Nappies - where are all the environmentalists!

Cardew

I find it ironic that much of the discussion about the finer points of environmentally friendly practices is conducted on the internet using a computer that most of us don’t ‘need’.

We have labour saving appliances we don’t ‘need’, ditto TVs/DVDs.

We dispose of clothes long before they are worn out, most of the fairer sex use make up – OK that is essential for some!!!!;)

We have cars, often for convenience rather than necessity, etc etc.

Yet one of the greatest labour saving inventions of recent times – the wonderful, wonderful disposable nappy – comes in for criticism!

Mmmmmm

Sarahsaver

spose so but i didnt expect SUCH an abrupt response from some people!

Sarahsaver

Cardew wrote: »

I find it ironic that much of the discussion about the finer points of environmentally friendly practices is conducted on the internet using a computer that most of us don’t ‘need’.

We have labour saving appliances we don’t ‘need’, ditto TVs/DVDs.

We dispose of clothes long before they are worn out, most of the fairer sex use make up – OK that is essential for some!!!!;)

We have cars, often for convenience rather than necessity, etc etc.

Yet one of the greatest labour saving inventions of recent times – the wonderful, wonderful disposable nappy – comes in for criticism!

Mmmmmm

Let's all log off NOW

geordie_joe

Sarahsaver wrote: »

spose so but i didnt expect SUCH an abrupt response from some people!

Sadly, it happens, even though there is a box on the right that says

Pls be nice to all MoneySavers.
There's no such thing as a stupid question, and even if you disagree courtesy helps.

freddykruggar

geordie_joe wrote: »

Depends on how you look at it. For a disposable nappy someone in China, or other country makes the nappy, using a lot of resources. Then a ship carries it half way round the world, a truck takes it to the importers, another truck then takes it to the wholesalers, then another truck takes it to the shop and a car takes it home. Some kid sh*ts in it and a truck takes it away again.

This journey is repeated many times if you use disposable nappies, but only once if you use reusables.



I doubt it, you may use electricity, water and detergent to wash reusable nappies, but this will be offset by what is used to manufacture new disposables.

What you have left is the cost of transporting the nappies, and reusables ones will win that every time.

Huggies and pampers are made in the UK,
The materials used are from sustainable sources, ie the pulp is from sustainable forests in France.
Reuseables take ALOT of resources to make and they also need transporting around the globe, from sourcing raw materials to transportation to you.

There have been many investigations into which is greener and the out come is: there is nothing to choose between them in the total life of either product.

Lets not forget the infrastructure and jobs that go with them either.
Like the advert for that concentrated wash liquid that has removed x number of lorries from our roads.... and made more people redundant in the process.

Ultimately if you sandle wearing greenies get your way we'll all be back living in caves sat around a fire..... no wait, no fire cause that pollutes the atmosphere, so we'll all freeze to death in the winter and then the earth will be safe from us.......:rotfl:

geordie_joe

freddykruggar wrote: »

Huggies and pampers are made in the UK,
The materials used are from sustainable sources, ie the pulp is from sustainable forests in France.

So, they are assembled using materials brought in from other countries. What is the difference in transport costs between manufacturing in the country where the raw materials are and transporting the finished product here, and shipping all the raw materials here and manufacturing the finished product in this country?

freddykruggar wrote: »

Reuseables take ALOT of resources to make and they also need transporting around the globe, from sourcing raw materials to transportation to you.

So do disposables, but a reusable nappy only goes through the transport process once. With disposables each one you use goes through the process.

freddykruggar wrote: »

There have been many investigations into which is greener and the out come is: there is nothing to choose between them in the total life of either product.

There have been many investigation into who killed JFK too, I doubt any of them got it right.

freddykruggar wrote: »

Lets not forget the infrastructure and jobs that go with them either.
Like the advert for that concentrated wash liquid that has removed x number of lorries from our roads.... and made more people redundant in the process.

But we are discussing which are cheapest to use and which are less harmful to the environment. Making people redundant could be good for the environment. If they are unemployed they might not have so much money to spend on things they don't need.

freddykruggar wrote: »

Ultimately if you sandle wearing greenies get your way we'll all be back living in caves sat around a fire..... no wait, no fire cause that pollutes the atmosphere, so we'll all freeze to death in the winter and then the earth will be safe from us.......:rotfl:

I am not a greenie, I'm a money saver. I have no interest in saving the planet, and don't even think it needs saving.

I simply believe that if we continue to use finite resources then one day we will run out.

Hawthorn

freddykruggar wrote: »

Ultimately if you sandle wearing greenies get your way we'll all be back living in caves sat around a fire..... no wait, no fire cause that pollutes the atmosphere, so we'll all freeze to death in the winter and then the earth will be safe from us.......:rotfl:

Not all greenies wear sandals

And I suspect most greenies would rather live in something akin to a hobbit hole http://www.simondale.net/house/index.htm
Than a cave. Caves are damned uncomfortable. Bit cold round the old nether regions when you sit on the floor, and that damp plays havoc with the chest you know.

geordie_joe

freddykruggar wrote: »

Huggies and pampers are made in the UK,

Forgot to mention, earlier I had a look on the Tesco web site. Searched for "nappy" and up came 75 products.

Looking through the first 2 pages, 40 types of disposable nappy, only 4 types of pampers stated they were made in the UK. The was less than half the type of pampers in the list. No other brand, including huggies said they were made in the UK. 4 out of 40 types said Country = UK and the other 36 did not mention the country at all.

Maybe this is just an oversight by Tesco, but it looked to me that they mentioned if a nappy was made in the UK and just didn't mention the country for those that weren't

My conclusion is 36 out of 40 types of disposable nappy are not made in the UK.

Hawthorn

.........and cloth nappies DO work out cheaper. Whether they are any greener these days....well, I suppose that depends entirely on the person laundering them?

freddykruggar

geordie_joe wrote: »

Forgot to mention, earlier I had a look on the Tesco web site. Searched for "nappy" and up came 75 products.

Looking through the first 2 pages, 40 types of disposable nappy, only 4 types of pampers stated they were made in the UK. The was less than half the type of pampers in the list. No other brand, including huggies said they were made in the UK. 4 out of 40 types said Country = UK and the other 36 did not mention the country at all.

Maybe this is just an oversight by Tesco, but it looked to me that they mentioned if a nappy was made in the UK and just didn't mention the country for those that weren't

My conclusion is 36 out of 40 types of disposable nappy are not made in the UK.

Then your conclusion is WAY off the mark,

Pampers are made by Proctor and Gamble in a factory near Manchester and Huggies are made by Kimberley Clark at a factory in Barton upon Humber.

Not sure who else P&G make nappies for but Kimberley Clark used to make Boots and Super Drug nappies.

You really need to get your facts right before making silly statements like that.

Also it takes ALOT more raw materials to make 1 reuseable compared to 1 disposible

As for the studies for both, ALL costs where factored in, including transportation. And your comment re: JFK :rolleyes: totally different, ALL studies have shown there is no difference.


You also said
'Making people redundant could be good for the environment. If they are unemployed they might not have so much money to spend on things they don't need'

exactly my point, you would rather us all live in caves/mud huts. pathetic