codes to help identify the material.

Zantow knew nothing about plastics, but she soon became an expert. She called processors in Wisconsin and discovered that they already recycled their in-house scrap.

According to the story, Zantow deserves at least partial credit for coming up with the idea for a bottle recycling code:

Zantow wanted to come up with a simple system to classify plastics, and that led to the development of the number code that identifies the polymer type.

At the urging of recyclers such as Zantow across the country, the Society of the Plastics Industry developed the numbered codes in 1988, said Tisha Petteway, a spokeswoman for the federal Environmental Protection Agency. They allow recyclers to divert the different types of plastic to specific recycling streams and now are used around the world.

Zantow didn't stay in the plastics recycling business for long. She told the State Journal that the business "never made a nickel" in the few years she ran it, and she sold it in 1982 to a Milwaukee company that folded in 1984.

It's an interesting story and video, definitely worth a look for Plastics Blog readers interested in recycling.

For the record, though, I'd like to stress that plastics recycling absolutely dates back before Zantow and E-Z Recycling, even in Wisconsin.

One such pioneer was Irv Vincent, founder of N.E.W. Plastics Corp. in Luxemburg, Wis.

Vincent founded N.E.W., a blow molder, in 1968. He branched into plastics recycling in the early 1970s, according to a profile that Plastics News published in 2003.

Who was the first plastics recycler? That's hard to say. But pioneers like Vincent and Zantow deserve credit for helping to create a sector of the plastics industry that today the entire industry depends on to buttress its sustainability claims.

I get a kick out of the plastics-related articles on The Onion's Web site. There's a new one today, in the lead story spot, "'How Bad For The Environment Can Throwing Away One Plastic Bottle Be?' 30 Million People Wonder"

This story doesn't really aim its satire at the plastics industry. The target is the public, specifically people who don't make the effort to recycle PET water bottles.

According to the inner monologue of millions upon millions of citizens, while not necessarily ideal, throwing away one empty bottle probably wouldn't make that much of a difference, and could even be forgiven, considering how long they had been carrying it around with them, the time that could be saved by just tossing it out right here, and the fact that they had bicycled to work once last July.

In addition, pretty much the entire states of Missouri and New Mexico calmly reassured themselves Monday that they definitely knew better than to do something like this, but admitted that hey, nobody is perfect, and at least they weren't still using those horrible aerosol cans, or just throwing garbage directly on the ground.

All agreed that disposing of what would eventually amount to 50 tons of thermoplastic polymer resin wasn't the end of the world.

"It's not like I don't care, because I do, and most of the time I don't even buy bottled water," thought Missouri school teacher Heather Delamere, the 450,000th caring and progressive individual to have done so that morning, and the 850,000th to have purchased the environmentally damaging vessel due to being thirsty, in a huge rush, and away from home. "It's really not worth beating myself up over."

It's evident that someone at The Onion knows a little bit about plastics -- or at least they think plastics are funny enough to merit attention. Remember the tongue-in-cheek story last year about the paper being sold to a Chinese injection molder?

Reminding readers that they should recycle PET is a good thing, and using humor might be a very effective way to get people to pay attention. Keep up the good work, Onion staffers.

Some readers might have wondered, why did Brownsville, Texas, become the 12th U.S. city to ban single-use plastic grocery bags? Most bag bans have been in California, or on the coasts.

But Brownsville is also home to a big Duro Bag Manufacturing Co. plant. The plant employs 120 and makes about 9 million paper bags a day.

This story from The Brownsville Herald points out that Duro -- which touts itself as the world's No. 1 paper bag maker -- considers the plastic bag ban to be good news.

"We're hoping for the good of the community, for the good of the people and the environment," plant manager Carlos Villarreal told the newspaper.

The story, headlined "Local company may benefit from plastic bag ban," points out that the plant used to employ 250, but business took a hit when groceries switched to plastic bags.

A plastic bag ban in Brownsville isn't going to bring back all those jobs at Duro. But it is noteworthy that Brownsville is joining the bag ban parade.

Unlike Brownsville, however, most communities that are banning or taxing single-use bags are urging residents to use reusable bags instead -- not simply switching from plastic to paper.

The Iowa Grocery Industry Association, aware of battles over single-use bag taxes and bans around the country, is taking a proactive approach with a new program to make customers aware of plastic bag recycling opportunities.

The Build with Bags program has four goals:

1. Double the amount of plastic bags recycled over a 24-month period;
2. Reduce consumption of plastic bags;
3. Increase use of reusable bags; and
4. Encourage purchases of furniture and equipment made from recycled plastic through a grant program for parks and schools.

The program offers "a meaningful alternative to the banning of plastic bags, a practice that has been shown to have a number of negative unintended consequences," according to the project's Web site.

Customers are getting their first look at the program in local grocery stores this week, with a two weeks of promotions that will run statewide.

Stores are handing out bags that highlight the program, and they're also placing Build with Bags posters in the entry ways of stores near plastic bag recycling barrels.

Build with Bags is supported by the Iowa Grocery Industry Association, Keep Iowa Beautiful, Metro Waste Authority in Des Moines, Iowa Department of Natural Resources and The Des Moines Register.

Here's an unusual story: the chairman of a plastics trade show is suggesting that any film extruder that breaks a law in India and makes plastic bags less than 20 microns thick should go to jail.

Jigish Doshi, chairman of the Plexpo India 2010, told reporters that the plastics industry in India "will support a government initiative for a consensus on providing a jail term for such law violators."

"We would like to assure the authorities that the associations of plastic manufacturers themselves would help the authorities to identify such errant manufacturers and put them behind the bar," Doshi said. According to the report, he added that plastic manufacturers are "equally concerned about the environment as anyone else."

Sounds harsh, certainly. Here's a guy who knows how to make a promise!

Designers and manufacturers looking for ideas for making sustainable products can take some ideas from a couple of plastic products featured today in the Treehugger.com blog.

One is a rotationally molded kayak dubbed the Tequila! with an unusual feature: it can snap apart into two pieces for easy transport and storage.

Treehugger notes that the smart design "reduces the cost of buying roof racks, and their associated environmental impact on fuel economy and carbon emissions."

Similarly, the Eco Board surfboard from Imagine is touted for its sustainability, both for the materials selection and the design.

On the materials side, the boards are made from recycled polystyrene, laminated with a stretch bamboo cloth.

In terms of design, the surfboards come in two pieces that snap together -- again, doing away with the need to put them in a car roof rack. (Treehugger notes that putting a sports toy on a car roof cuts the car's fuel economy by up to 27 percent.)

Interesting how these two sporting goods manufacturers are using some pretty conventional plastic materials -- polyethylene and polystyrene -- to make products that they can promote as being ultra-sustainable.

This could be the ultimate in design-for-recyclability: a team of students from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have designed a teddy bear made entirely from PET.

The toy, dubbed the "Sustain-a-Bear," recently won first prize in the 2009 Manufacturing Student Design Competition held by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

"Sustain-a-Bear is inexpensive to produce, easy to assemble, fully recyclable, and undeniably cuddly," according to a news release from the school.

Instead of stitching it together, this politically correct bear is designed to be assembled using ultrasonic welding.

"This lack of adhesives and stitching, paired with the fact that the bear is stuffed with scraps of the same fleece from which its exterior is made, means a Sustain-a-Bear at the end of its days can be tossed in the recycling bin and easily find a second life as brand-new bear. (Or maybe a soda bottle.)," the release says.

The group is pursuing full patent protection, with an eye toward eventually commercializing or licensing the product.

"The teddy bear market is huge, and despite all the billions of dollars of sales every year, no one has really looked into manufacturing stuffed animals in a sustainable way," said mechanical engineering doctoral student Christina Laskowski, who was part of the team.

"It's hard to know what to do with old teddy bears, because they're difficult to clean, they get damaged when you wash them, and they usually end up in a landfill," said Todd Snelson, another doctoral student who was part of the team. "We wanted to make a bear that didn't end up in landfills, something that still had utility at the end of its product life."

Remember seeing 3D movies with flimsy cardboard glasses? If that's your recollection of 3D movies, get ready for some big changes.

Today's 3D glasses are made of plastic and cost as much as $50 each. Movies like Avatar are making the glasses popular. Right now there are four companies fighting for a share of the market, according to this story from The New York Times.

The players:

• RealD, which makes disposable glasses (the company touts them as being recyclable) that cost about 65 cents each, according to the NYT report;
• MasterImage 3D, which offers both single-use and multiple-use glasses (the company says the single-use glasses can be washed and reused several times;
• Dolby Laboratories, which makes higher-tech glasses that cost about $28 each; and
• XpanD, which makes glasses that "use battery-powered LCD shutters that open and shut so each eye sees the appropriate frame of the movie," according to the story. Those glasses cost up to $50.

The companies that make these glasses expect 3D movies won't just be a flash in the pan that will disappear once Avatar has its run in the theaters. They expect Hollywood will keep making 3D movies, in order to lure customers away from their big-screen home screens to experience something special.

Which product and technology will win? Expensive glasses that viewers will want to use over and over? Mid-range products that the theaters can collect and clean for multiple uses? Or single-use disposable/recyclable glasses?

Sustainability may play a role in this debate, but I expect the best technology -- not necessarily the most environmentally friendly product -- will eventually win.

Is anyone in the federal government working on cleaning up the Great Pacific Garbage Patch? Yes, according to The Washington Post -- and the point person is Holly Bamford, director and chief of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Marine Debris Program.

The Post features Bamford in today's "Federal Player of the Week" feature.

NOAA's Marine Debris Program has set up 160 projects since Bamford came on board in 2005. In one, bins are provided at 16 East Coast ports where fishermen can dispose of their gear at no cost.

The item notes that Bamford is working with Joel Baker at the University of Washington in Tacoma, in researching microplastics in marine debris.

She told the newspaper, "... once we present our research on the degradation caused by litter and debris on our seafloors, on our beaches, and in our waterways, people will be more inclined to reduce, reuse and recycle a non-degradable item, which in turn reduces marine debris."

Today marked a milestone for plastics in the transportation sector, with the first flight of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner -- the plane you've been hearing about for so long that saves fuel through widespread use of structural composites.

A live crowd of 25,000 witnessed the first Dreamliner liftoff in Everett, Wash., as well as millions more on live TV. (Check out the number of people who tweated about the test flight on their Twitter sites today).

Soon enough, all those composite aircraft fans will be able to take a ride of their own. Boeing plans to test the jets for about nine months, and then deliver the first to a customer late next year.

Coca-Cola's new PlantBottle -- a PET bottle made in-part from plant feedstocks -- is about to hit the store shelves. Scott Vitters, Coke's global head of sustainable packaging, gave an interview about the material to Marc Gunther, a senior writer for GreenBiz.com.

Here are a few of the highlights:

• The PET resin in the bottles is made from 30 percent plant-based material, and Coke's R&D teams are to make the remaining 70 percent from renewable sources, too.
• The material currently is made from sugar cane and molasses, a byproduct of the sugar production process, from Brazil. Vitters said the material is "not perfect, but the commitment from the Brazilian government, the growers down there ... enabled us to be able to get started with this process, as we look toward a long-term vision of using plant waste material."
• The company has proven in the lab that it is technically feasible to make bottles from 100 percent plant-based resin.
• The PlantBottle resin costs more than conventional PET, but for now the company is not charging customers a premium price. Eventually, the company expects to bring down the cost of the plant-based resin.

Vitters put it this way:

" It's largely driven because of an unoptimized supply chain. ... Long term though, we believe we can drive that price down through improving the supply chain, as well as ongoing work to look at plant waste materials, and increasing our use of recycled materials."

Littering has decreased by 61 percent in America during the past 40 years, but the amount of plastic litter is actually up 165.4 percent, according to a study released today by Keep America Beautiful Inc.

Is it any wonder that there's public pressure to ban or tax plastic bags and polystyrene foodservice products, and to place deposits on PET water bottles and other beverage containers?

KAB touts the new study as the largest litter study ever conducted in the U.S., and the first major national survey of litter in the U.S. in 40 years.

Despite the perception that plastic is the top litter problem, the study found that it is actually No. 3. Tobacco products are the biggest problem, accounting for 37.7 percent of all litter, and paper products are No. 2 at 21.9 percent.

Plastic accounts for 19.3 percent of litter, followed by metal at 5.8 percent and glass at 4.5 percent.

But the big problem is that plastics' share of the litter pie has exploded.

Since 1969, paper litter has dropped 78.9 percent; metal litter is down 88.2 percent, glass is down 86.4 percent -- but plastic is up 165.4 percent.

There's a good explanation for the increase, of course -- the amount of plastic packaging used in the U.S. over the past 40 years has skyrocketed (up 340 percent per capita). Much of the gains by plastics have been at the expense of metal, glass and paper packaging.

So, naturally, researchers are going to find more plastic in litter today than in 1969.

Some more highlights from the report:

• Litter conservatively costs our nation $11.5 billion per year. These are direct costs, including cleanup and prevention programs.
• There are also major indirect costs: including decreased commerce, tourism, and health effects. A significant problem: decreased property values. 93 percent of homeowners, 55 percent of real estate agents and 90 percent of property appraisers said a littered neighborhood would decrease their assessment of a home's value.
• The study said there are at least 51.2 billion pieces of litter on roadways in the U.S.; an average of 6,729 pieces of litter per mile.

The study concludes that education and cleanups work, as does investing in trash receptacles.

It called for boosting the nation's recycling infrastructure (only 12 percent of public spaces surveyed had recycling receptacles), and funding is needed for education programs, volunteer programs and infrastructure.

I missed it, but one of our reporters notes that plastics health and safety issues were highlighted in the B story on last night's episode of "The Simpsons."

Here's the context: Marge's attempts to placate the oversensitive mommies in her mommy circle ended with her making a non-fat, all organic muffins, only to have the mommies get enraged that she used Teflon-coated bakeware. Then they started to panic when they noticed a No. 7 resin code on the plastic sippy cups -- beware of bisphenol A!

Cue the other mommies going insane and taking their babies into a passing ambulance.

A.V. Club TV reviewer Todd VanDerWerff has this to say about the program:

I ... liked the B story, wherein Marge gradually became aware of all of the dangers she faced in junk food and common plastics thanks to a baby play group that Maggie was a part of. The show's portrayal of hyper-vigilant mothers who worry too much and the sorts of inane baby activities that occur at these groups was spot-on, and Homer and Marge's junk food binge made up for some of the sloppiness in the main plot.

Is "The Simpsons" dealing with BPA and fluoropolymer safety yet another sign that these issues are now in the mainstream public eye? I suppose so -- although I like to think that "The Simpsons," like Mad magazine, are always a bit more intellectually advanced than they appear.

I wrote about plastics companies using social media last week, so today let's tackle a related topic -- critics of the plastics industry using social media.

A reader suggested that I check out the entry for Polyethylene in Wikipedia. A section titled "Environmental Issues" says, in part:

The wide use of polyethylene makes it an important environmental issue. Though it can be recycled, most of the commercial polyethylene ends up in landfills and in the oceans (notably the Great Pacific Garbage Patch). Polyethylene is not considered biodegradable, as it takes several centuries until it is efficiently degraded.

The reader suggests that the author of that section "clearly [has] an anti-plastic agenda."

I'll say this -- there's an anti-plastics spin. That's also typical of many blogs and other social media sites that tackle plastics-related issues.

Sometimes these blogs have connections to mainstream media Web sites -- for example, check out the plastics-related posts in the "Julie's Health Club" blog on the Chicago Tribune's site. The Tribune connection certainly would tend to give this blog credibility, at least with some readers.

Does it matter when dozens of blogs highlight issues like phthalate and BPA safety, or marine debris? I think so.

Many of these Web sites come up pretty high in search engine results. So every time someone hears a rumor or sees a news report about plastics and the environment and decides to go online for more information, this is what they'll find. Likewise for students who are doing plastics-related reports and science fair projects.

The plastics industry can't wish away its problems -- or pretend that social media sites that highlight them (sometimes with an anti-plastics spin or agenda) don't exist.

Three new technology forums at next year's Antec conference will explore ways to improve the environmental sustainability of plastics.

The half-day forums will begin at 1:30 pm on three successive days of the May 16-20 conference in Orlando, Fla:

• On Monday, May 17, Polymer Applications for a Clean Environment. This symposium on plastics as keys to clean air and water. The moderators will be Sadhan C. Jana of the University of Akron; Prithu Mukhopadhyay of Ipex Inc.; and Vassilios Galiatsatos of LyondellBasell Industries.
• On Tuesday, May 18, Successful Case Studies in Bioplastics. Presentations will focus on commercial bio-content applications, including film, fiber, and molded parts for use in automotive, building and construction, industrial, medical, and packaging markets. The moderators will be Maggie Baumann of G.H. Associates; and Roger Avakian of PolyOne Corp.
• On Wednesday, May 19, Latest Developments in Non-Halogenated Flame Retardants. This forum will cover recent advances in technology and applications for mineral fillers such as alumina trihydrate, phosphorus compounds, antimony trioxide, borates, intumescent materials, nanocomposites, and other flame retardants. The moderators will be Baumann and Avakian.

What's new and interesting in plastics packaging? DuPont Co. is on the lookout once again -- the company today issued a call for entries for its 22nd annual DuPont Awards for Packaging Innovation.

The awards are pretty big in the packaging sector -- DuPont touts them as the industry's longest running, independently judged competition.

As you'd expect, sustainability is an important criteria this year. The company also is looking for products that are innovative, and packaging that helps customers (and consumers) reduce cost and waste, according to Carolann Haznedar, global business director for DuPont Packaging.

Entry forms and guidelines are available at www.packaging.dupont.com.The deadline for entries is Feb. 12. There's no fee for entry, and DuPont materials do not need to be in the packaging structure.

Dow Chemical Co. will sponsor a new showcase at the 2010 North American International Auto Show that will feature innovations related to electric vehicles.

The exhibit, dubbed Electric Avenue, will include advances in lighweight design and battery technology. It will include almost 20 vehicles, plus related symposiums and special events on an adjacent stage.

"We believe developing and commercializing next generation battery technology, for example, will help ensure the sustainability of the automotive industry while meeting the nation's energy and environmental goals and generating tens of thousands of green collar jobs in Michigan and throughout the nation," Dow's Heinz Haller, executive vice president for performance systems, said in a news release.

The auto show will be here before you know it -- the press preview starts Jan. 11, and the industry preview on Jan. 13.

I saw Nicholas Kristof's op-ed column about bisphenol A in The New York Times a few days ago, but I wasn't going to post a comment in the blog because he didn't appear to cover any new ground.

But it's noteworthy that -- to Times readers at least -- the column seems to be getting a lot of attention. The column has been hovering near the top of the newspaper's Web site list of most popular stories most of the day.

Since many readers look to Kristof for his opinion, here's what he has to say about BPA:

While the evidence isn't conclusive, it justifies precautions. In my family, we're cutting down on the use of those plastic containers that contain BPA to store or microwave food, and I'm drinking water out of a metal bottle now. In my reporting around the world, I've come to terms with the threats from warlords, bandits and tarantulas. But endocrine disrupting chemicals -- they give me the willies.

BPA safety is a pretty high priority issue these days -- not as "hot" as global warming, of course. But between BPA and marine debris, there's no doubt that plastics will continue to face plenty of legislative, and regulatory, pressure in 2010.

The guys from Orange County Choppers (remember them from NPE2009?) are doing a "green" motorcycle -- all electric -- for the show airing Thursday night.

It includes a visit to the Siemens wind turbine plant in Iowa (check out the link for video from the Discovery Channel) in which they show a little of the fiberglass turbine production.

The bike also includes LED lighting (which has lots of plastics, including a polycarbonate component).

This may be a "green" motorcycle, but it's not a wimpy scooter. They elected to use a high-voltage motor, despite the increased size and power requirements, so the bike could achieve speeds of 100 mph or more.

But does it sound like a real motorcycle? We'll see.

(And thanks to Rhoda Miel, Plastics News' staff reporter in Detroit, for suggesting this post).

The lightweight Boeing 787 Dreamliner has experienced more than its share of delays, but that didn't stop the folks in Charleston, S.C., from celebrating the company's decision to make that city the site of a second assembly plant for the revolutionary aircraft.

The first assembly plant is in Everett, Wash., but Boeing says it needs a second line so it can eventually deliver as many as 10 of the wide-body jets per month, according to this story from The Seattle Times.

Although production of the 787 has been delayed several times, airline companies are eager to buy the Dreamliners because the revolutionary fuel-saving design.

Boeing already has a plant in Charleston where it employs 900 fabricating single-piece rear-fuselage barrels out of composites. The company also has an adjacent joint venture plant that employs 1,600 assembling the central fuselage, according to the story.

With the new assembly line, the company expects to add 3,800 new jobs in South Carolina.

That sort of investment will quickly make South Carolina a major force in high-tech composite plastic design and manufacturing.

Here's a sentence I never expected to write: actress Kaley Cuoco from TV's "Big Bang Theory" is partnering with the American Chemistry Council to celebrate the future of plastics in fashion.

ACC put out a news release on the partnership, and I have to admit I'm a little out of my element writing about plastics' impact on the fashion industry.

The announcement starts with the headline: "Plastic Is the New Black!" and notes that Cuoco will host the Oct. 29 Gen Art "Fresh Faces in Fashion" Los Angeles show.

"Plastics and couture might not seem like an obvious fit, but the fact is that plastics have played a very large role in fashion for decades," said Steve Russell, vice president of ACC's Plastics Division, in the release.

"Without plastic, we wouldn't have faux fur, and skinny jeans wouldn't have their stretch. Plastics also provide women with comfortable, smooth support under their favorite looks. We're thrilled to partner with Gen Art to highlight how plastics inspire designers' imaginations and allow artists to create pieces that are cutting-edge, on trend, chic, affordable, and even eco-friendly."

At the show, Cuoco will announce a fashion design competition that will challenge designers to create "two dynamic womenswear" looks made from fabrics that include plastic-based fibers. The winner will receive a $10,000 prize and a runway show at Gen Art's Fresh Faces event at Winter 2010 New York Fashion Week.

Will this type of event help improve the image of plastics, especially among the young millennial generation? Stay tuned.

As a footnote, I discovered a new ACC Web site through this story, PlasticsMakeItPossible.com. ACC uses that "brand" throughout the announcement, apparently assuming that its target audience still remembers the old American Plastics Council TV ads and radio spots that touted the benefits of plastics.

Recycling foodservice polystyrene products offers some unique challenges. The light weight of the PS foam is one of the biggest stumbling blocks, and so is contamination.

I remember interviewing the some leaders of the now-defunct National Polystyrene Recycling Corp. back in 1992. One told me that NPRC had spent $60 million between 1988 and 1992 to set up and promote its PS recycling infrastructure, and yet it had only managed to recycle about 35 million pounds of material.

Not exactly a great return on investment.

So I'm not surprised to see this story from the Oakland Tribune today, reporting that GB Industrial Materials Corp., the only company in the Fremont-Union City area to collect plastic foam for recycling, will no longer allow people to make drop-offs at its Union City plant.

"People leave all the garbage bags in our parking lot and on weekends. Many times we come in in the morning and are like, 'What is that?,'" owner Christina Liu told the newspaper. "We are short-handed. This is very labor-intensive work."

GBIM Corp. specializes in importing and exporting thermoplastics, including both virgin and recycled material.

The company wasn't alone -- the story points out that other companies that recycle PS foam are in Oakland, Redwood City and Stockton. Plastics News has written stories about successful PS recycling programs, as has our sister newspaper Waste & Recycling News. (Here are a few).

But with PS bans spreading across California (24 California towns and two counties have banned PS takeout packaging), the news that a drop-off program in one community is scaling back is bad news for the foodservice packaging sector.

Are you interested in what Procter & Gamble Co. considers sustainable? The Cincinnati-based consumer products giant released its 2009 sustainability overview this week.

The document touches on plastics in several places -- in both positive and negative lights.

For P&G, much of the emphasis is on creating and marketing products that have a reduced environmental impact. According to the company, it has achieved $13.1 billion in sales since 2007 in "products with a significantly reduced environmental impact." One that gets a lot of ink in the report is Ariel Excel Gel, a highly concentrated, low-temperature laundry detergent introduced in Western Europe. Because it is created for consumers to wash clothes in cold water, much of the sustainable benefit comes through energy savings -- assuming that consumers really do use the detergent in cold water.

Because the product is concentrated, there's a plastics angle. It uses 14-45 percent less packaging:

The next-generation formula uses only ingredients that add value to the cleaning performance, adding no thickeners, solvents, or stabilizers. Thanks to a breakthrough formulation that forms a gel naturally, the product's easy-squeeze consistency is achieved without the need for any structuring agents. This makes it possible to handle the same number of loads in a highly concentrated formula, leading to a dramatic reduction in packaging.

Ariel also uses plastics to reduce transport packaging by 80 percent:

One example of our systemic approach involves an advance by P&G teams in Turkey. By replacing cardboard shipping boxes on Ariel with seal-tight plastic bags, they found a way to use significantly less material while delivering a superior product to market. Previously, shipping Ariel involved packing eight bags of Ariel granule detergent into a corrugated box. The team designed a new process that packed Ariel in large, sealtight polyethylene bags. Entirely recyclable, these bags require 80% less packaging material than boxes, and can be opened without tools. They also take up 20% less space during transport and storage and help speed up the packaging line.

For our retail customers, the new outer covering provides still more value. It allows for easier stock management, with the transparent film showing the product inside for
faster recognition of brands and sizes. Because the packaging can be opened without tools, it is easier to handle. And it maximizes shelf space, helping reduce out-of-stock situations.

The success of this packaging advance has inspired its expansion beyond Turkey. The new process is currently being reapplied across multiple regions, with three more plants scheduled to be up and running by early next year.

The report also mentions that P&G is replacing plastic with recycled-content corrugate in its in-store displays.

For more details, here's a link directly to P&G's 26-page sustainability overview (PDF warning). The company notes that the full report is coming soon.

Remember how San Francisco banned plastic bags? Now Board of Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi is after paper bags, too.

Mirkarimi, the author of the city's plastic bag ban, introduced legislation yesterday that would require stores to offer a 10-cent rebate to people who bring their own bags.

"I believe we now need to tackle paper bags," Mirkarimi told the San Francisco Chronicle. "So when the question is asked, paper or plastic, the answer is neither."

His proposed ordinance would fine large retailers up to $500 if they failed to provide the rebate.

Apple Inc.'s newest MacBook has a polycarbonate shell, and it's getting pretty good reviews. Considering that the company has been using aluminum for everything else, retaining PC for the entry-point laptop is worth noting.

Engadget's Joshua Topolsky said:

We had a chance to play around with the laptop, and it's pretty snazzy for a hunk of plastic. The surface is super slick (AKA super fingerprint friendly), though the base of the laptop utilizes a soft-touch, non-slip surface that's nice to handle.

TUAW (The Unofficial Apple Weblog) and PCmag.com note that the new iBook features a unibody design similar to the more expensive MacBook Pro (which are aluminum).

Apple claims the unibody makes the MacBook lighter and more durable.

Apple also notes that the new laptops are PVC-free.

The energy-efficient MacBook joins the industry's greenest lineup of notebooks, with every Mac notebook achieving EPEAT Gold status and meeting Energy Star 5.0 requirements. The entire Mac notebook line now comes standard with energy efficient LED-backlit displays that are mercury-free and made with arsenic-free glass. Mac notebooks contain no brominated flame retardants, use internal cables and components that are PVC-free and are constructed of recyclable materials.

Blog readers will remember that BusinessWeek wrote a feature back in September about Apple's efforts to eliminate PVC.

The Automotive Division of the Society of Plastics Engineers today announced the finalists for its 39th-annual Automotive Innovation Awards Competition.

Maria Ciliberti of Ticona Engineering Polymers, and chair of the awards program, said despite the challenging year for the auto sector, the contest attracted more than 50 nominations, with entries that can be found on commercial vehicles produced on four continents -- North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia.

"Clearly, there is no shortage of innovative automotive-plastics applications being commercialized right now," she said in a news release. "Polymeric materials continue to bring value to molders, tier integrators, OEMs, and the ultimate customer -- the consumer."

Category and the event's Grand Award Winner will be announced on Nov. 12 during the Automotive Innovation Awards Gala in Livonia, Mich.

Here is a list of the finalists, by category, courtesy of SPE:

CATEGORY: Body Exterior
LOW-PROFILE OUTER-BELT WEATHERSTRIP DESIGN
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Taurus Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Cooper Standard
Material Supplier: ExxonMobil
Material: TPV
Process: Tri-Layer Extrusion
Description: These outer-belt weatherstrips are the first to provide a low-profile, tri-extrusion with stainless steel, TPV, and a high-gloss vinyl ionomer. The manufacturing process envelop was pushed to the maximum to satisfy the Taurus design theme, achieving a functional component that offers three different textures (low-gloss, high-gloss, and stainless) in the same part.

GLASS-RUN WEATHERSTRIP CORNER MOLD OVERLAYS
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Taurus Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Henneges / ITW
Material Supplier: DuPont Automotive
Material: 16.5 percent-GR PA 6/6
Process: Injection Molding
Description: These door glass-run weatherstrip corner mold overlays are an industry first, providing gloss and appearance differences to the glass seals while helping guide the glass properly into the top seal. A simple part that solves a big problem in an elegant way, the plastic glass-run corner mold overlays offer improved appearance and customized craftsmanship for window surroundings while ensuring a good seal.

EXTERIOR SPOILER WITH INTEGRATED CHMSL ASSEMBLY
OEM: General Motors Co.
Make/Model: 2009MY Cadillac CTS Sport Wagon
Tier Supplier/Processor: ABC Group
Material Suppliers: SABIC Innovative Plastics
Material: PC/ABS (with proprietary nanofiller package)
Process: Injection Molding
Description: Highly dimensionally stable, this thermoplastic Class A horizontal body panel meets stringent gap requirements by managing a low coefficient of thermal expansion (3.9) while also maintaining heat, impact, and surface quality for a highly aesthetic application. The center-high-mounted stop light (CHMSL) is also integrated in this first-surface part.

HEADLAMP BEZEL
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Taurus Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Ford ACH Lighting - Sandusky
Material Suppliers: SABIC Innovative Plastics
Material: PC (with metallic-pigment package)
Process: Injection Molding
Description: The inclusion of a special metallic-flake pigment package in the resin matrix for this application eliminated the need for paint while delivering improved styling aesthetics in an as-molded part.

CATEGORY: Body Interior
TUFTED PET AUTOMOTIVE CARPET - BODY INTERIOR
OEM: GM Holden
Make/Model: 2010MY VE Commodore Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Futuris Automotive Interiors
Material Supplier: Not stated
Material: Recycled PET
Process: Fiber Spinning
Description: For the first time, tufted PET carpeting has been used in an automobile. Containing 20 - 80 percent post consumer recycled content, and with the option to use 100 percent recycled PET, this tufted carpet meets or exceeds all major OEM carpet performance specifications, is 12-15 percent less expensive than traditional tufted nylon, and provides a sustainable solution.

PLASTIC POST-ISOLATION FOR AUTOMOTIVE HVAC BLOWER MOTORS
OEM: General Motors Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Chevrolet Camaro Sportscar
Tier Supplier/Processor: Delphi
Material Supplier: Spartech Polycom
Material: 20 percent talc-filled PP
Process: Injection Molding
Description: This application uses an integrally molded plastic mount instead of multiple rubber isolators that softens and quiets HVAC fan-motor vibrations, resulting in significant reductions in cost and development time plus a quieter vehicle interior for consumers. A resonant frequency "tuning" feature allowed for noise/vibration/harshness (NVH) optimization even late in the vehicle-development cycle with minimum impact on mold tooling. Now bare motors can be purchased, allowing more motors to be shipped per container, and a quick snap-fit joins the plastic mount to motor, facilitating assembly.

MOLD & FOLD CLUSTER ATTACHMENT BRACKET
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2009MY Ford F-Series Pickup Truck
Tier Supplier/Processor: Automotive Components Holdings
Material Supplier: ATC
Material: 20 percent Talc-Filled PP
Process: Injection Molding
Description: Using "negative space" in the tool, this mold-&-fold cluster attachment bracket provides a mounting surface for the instrument panel's cluster without the necessity of adding an additional part. Cluster attachment locations are integrated into the IP substrate tool and the "molded-in hinge" is then folded into place. This allowed the styling team to maximize the size of register openings and the cluster lens by minimizing the design space between them.

LIGHTWEIGHT ACOUSTICAL HEADLINER BASED ON SOY FOAM
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Escape HEV & Edge and Lincoln MKX CUVs
Tier Supplier/Processor: Magna (Escape) & International Automotive Components (Edge)
Material Supplier: Woodbridge Group
Material: Polyurethane (with 10 percent-Bio-Based Polyol)
Process: Not stated
Description: Lightweight, open-cell acoustic foam based on polyurethane chemistry with some soy-based polyols (replacing petroleum-based polyols) were used in this application, which also featured permeable thermoplastic adhesives and permeable felt fabrics in the headliner construction. The result is industry-leading noise/vibration/harshness (NVH) performance and lower weight

CATEGORY: Chassis & Hardware
ELECTRIC POWER STEERING FLEXIBLE COUPLING
OEM: Fiat S.p.A.
Make/Model: 2010MY Fiat 500 Compact Car
Tier Supplier/Processor: Nexteer Automotive / Forteq
Material Supplier: DSM
Material: Heat-Stabilized, 50 percent-GR PA 4/6-
Description: This flexible plastic coupling for the vehicle's electric power steering replaced a similar stainless steel coupling with broached splines and grease. The part features ribs that connect and transfer torque from one rotating shaft to another, which in turn strokes axially and stretches and compresses the coupling. The fully complient constant-velocity joint eliminates torsional lash, the need for grease, and all sliding interfaces at a cost savings, while reducing audible interior cabin noise and improving steering "feel." The system replaces traditional hydraulic systems, reducing weight 17 percent, cost 50 percent, and increasing fuel economy by 4 percent. System performance and customer satisfaction were also improved.

LOAD-MANAGEMENT STRIKER CAP (LMSC)
OEM: General Motors Co.
Make/Model: 2009MY Cadillac CTS V-Series Luxury Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Delphi / Ammex Plastics
Material Supplier: BASF
Material: TPU
Process: Injection Molding
Description: When styling opted to add larger wheels/tires well into program development, this small thermoplastic urethane (TPU) load-management striker cap was designed to increase energy absorption by 74 percent and reduce loads on shock towers by 14 percent. This improved vehicle ride without the need to add extra structure to the body/chassis vs. standard nylon striker caps with a metal ring alone. The 43-g, high-elongation TPU part has a "springboard" effect designed in so it improves vertical impact management, leading to lower trim capability, better structural survivability, better energy management (via ride and handling), and enabling additional content (new wheels/tires) without adding significant cost or mass.

BELOW-BELT DOOR-GLASS RETAINING BRACKET
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Taurus Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Henneges
Material Supplier: Dow Automotive
Material: PA 6/6
Process: Injection Molding
Description: These nylon 6/6 below-belt door brackets are an industry first, replacing steel channels. The plastic channels will not ding the door outer panel during installation and provide quiet window-system operation, while also reducing weight 50 percent and cost 20 percent.

CATEGORY: Environmental
RADIATOR END TANK FROM RENEWABLY SOURCED MATERIAL
OEM: Toyota Motor Co
Make/Model: 2010 Toyota Camry Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: DENSO Corp.
Material Supplier: DuPont Automotive
Material: PA 6/10 (with monomer from caster bean oil)
Process: Injection Molding
Description: This is the first use of bio-plastic in a chemically aggressive and mechanically demanding application - in radiator end tanks. Roughly 40 percent of this new nylon 6/10 material is sourced from caster bean oil, reducing reliance on petroleum-based inputs and helping lower the vehicle's carbon footprint.

WHEAT-FILLED PP FOR QUARTER TRIM BIN
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010 FordFlex CUV
Tier Supplier/Processor: International Automotive Components
Material Supplier: A. Schulman
Material: Wheat-Straw-Reinforced PP
Process: Injection Molding
Description: This is the auto industry's first use of renewable (and locally sourced) wheat-straw filler for storage-bin components. This natural-fiber-reinforced PP offers greater dimensional stability than unfilled resin and is more sustainable than talc-filled PP.

HALOGEN-FREE WIRE COATING
OEM: General Motors Co.
Make/Model: 2008MY GMC Yukon, Chevrolet Tahoe, & Cadillac Escalade SUVs
Tier Supplier/Processor: Delphi
Material Supplier: SABIC Innovative Plastics
Material: PPO
Process: Extrusion
Description: Flexible, halogen-free, PPO resin for wire insulation provides an environmentally friendly alternative to PVC and cross-linked HDPE. The durability and low specific gravity of the material enables thinner insulation and jacketing, allowing comparable performance to be achieved in less packaging space and at lower weight.

CATEGORY: Materials
MOLDED-IN-COLOR METALLIC INTERIOR-FINISH PANELS
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Mustang Sportscar
Tier Supplier/Processor: Ford Motor Co. / Summit Polymers
Material Supplier: SABIC Innovative Plastics
Material: PC/ASA
Process: Injection Molding
Description: Molded-in-color metallic finish PC/ASA replaced painted PC/ABS in this Injection-molded application, eliminating paint for greater sustainability while meeting tough weathering, scratch/mar, and low-gloss requirements. Optimized gating strategies and a modified pigment package were essential to minimize flow disruptions that can lead to dark streaks in molded metallic parts where flow-fronts converge. The result is the industry's first metallic-finish interior-trim panel, which is greener, increases customer satisfaction (by eliminating paint-related defects), and provides a $2.30 USD/vehicle cost savings

DOOR PANEL FROM NATURAL-FIBER PREG COMPOSITE
OEM: BMW
Make/Model: 2008MY BMW 7 Series Luxury Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Dräxlmaier Group
Material Supplier: BASF AG (resin) / J. Dittrich & Söhne GmbH (fiber mat)
Material: Acrylic Copolymer
Process: Compression Molding
Description: This lower door-panel inner was compression molded from a new, high-performance, lightweight, cost-effective, and green composite. The resin matrix is a unique acrylic polymer that is thermoplastic in its "B-stage," allowing for production of prepreg/semi-finished rollstock or blanks, yet cross-linking at temperatures above 120C to produce a very durable thermoset. The resin's high wetout of natural fibers and ability to form chemical as well as mechanical bonds to the reinforcement allows for production of composites with very-high fiber loadings - 70 percent in this application - yielding lightweight parts with high stiffness in thin walls. The resulting panel saves weight and cost, significantly reduces VOC emissions, and its rapidly renewable natural fiber needled mat reduces the vehicle's carbon footprint without sacrificing performance.

LONG-GLASS-PP FIRST-SURFACE CONSOLE SIDE PANELS
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Lincoln MKT CUV
Tier Supplier/Processor: Automotive Components Holdings
Material Supplier: Ticona Engineering Polymers
Material: 20 percent Long-Glass PP (Pelletized)
Process: Injection Molding
Description: This is the largest molded-in-color, long-glass PP part with a Class A surface out of the tool for a premium vehicle to date. The precolored and textured part is 100 percent color-matched, has no glass read-through, and offers higher stiffness than talc-filled PP and lower cost than ABS, while also eliminating the need for squeak & rattle countermeasures, saving $6 per vehicle.

CATEGORY: Performance & Customization
THERMOFORMED FULL-SIZE CARGO VAN PARTITION & CONSOLE
OEM: Various
Make/Model: 1985-2010MY Ford Astra & E-Series, Chevrolet Express & GMC Savana Cargo Vans
Tier Supplier/Processor: Chameleon 2000 / Advantage Plastics
Material Supplier: Primex Plastics
Material: Reprocessed ABS
Process: Thermoforming
Description: This large, thermoformed ABS partition and console closes off space between front and back of cargo vans, reducing workload on HVAC units, keeping exhaust fumes from the passenger compartment, and protecting passengers from flying or falling objects that could enter the passenger compartment from rear cargo space. The console provides a work surface between front seats, holding laptops, phones, and paperwork, and rear-accessible storage allows large parts to project into the underside of the console from the rear cargo hold. This application saves 100 lb vs. steel partitions while eliminating rust, quieting the passenger compartment, adding more functionality, and allowing significantly faster installation, making it ideal for fleet vans. The unit is fully recyclable and uses recycled material.

ILLUMINATED DOOR-SILL INSERT USING SINGLE-LED LIGHT ENGINE
OEM: Ford Motor Co.
Make/Model: 2010MY Ford Mustang Sportscar, Lincoln MKZ & Ford MKT Sedans
Tier Supplier/Processor: Innotec Group
Material Supplier: Altuglas, SABIC Innovative Plastics, Serigraph
Material: ABS Bi-Laminate, Polycarbonate, & Acrylic
Process: Multiple
Description: Combining several different plastic technologies to create highly efficient optics that require only one LED light source, this illuminated door-sill insert can easily be customizable (via laser etching) to produce high-impact illuminated graphics. The system's unique construction allows the design to be adapted to new vehicles in weeks, not months, significantly reducing development costs. In addition, the application is the auto industry's first to provide multi-color illumination from a single LED light engine.

HIGH-TEMPERATURE CORED-CARBON COMPOSITE AIR SPLITTER & DIVE PLANES
OEM: Chrysler Group LLC
Make/Model: 2010MY Viper ACR Supercar
Tier Supplier/Processor: Prefix / Plasan Carbon Composites
Material Supplier: Evonik
Material: High-Temperature Epoxy
Process: Hand Layup / Autoclave Cure
Description: A unique carbon composite with a special high-density, high-temperature core capable of surviving autoclave temperatures and pressures was used to produce an extremely thin, lightweight, precision air splitter and set of dive planes for the 2010MY Viper ACR supercar. The splitter is adjustable and produces extremely high downforce resistance of 1,000 lb without deflecting more than 0.25 mm at 180+ mph. A fast-cure, UV-stabilized grade of clear epoxy resin (with visible carbon fiber weave on the surface) brings autoclave cycles down to an average of 10 min. The aerodynamic package went from concept to production in just 12 month.

CATEGORY: Powertrain
BLOWMOLDED INTERCOOLER AIR DUCT IN PPS WITH JECTBONDING
OEM: Volkswagen AG
Make/Model: 2008MY Volkswagen PQ35 Platform
Tier Supplier/Processor: Röchling Automotive Leifers GmbH
Material Supplier: Ticona Engineering Polymers
Material: Glass-Reinforced PPS
Process: Hybrid Injection/Blow Molding
Description: This is the first time glass-reinforced PPS has successfully been blow molded. The complex part was formed by a unique patented hybrid injection/blow molding process called Jectbonding, which allows functional elements to be injected against the parison during expansion, forming a chemical bond and yielding a robust part with a clean joint vs. welding the element to the part in a secondary step. Two different grades of glass-reinforced PPS were used. The process eliminates two previous production steps and provides extremely high repeat accuracy; high-performance PPS resin provides dimensional stability and outstanding mechanicals in high-temperature, chemically aggressive environments with cost and weight reductions.

PLASTICS-INTENSIVE FLUID FILTER MODULE
OEM: Daimler AG, Mercedes Car Group
Make/Model: 2010MY Mercedes C-Class Compact Executive Sedan
Tier Supplier/Processor: Mahle Filtersysteme GmbH
Material Supplier: Lanxess
Material: 35 percent-GR PA 6/6
Process: Injection Molding
Description: This fluid module filters engine oil and cools it via cooling liquid. The cooling unit is fully integrated into a new plastic housing that provides 38 percent weight and 16 percent cost reduction and reduces pressure losses for higher engine efficiencies. The 35 percent-glass-reinforced nylon 6/6 shell covering the cooling unit serves to stiffen the filter housing against oscillation. A plastic hose replaces rubber for further cost savings.