Back in 2005, the Environment Agency produced a Life Cycle Analysis report comparing the environmental impact of disposable nappies versus washable nappies.
At the time, the cloth nappy community was up in arms, as the report was so unfair. Statistically, it was nonsense: 2,000 disposables users were quizzed on their (almost identical) nappy usage, but only 23 cotton nappy users were quizzed on their (massively variable) nappy usage. No wonder the figures were a bit silly – it even concluded that 7.5% of cloth nappy users iron their nappies.
I’m The Nappy Lady, and have been since 1999 or so, and I think I’ve only ever come across a couple of people who iron their nappies, so I’m thinking that 7.5% is a bit suspect, to say the least.
Although the report did draw the correct conclusions, in a low key way, the media only picked up on the headline news that using cloth and using disposables had comparable environmental impacts. Which made things harder for those promoting the benefits of cloth nappies. Some people can’t wait to close their minds and seize on “received wisdom” when it matches their own views.
Anyway, I’m rambling. Let’s just say the last LCA report (due to be published by DEFRA tomorrow) came to the same basic conclusion, but on a much less statistically flawed data set, and ended with a very clear indicator that the environmental impact of cloth nappy usage is much more in the hands of the user than of the manufacturer.
The environmental impact of cloth nappy production and usage is the equivalent of releasing 570kg of carbon dioxide into the air. The environmental impact of disposable nappy production and usage is the equivalent of releasing 550kg of carbon dioxide into the air.
Not hugely different, are they?
And the very last paragraph of the report spells it out in detail:
The environmental impacts of using shaped reusable nappies can be higher or lower than using disposables, depending on how they are laundered. The report shows that, in contrast to the use of disposable nappies, it is consumers’ behaviour after purchase that determines most of the impacts from reusable nappies.
Now, will the media report that? I wonder. I can’t say I’m holding my breath.
Tags: cloth nappies, disposables, environment, LCA, news, UK, washable nappies
October 24, 2008 at 8:14 am |
Does the report make any comment on the landfill issue/ disposal of disposable nappies?
I know that the carbon footprint is vitally important, but surely on the landfill issue, reusable nappies have to be ‘better’. That is a different angle but also worth mentioning, surely.
There are also the associated accessories to consider. Using disposable wipes and plastic nappy sacks must surely increase the carbon footprint of ‘using disposables’ in a way that doesn’t get applied to cloth nappy usage. So the nappies themselves may be fairly equally balanced, but the overall use of disposable nappies versus washable nappies may well show a greater difference.
October 24, 2008 at 9:25 am |
So they say 570kg of carbon for cloth and 550kg of carbon for disposables. But for the production of how many nappies is that? If it’s per 1000 nappies of either sort, surely how many nappies are produced for each child should be taken into consideration. Disposable users use 100 times more nappies for each child. Maybe carbon monoxide per nappy wearing child would be better? But then you need to take into consideration the carbon produced in washing. Surely there will never be a accurate study!!!
October 24, 2008 at 8:38 pm |
Yes, Jemma, the report includes the landfill aspect of disposables’ use. But landfill is only one part of the environmental footprint of any life cycle. The aim of the LCA is to assess the overall environmental impact, without stressing any particular section of it.
Like you, I believe there is more to it than this. It all depends on your limiting resources. If you live in Australia, water is going to be a more scarce resource than landfill space. In Europe, the opposite is true.
And you are entirely right about the concomitant disposable add-ons which would add to the environmental impact.
As Sally concludes, there never CAN be an accurate study, because there is so much variability especially on the cloth-nappy usage side. All you can do is try to give as much information as possible, and encourage users to take control of their environmental footprint as much as they can.
As for your question, Sally, the 550kg vs 570kg is based on an average of “birth to potty,” not a specific number of nappies. It is as near as they can get to a comparison, but it is necessarily vague.
The overall conclusion which came from the original report but was lost n the media reporting, and is restated again in this LCA is that disposables’ environmental control is the responsibility of the manufacturers, whereas for cloth nappy users it is in the hands of those users.