------------------------------
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 09:58:29 +0900
From: oldxeye@crisscross.com (Hop)
Subject: Recycling Coke cans vs. Reusing Glass Bottles
Dear Jamby,
I saw your message (copied below) listed in GreenYes Digest V98 #30.
Research supports your theory that sanitizing glass bottles reduces the
energy required for the production of beverage containers. When compared
with single-trip throw-away &/or recyclable containers (ie. including cans)
the generally accepted rule is that re-using glass bottles 10 or more times
results in less environmental impact across the entire beverage
distribution system (ie. from cradle to grave).
Numerous references are given in the report "Container Deposit Legislation
for New South Wales - Bringing Back Returnables" which I published several
years ago. Of particular interest would be the graph on p.12 summarising
'Soft Drink Packaging - Energy Impact' by container type. I believe a copy
is held by the Container Recycling Institute (cri@igc.org or
www.igc.apc.org/cri/) in the US.
Also, the response I recieved from Coke recently should be of interest to you:
Thank you for contacting The Coca-Cola Company via e-mail.
We appreciate your taking the time to contact us.
Our Company considers packaging mix sales information to be
proprietary; however, I am able to answer your question in
general terms. Here in the United States, the refillable
bottle market share is small. The refillables that are in
use are mainly used by restaurant accounts that can guarantee
the return of the bottles. Refillable use in countries
outside the United States is more prominent, being that most
countries are not as convenience-oriented as the United
States and promise a more hopeful potential for the return of
the expensive empty refillable bottles.
The benefits of both refillable and non-refillable bottles
depend completely on the location in which they are sold.
You mentioned in your e-mail message that the return rate of
refillable bottles is something that must be considered.
This is true. In markets where consumers return the bottles
at a high rate, it can be economically and environmentally
feasible to use refillable bottles, but it does depend on the
return rate of the bottles.
The environmental advantages of refillable bottles are only
realized when a number of variables, such as consumers
regularly purchasing and returning refillable bottles, work
successfully together. If the bottles are not returned at
high rates, it is better for non-refillable, recyclable
containers to be used. Refillables tend to be heavier
because of concerns over breakage, and these heavier weight
containers require more natural resources to produce and
distribute than recyclables. They also require extra water
to wash and clean before going back out. Thus, if they are
not returned enough, no environmental benefits for using this
bottle materialize. This tradeoff must be considered.
We hope that this information is helpful. If you have
additional questions or comments, please visit our Web site
again.
Paige Ferguson
The Coca-Cola Company
Industry and Consumer Affairs
Unfortunately Coke never answered my original question, which was:
Dear Coca-Cola,
Can you please tell me what percentage of Coca-Cola owned drinks are sold
in refillable bottles in the United States (ie. what percentage
of liquid drink is sold in refillable compared to non-refillable
containers)? And how does this compare with the sale of drinks in
refillable versus non-refillable containers sold by Coca-Cola in
other countries of the world? In which country of the world
selling Coca-Cola owned drinks is the percentage use of
refillable bottles the highest, and what is that percentage?
Thanks. I look forward to your reply.
Perhaps you will have more luck from within the US.
Please contact me directly if I can be of any further help to you.
Regards,
Hop.
>Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 10:13:30 -0600
>From: "John Reindl" <reindl@co.dane.wi.us>
>Subject: Recycling Coke cans vs. Reusing Glass Bottles
>
>Hi Jamby -
>
>Thanks for your note. Many years ago (20 or so?), EPA put out a
>document on a resource and environmental profile analysis of
>beverage container alternatives. This showed a comparison of energy
>and resource use for a number of alternative packages. I suspect,
>however, that the data are badly out of date.
>
>Unfortunately, I have not been able to keep up with the literature
>and more recent studies. By copy of this note to several email
>lists, I am asking anyone who might have more recent information to
>please respond to you at your email address of jamby@juno.com
>
>Good luck on your project! Wish I could be of more help.
>
>John
>
>> To: reindl@co.dane.wi.us
>> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 18:56:06 -0600
>> Subject: Recycling Coke cans vs. Reusing Glass Bottles
>> From: jamby@juno.com (Jamby M Taylor)
>
>> John,
>>
>> I'm doin research on cost/energy efficiency of various soft drink
>> containers. Weather it would be cheaper to sanitize glass bottles, or
>> recycle aluminum. I was told that glass is cheaper/better/more energy
>> efficient, but I have no sources to site. I saw two of your news group
>> messages on the subject, and seeing that you are knowladgeable about the
>> subject I figured I'd ask for your help. Where should I be looking?
>> Books, or articles, any info would be great.
>>
>> Oh, although glass isn't used much in the U.S. for cokes and such, in
>> Mexico, where I frequently travel, the drinks in glass containers are
>> considerably cheaper, due mostly to the fact (I assume) that they
>> sanitize the glass bottles, reducing the energy required for the
>> production of the beverage container. So I'm lookin for support or
>> evidence refuting my therory
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Jamby Taylor
>>
>> P.S.
>> Just saw another message stating that your email doesn't always get
>> through.
>> My other email address is <icandunk@tamu.edu>
>> Phone #: (409) 847-4379, call collect.
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>> Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
>> Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>>
>
>reindl@co.dane.wi.us
>(608)267-1533 - fax
>(608)267-8815 - phone
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 14:56:11 -0500
>From: Pete Pasterz <Pete.Pasterz@USDWP.MSU.EDU>
>Subject: Recycling Coke cans vs. Reusing Glass Bottles -Reply
>
>Jamby--
>
>contact the Container Recycling Institute, cri@igc.org or
>www.igc.apc.org/cri/
>
>
>Pete Pasterz
>Michigan State Univ.
>pasterz@pilot.msu.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 18:10:15 +0100
From: WdeBruyn@mail.dma.be (Wim A. de Bruyn)
Subject: WARNING Re: Announcement by William M.Zadorsky
On Sat, 7 Feb 1998 15:19:08 -0500 I received following invitation from
William M.Zadorsky via the ecotalk list :
> March 11-12, 1998
> INTERNATIONAL ECOSYMPOSIUM
>"MODERN METHODS OF LAND REMEDIATION AND MANUFACTURE OF ECOLOGICALLY SAFE
> AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS"
>Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine
I went to the "Cleaner product and waste management conference" he held in
September 1996 as an International Conference. I was the only
international participant and none of the other participants spoke English.
Mr. Zadorsky spoke only broken English.
I had come a little bit forewarned, because I had participated in another
conference in Sevastopol before. It was international in so far that there
were half a dozen international participants. The other participants did
not speak English either. I had arrived in Dnepropetrovsk with another
international participant of this congress. We had paid about 11US$ for a
first class sleeping wagon ticket to cross half of Ukraine. The bottle of
alcohol we bought cost 2.5US$. The dinners we had in Sevastopol were not
more than a few dollars, not even in the best restaurant. It was
comparable in comfort and quality with a European one. A ticket for the
best seats to the opera was 3.8US$
Mr. Zadorsky put us up in the hotel "Dnepropetrovsk". He must have had a
deal with the management of the hotel to rip off any international
participant he could lure to his lair. We had to pay a 50 Hryvna
inscription fee, in the hotel! A Hryvna was at that moment equal in value
with a Dutch Florin. The inscription fee in the hotel amounted to almost
25US$. The price of the hotel room was about 70US$. We had dinner in the
hotel with four people. The price amounted to almost 100US$. The hotel
must have opened the snack bar / grocery shop for me, to serve breakfast.
I got a half defrosted roll and some cheese, luke warm instant coffee in a
greasy plastic cup, all served on a rickety table covered with a greasy
plastic table cloth. The waiter did not speak any English but the
calculating machine he held up to me showed clearly 14.7 Hryvna or a bit
more than 7US$ I left 15 Hryvna, got my suitcase and wanted to leave.
The guardian woman of the floor who saw me leave my room, yelled that I
could not leave and held on to my suitcase. I had to wait at the desk
until a young assistant of Mr. Zadorsky who spoke English had rushed over
to ask what was going on. I told him the story and that I had no intention
to participate in the conference for which I was supposed to pay a 120US$
inscription fee. He pleaded with me and offered as argument that they had
informed me before I came about the price of the hotel and food! We
refused to pay the inscription fee in the hotel and got away with paying
the 70US$ for a night sleep. We never saw a smile on the face of any of
the people who served us.
I noticed that one of the organisers and head of this March 1998 symposium is :
>Dr Carle Gibbons (UK), chairman of the company, "Environmental Consulting and
>Management", Oxfordshire, United Kingdom.
In 1996, Carle Gibbons was working for Eureng Ltd, also from Oxfordshire.
He did not show a Dr. title on his business card, then. - I was told
that Mr. Zadorsky is not a professor. - Carle Gibbons was already one of
the organisers of the 1996 conference. He invited me to stay at the
conference as his guest, after trying to convince me to pay the inscription
fee anyway. I presented my paper, with the help of a good interpreter they
had found for me. None of the participants spoke any English. They were
not interested in any theory. They had come to do business about waste
management machines, I got the impression. The "Palace of students and
Palace of Scientists" where the "conference" was held was a warehouse for
second hand furniture or the palace had been turned into a store for second
hand furniture. I left after my speech and never heard from Mr. Zadorsky
again.
My experience with Mr. Zadorsky was the worst of my experiences in Ukraine.
I spent a month there. After Dnepropetrovsk I went to Kiev where I was
invited to be the key note speaker at a meeting of an organisation for
sustainable development. I had exchanged e-mails about my theory for
months. They agreed with the logic of my theory. When I arrived at the
meeting, a secretary put us in the office of the president, to wait. When
the president came, he kicked us out. After my allotted time was up, the
president interrupted me and the meeting was ended. I never heard from the
organisation again. After the meeting, I was taken to a shop of an
association to promote the work by local artisans. The owner of the shop
would put me in contact with producers of hemp products which I wanted to
import in Belgium, if the prices were right. The owner never put me in
contact with these producers but she offered me her products for sale. The
prices of the handicraft were higher than these in Brussels. This was due
to the "price alignment", my host explained. I declined to buy, but was
then invited to negotiate the price. In order not to embarrass my host, a
very kind person, I bought some items at Brussels prices.
After I got back to Brussels, I received various invitations to participate
in projects financed by INTAS. The two western participants each get 10%
of the funds, the participants of the former communistic bloc, get the 80%.
On a purchase power basis, the split is more like 1% and 99%. The western
participants have the responsibility as co-ordinator of the project. I
received all the documents the last day they could be deposited at the
offices of INTAS in Brussels. I did not and e-mailed that I considered the
project as abandoned.
These are the most remarkable of my bad experiences in Ukraine and
afterwards. I also had good experiences, very few. However, I would like
to warn everyone for Mr. Zadorsky's invitations. Before, Mr. Zadorsky was
poaching on the "Environmental Issues in Central an Eastern Europe list".
I advice to be careful before accepting any invitation for a "conference"
or "congress" in a former communist bloc country.
I would like to know what the experiences of other people are with
"conferences in the East"
With sincerity and its feelings,
Wim A. de Bruyn
45 rue Alfred Giron
B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
Tel.: **32(2) 648 56 95
e-mail : WdeBruyn@mail.dma.be
ZERO web site : http://freezone.exmachina.net/ZERO, rewritten on November 24.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 18:11:31 +0100
From: WdeBruyn@mail.dma.be (Wim A. de Bruyn)
Subject: WARNING Re: Announcement by William M.Zadorsky
On Sat, 7 Feb 1998 15:19:08 -0500 I received following invitation from
William M.Zadorsky via the ecotalk list :
> March 11-12, 1998
> INTERNATIONAL ECOSYMPOSIUM
>"MODERN METHODS OF LAND REMEDIATION AND MANUFACTURE OF ECOLOGICALLY SAFE
> AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS"
>Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine
I went to the "Cleaner product and waste management conference" he held in
September 1996 as an International Conference. I was the only
international participant and none of the other participants spoke English.
Mr. Zadorsky spoke only broken English.
I had come a little bit forewarned, because I had participated in another
conference in Sevastopol before. It was international in so far that there
were half a dozen international participants. The other participants did
not speak English either. I had arrived in Dnepropetrovsk with another
international participant of this congress. We had paid about 11US$ for a
first class sleeping wagon ticket to cross half of Ukraine. The bottle of
alcohol we bought cost 2.5US$. The dinners we had in Sevastopol were not
more than a few dollars, not even in the best restaurant. It was
comparable in comfort and quality with a European one. A ticket for the
best seats to the opera was 3.8US$
Mr. Zadorsky put us up in the hotel "Dnepropetrovsk". He must have had a
deal with the management of the hotel to rip off any international
participant he could lure to his lair. We had to pay a 50 Hryvna
inscription fee, in the hotel! A Hryvna was at that moment equal in value
with a Dutch Florin. The inscription fee in the hotel amounted to almost
25US$. The price of the hotel room was about 70US$. We had dinner in the
hotel with four people. The price amounted to almost 100US$. The hotel
must have opened the snack bar / grocery shop for me, to serve breakfast.
I got a half defrosted roll and some cheese, luke warm instant coffee in a
greasy plastic cup, all served on a rickety table covered with a greasy
plastic table cloth. The waiter did not speak any English but the
calculating machine he held up to me showed clearly 14.7 Hryvna or a bit
more than 7US$ I left 15 Hryvna, got my suitcase and wanted to leave.
The guardian woman of the floor who saw me leave my room, yelled that I
could not leave and held on to my suitcase. I had to wait at the desk
until a young assistant of Mr. Zadorsky who spoke English had rushed over
to ask what was going on. I told him the story and that I had no intention
to participate in the conference for which I was supposed to pay a 120US$
inscription fee. He pleaded with me and offered as argument that they had
informed me before I came about the price of the hotel and food! We
refused to pay the inscription fee in the hotel and got away with paying
the 70US$ for a night sleep. We never saw a smile on the face of any of
the people who served us.
I noticed that one of the organisers and head of this March 1998 symposium is :
>Dr Carle Gibbons (UK), chairman of the company, "Environmental Consulting and
>Management", Oxfordshire, United Kingdom.
In 1996, Carle Gibbons was working for Eureng Ltd, also from Oxfordshire.
He did not show a Dr. title on his business card, then. - I was told
that Mr. Zadorsky is not a professor. - Carle Gibbons was already one of
the organisers of the 1996 conference. He invited me to stay at the
conference as his guest, after trying to convince me to pay the inscription
fee anyway. I presented my paper, with the help of a good interpreter they
had found for me. None of the participants spoke any English. They were
not interested in any theory. They had come to do business about waste
management machines, I got the impression. The "Palace of students and
Palace of Scientists" where the "conference" was held was a warehouse for
second hand furniture or the palace had been turned into a store for second
hand furniture. I left after my speech and never heard from Mr. Zadorsky
again.
My experience with Mr. Zadorsky was the worst of my experiences in Ukraine.
I spent a month there. After Dnepropetrovsk I went to Kiev where I was
invited to be the key note speaker at a meeting of an organisation for
sustainable development. I had exchanged e-mails about my theory for
months. They agreed with the logic of my theory. When I arrived at the
meeting, a secretary put us in the office of the president, to wait. When
the president came, he kicked us out. After my allotted time was up, the
president interrupted me and the meeting was ended. I never heard from the
organisation again. After the meeting, I was taken to a shop of an
association to promote the work by local artisans. The owner of the shop
would put me in contact with producers of hemp products which I wanted to
import in Belgium, if the prices were right. The owner never put me in
contact with these producers but she offered me her products for sale. The
prices of the handicraft were higher than these in Brussels. This was due
to the "price alignment", my host explained. I declined to buy, but was
then invited to negotiate the price. In order not to embarrass my host, a
very kind person, I bought some items at Brussels prices.
After I got back to Brussels, I received various invitations to participate
in projects financed by INTAS. The two western participants each get 10%
of the funds, the participants of the former communistic bloc, get the 80%.
On a purchase power basis, the split is more like 1% and 99%. The western
participants have the responsibility as co-ordinator of the project. I
received all the documents the last day they could be deposited at the
offices of INTAS in Brussels. I did not and e-mailed that I considered the
project as abandoned.
These are the most remarkable of my bad experiences in Ukraine and
afterwards. I also had good experiences, very few. However, I would like
to warn everyone for Mr. Zadorsky's invitations. Before, Mr. Zadorsky was
poaching on the "Environmental Issues in Central an Eastern Europe list".
I advice to be careful before accepting any invitation for a "conference"
or "congress" in a former communist bloc country.
I would like to know what the experiences of other people are with
"conferences in the East"
With sincerity and its feelings,
Wim A. de Bruyn
45 rue Alfred Giron
B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
Tel.: **32(2) 648 56 95
e-mail : WdeBruyn@mail.dma.be
ZERO web site : http://freezone.exmachina.net/ZERO, rewritten on November 24.
------------------------------
End of GreenYes Digest V98 #35
******************************