Good news for all vegans and supporters of plant-based diets, as McDonald’s, in collaboration with Beyond Meat, has just announced the launch of its new plant-based burger, the McPlant!

McPlant can be expected to arrive in selected markets in early 2021 and was developed to cater to the growing demands for non-meat diets. Growth of plant-based meat has been on the rise due to food supply disruptions and people’s preference for healthier food choices, with statistics showing an increase in sales of 265% for plant-based meats between February and April this year (Quek, 2020).

Plant-based meats has been an amazing development for the environment through significantly reducing the feed, water, emissions, and land costs from producing beef. However, there has been lots of criticisms revolving around the nature of plant-based meats as highly-processed foods. Although it has high amounts of sodium and fat, many do not consider the fact that these “unhealthy” nutrients are present in regular meat products, concluding that plant-based meats are still very much a viable alternative. In addition to what’s crucial, taste, costs, and convenience play dominant roles in shaping our food choices. Though innovation may save the world, but the choices we make as consumers are equally critical in creating meaningful impacts to the environment.

---

References

The Straits Times. McDonald’s launching meatless ‘McPlant’ burger. (2020, November 10). Retrieved from: https://www.straitstimes.com/life/food/mcdonalds-launching-meatless-mcplant-burger 

Quek, E. (2020, May 24). Growing interest in plant-based meat. The Straits Times. Retrieved from: https://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/food/growing-interest-in-plant-based-meat

Scipioni, J. (2020, July 21). Impossible CEO on critics who say plant-based meat is unhealthy: ‘It’s bull—-’. CNBC Make it. Retrieved from: https://cnb.cx/3aGMPhn

Let’s talk about Covid-19 and possible impact on the environment. Many have argued that, because of isolation practices, the environment would benefit from the reduction in travel and consumption. Air has been proven to be cleaner in many parts of the world, and biodiversity has thrived in others, with dolphins showing up at the harbour of Italy. Emissions were reported to have fallen 25% in China at the start of 2020 (Henriques, 2020).The “Anthropause”, which is the dramatic slow down of human activity caused by the pandemic has been useful for scientists in providing a better understanding between human and animal relationship (Loretto et al., 2020).

However on the flip side of things, plastic waste generation seem to have increased dramatically during Covid-19 lockdown, which mainly include single-use hygiene related plastics such as masks and gloves. On top of that, social distancing measures have also witnessed increase in single-use plastic food packaging take-away food seem to be the only option as restaurants are closed for dine-ins (Prata et al. 2020; Vanapalli et al. 2020).

Benefits from the lock seem to only be temporary as restrictions are slowly being lifted. Based on past trends, emissions that fall during recession periods, often bounce right back up, erasing any previously short-term cuts in emissions (Henriques, 2020). More importantly, the response shown during the outbreak has proven that large scale action is possible, if real action were to take place to combat climate change, showing how communities and people can work together to tackle problems.

---

References

Henriques, M. (2020, March 27). Pollution and greenhouse gas emissions have fallen across continents as countries try to contain the spread of the new coronavirus. Is this just a fleeting change, or could it lead to longer-lasting falls in emissions? BBC. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200326-covid-19-the-impact-of-coronavirus-on-the-environment

Prata J. C., Silva A. L. P., Walker T. R., Duarte A. C., & Rocha-Santos, T. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic repercussions on the use and management of plastics. Environ Sci Technol, 54, 7760–7765.

Rutz, C., Loretto, M. C., Bates, A. E., Davidson, S. C., Duarte, C. M., Jetz, W., … & Primack, R. B. (2020). COVID-19 lockdown allows researchers to quantify the effects of human activity on wildlife. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 4(9), 1156-1159.

 

In a continuation from upcycling, recycling has been deemed as the better option, yet again to be disappointed from facts that have often been left out. Many environmentally conscious consumers do their part in sorting and recycling their waste at the curbside, however, the processes that occur once the recyclables are out of the consumers sight have to be traced and made known to consumers.

Only a small fraction of what we put into recycling bins, actually gets recycled, between 1950s to 2015, only 9% of all plastic waste generated was actually recycled, 12% are incinerated, and the remaining 79% are dumped into landfills or into the environment (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2018). Large portions of plastic waste recycled were exported to third world countries like Cambodia and Vietnam, most of which gets accumulated and pollute their environment.

What was imported to be recycled by third world countries, ended up on the curbsides. From the curbsides of developed nations, to the curbsides of less-developed nations. Every month, approximately 260 tons of plastic waste was exported from the US to seaside town of Sihanoukville in Cambodia, where no proper systems are in place to deal with these imports, resulting in streets and beaches to be covered with plastics (Peren, 2019).

As consumers, having the knowledge of a product’s life cycle is important, understanding the production network provides accountability and responsible production practices and consumption, and understanding the end of life cycle is equally important. Amongst the 3Rs, reducing would have to be the top contender when it comes to sustainable living, using less is always best!

 

---

References

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2019). Facts and Figures about Materials, Waste and Recycling. Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/plastics-material-specific-data#PlasticsTableandGraph

Peren, N. (2019, June 17). Where does your plastic go? Global investigation reveals America’s dirty secret. The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/17/recycled-plastic-america-global-crisis

As individual consumers, we often feel insignificant, using this fact to comfort ourselves in our indulgent consumption habits. In 2008, a Walmart employee was trampled to death by Black Friday shoppers in New York. The extent of many consumers behaviours have proven to be distasteful and unnecessarily excessive.

Today’s posts targets directly at the role of individual consumption behaviours. Before putting the blame on organisations or business for the environmental degradation, household individuals are responsible for 50 – 60% of environmental impacts on the planet (Jacobs, 2016). According to a study from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, four-fifths of environmental impacts of consumerism traces back down to the supply chain, and not from transportation or taking long showers (Ivanova et al., 2015). Individuals often lack accurate information and knowledge about their environmental footprint, especially impacts from secondary sources down the supply chain.

Consumerism has been slowly eroding our planet and its time for individuals to face the reality that despite being only a single person out of 7.5 billion people, our actions do play a part in creating a change, and we have the power the power to decide the fate of the earth.

 

---

References

Bradshaw, A. (2019, November 29). Mass consumerism is destroying our planet. This Black Friday, let’s take a stand. The Guardian. Retrieved from:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/29/mass-consumerism-black-friday-climate-catastrophe-consumption-shopping

Ivanova, D., Stadler, K., Steen‐Olsen, K., Wood, R., Vita, G., Tukker, A. & Hertwich, E.G. (2016). Environmental Impact Assessment of Household Consumption. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 20, 526-536.

Jacobs, S. (2016, February 24). Consumerism plays a huge role in climate change. Grist. Retrieved from: https://grist.org/living/consumerism-plays-a-huge-role-in-climate-change/

The Guardian. Wal-Mart worker killed in Black Friday shopping stampede. (2008, November 29). Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/nov/29/wal-mart-blackfriday-shoppersstampede

 

Remember that photograph of the turtle with a straw stuck in it’s nose? That image sparked the internet’s awareness of ocean plastic pollution.

So how do these plastics end up in the ocean? Humans are fully responsible for this. Littering and improper disposal of plastic items often find its way into oceans through rivers and drains, where rainwater could easily transport them into the ocean. Based on current trends, there could be 1 ton of plastic for every 3 tons of fish in the next 5 years, that is(Jambeck, et al., 2015). This endangers marine life through entanglement or when ingested. Although proper waste management system could be implemented to prevent plastics from entering the ocean, individual consumers have an equally important responsibility in this. As individuals, reducing single-use plastic consumption could combat ocean pollution, that reduces the total amount of plastics being circulated in our economy.

---

References

World Widelife Fund. (n.d.). How does plastic end up in the ocean?. Retrieved from: https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/how-does-plastic-end-ocean

Jambeck, J. R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T. R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., … & Law, K. L. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347 (6223), 768-771.

Cotton tote bags have been reported to cause more harm to the environment! According to the Ministry of Environment and Food of Denmark, cottons bags have to be used 7100 times to offset plastic bags if all environmental indicators such as climate change, ozone depletion, toxicity, eutrophication and resource depletion, were considered. In practical aspects, it is nearly impossible for typical consumers to fulfil the minimum usage of 7100 for a cotton tote bag. Cotton falls short mainly due to the its ozone depletion impact, which is far worse than using plastic grocery bags. Cotton crops require large quantities of water, land as well as fertiliser, creating large environmental footprint. In fact, organic cotton has proven to be even less sustainable, as they are often low yield, thus requiring more resources to produce.

The report by Ministry of Environment and Food of Denmark has proven that best alternatives are reusable/recycled plastic bags made from  woven Polypropylene (PP) or nylon.

Asian people are the biggest recyclers of plastic bags. So when you see a turtle choking, don’t look at us. All of our plastic bags are in the cabinet under the sink. 😂💁🏾‍♂️

— Indian Stats v2 (@Indian_stats) October 29, 2018

In the tweet above, it simply shows how we can prevent environmental damage with simple acts and behaviours. Reusing of plastic bags are highly encouraged as well as proper disposal of waste. However, it still does make sense to use cotton tote bags if we have them lying around the house, which would prevent additional plastic bags from being used/produced, reducing overall single-use disposable waste. If you’re thinking of procure tote bags for a company giveaway, or for school welfare packs, do think twice, as i believe that our homes already have plenty of tote bags lying around, so it may be wiser to just stick with plastic bags. With all the fuss and debates about the best alternative, i strongly believe that reduction is still the best way to fight climate change and resource depletion, don’t take what you don’t need!

Are metal straws killing us, more than they are saving the environment? Quite literally, a metal straw have caused the death of a 60 year old lady last year, where she was impaled through her eye after falling onto an eco-friendly reusable metal straw. With that said, we are here to debunk environmental truths about plastic and metal straws. Is the metal straw truly beneficial for the environment, or is it a costly expression for environmental enthusiast? In order to fully debunk the environmental impact, a life cycle assessment has to be done, which provides us with a rough estimate on the energy required to produce these straws.

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

According to the Humboldt State University, the production of a single metal straw produces 149 times more carbon emissions, and requires 102 times more energy than a plastic straw (more date in the table below). This means that you need to replace at least 149 plastic straws with a single metal straw to offset the environmental damage, if not, more harm will be caused to the environment. I personally feel that it is unlikely that the majority of metal straws were able to serve their full purpose, but this reduces the amount of plastic waste generate yearly. Furthermore, metal straws have a much longer use lifespan, and it is fully recyclable, as opposed to plastic. Which boils down to the responsibility of consumers to diligently use their metal straws, and to recycle it if disposal is a must.

Below is a mildly infuriating picture of $3 metal straws, being wrap with a layer of plastic, a real irony. This shows  the relationship that humans are still highly dependent on plastics for hygiene purposes. Though intentions are good, more thought needs to be given towards the process and implications of environmental impacts.

It is also important to note that metal straws do not reverse environmental impacts, but in fact, they continue to consume natural resources and emit carbon from the extraction, manufacturing, and transportation. As such, one must know the issue of straws should be one that requires the reduction rather than replacement, same goes with all reusable items. We should ask ourselves if we really need to use the disposable item, if we really require it, then perhaps consider a reusable alternative. It’s our sustainable behaviour that counts and not how many environmentally-safe products we own.

 

Prior to the recent cancellation of Singapore Airlines’ (SIA) plans of ‘flight to nowhere’, there was much debates revolving around the alternative solutions in bailing out Singapore Airlines from the current economic and health crisis. The intentions of environmentalist against the ‘flights to nowhere’ were directed towards the carbon emissions for a purpose deemed unnecessary, which was to take passengers on the Airbus A-350 for a 3-hours non-essential joy ride. However, we felt that more could be discussed around the actual facts and figures of these flights and it’s environmental impact, putting it into scale.

To put things into perspective, a 3-hr joy ride, which is estimated to be the same flight time require between Singapore to Chiang Mai (Thailand), is expected to produce 0.28 metric tons of carbon dioxide per passenger, according to carbonfootprint.com. 0.28 metric tons (280 kg) of carbon dioxide is closely equivalent to a 1,600km journey on an average petrol powered car. Now that we understand the extent of environmental impact created by a single 3-hour flight, it may be worth noting that in 2019, Singapore’s prestigious Changi Airport served 382,000 flights, which is an average of 1,046 flights per day, or 1 flight every 80 seconds! Shedding light on the extent of air travel on a regular basis, makes the environmental issue regarding the ‘flights to nowhere’ seem like consolation by mother earth, given the substantial cut in air travel due to Covid-19.

Through understanding the extent of this environmental issue, it is not undermine the efforts and suggestions made by environmentalist, but it is good to consider the implication of things through a wider perspective and a larger scale. Other implications are equally important in considering the best option, such as economical and operational considerations like the requirements for pilots to fly in order to retain licenses.  According to the Air Transport Action Group (ATAG), new fuel efficient aircrafts like the Airbus A380 and A220 have the fuel efficiency of most modern compact cars, which is a step in the right direction, given that air transport would probably remain as a necessity for mankind. With that said, the attention given to SIA’s ‘flight to nowhere’ has was indeed a step towards combating environmental issues, mainly carbon emissions and climate change, as it brought positive attention towards climate change, with participation from the community. Such attention and participation from both the community and corporations will go along way in educating and changing the mindsets of consumers and organisations in the long run and the benefits would probably far exceed the reduced carbon emissions from the ‘flights to nowhere’.

 

---

References

Air Transport Action Group. (2020). Facts and Figures. Retrieved from https://www.atag.org/facts-figures.html#:~:text=The%20global%20aviation%20industry%20produces,carbon%20dioxide%20(CO2)%20emissions.&text=Aviation%20is%20responsible%20for%2012,to%2074%25%20from%20road%20transport.

Carbon Footprint. (n.d.). Carbon Calculator. Retrieved from https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

Changi Airport Group. (2020). Traffic Statistics. Retrived from  https://www.changiairport.com/corporate/our-expertise/air-hub/traffic-statistics.html

Climate Action Tracker. (2020, 30 July). Current Policy Projections. Retrieved from https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/singapore/current-policy-projections/

Energy Efficient Singapore. (2020). Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change. Retrieved from https://www.e2singapore.gov.sg/overview/climate-change

Toh, T. W. (2020, September 13). SIA eyeing ‘flights to nowhere’ to give a life to ailing business. The Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/sia-eyeing-flights-to-nowhere-to-give-a-lift-to-ailing-business

The benefits of renewable energy is well known, and it will most probably be the way forward towards a sustainable future. But have you heard about how corporate firms purchase Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)? Corporate firms are able to purchase RECs sold on an open market, which represents an amount of renewable energy that is being fed into the energy grid. The RECs is a way for corporate firms to offset their carbon footprint, and as a form of corporate social responsibility.

https://www.ejbasler.com/precision-machining-and-the-environment/ej-basler-renewable-energy-certificate-02-12-2016/

Although the benefits do not directly impact the environment, purchasing of RECs promotes the development of renewable energy. This provide the opportunity for firms to market and promote themselves as “green” or “eco-friendly”, just because RECs were purchased, which deviates from genuine change which firms are capable of making in the long run. Seen as a quick-fix to environmental change, RECs could conveniently diverted the attention of firms away from making genuine changes towards tackling climate change, many of which lie within company processes which could be streamlined or improve to reduce energy/resource consumption or waste reduction.

Although RECs are not necessarily greenwashing, the benefits from buying RECs do not solve the root issue towards climate change but rather, offsetting the effects of climate change isn’t the best or most sustainable way to move forward in the long term. This would also defeat the purpose if RECs provides the incentive for consumers/firms to increase consumption of resource and energy.

 

---

References

Scott, M. (2018, October 29). New rules to crack down on ‘greenwash’ in corporate clean energy claims. Reuter Events Sustainable Business. Retrieved from https://www.reutersevents.com/sustainability/new-rules-crack-down-greenwash-corporate-clean-energy-claims

https://www.eco-business.com/news/development-dilemma-how-did-coal-sneak-into-laos-energy-plans/

Have we truly found a clean alternative to energy? Coal has been known to be the oldest, and dirtiest energy source, which has contributed to 70% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, and to be to using it without damaging the environment may seem rather questionable.

There are many different variations to “clean coal”, in which technology has been applied to reduce or mitigate environmental degradation through removing pollutants. In today’s context, “clean coal” makes use of carbon capture and storage (CCS), which allows for the carbon dioxide generated at coal plants to be stored underground in rock formations and aquifers. Though the general idea of underground carbon sequestration may sound like a genius plan, there has been multiple critics revolving around the oversight on other pollutants as well as it’s cost and efficiency.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-basic-principle-for-Carbon-Capture-and-Storage-CCS_fig1_328352287

While CCS is able to capture around 90% of the CO2 produced at power plants, we have forgotten about the other pollutants by coal, such as mercury, nitrogen oxide, and other poisonous pollutants. Would the production of “clean coal” lift the guilt from consumers, thus further increase the consumption of energy? If so,  Furthermore, would this accelerate the depletion of coal since it is a non-renewable resource? Though the reduction in carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is an excellent outcome, these are some of our thoughts with regards to the other considerations towards this technology.

Singapore has recently announced its plans in researching and developing carbon capture use and storage (CCUS) technology as well.

 

---

References 

Cunanan, P. (2018, April 1). Clean Coal Explained: What It Is and Is It Really Sustainable? EcoWarrior Princess. Retrieved from https://ecowarriorprincess.net/2018/04/clean-coal-explained-what-it-is-and-is-it-really-sustainable/

Grossman, D. (2017, August 23). How Does Clean Coal Work? Capturing carbon dioxide and sending it below the Earth’s surface, explained. Popular Mechanics. Retrieved from  https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/news/a27886/how-does-clean-coal-work/