[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference moira::parenting_v3

Title:Parenting
Notice:READ 1.27 BEFORE WRITING
Moderator:CSC32::DUBOIS
Created:Wed May 30 1990
Last Modified:Tue May 27 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1364
Total number of notes:23848

539.0. "Disposable Diapers" by EXPRES::GILMAN () Tue Dec 04 1990 10:49

    I am copying this article from the periodical Science News (Dec 1990)
    because there is so much guilt over using disposables.  This should
    help ease the guilt.

    REASSESSING COSTS OF KEEPING BABY DRY:

    "Because human feces may contain many disease-causing organisisms,
    environmental engineers worry about the long term safety of burying
    disposable diapers in landfills.  To investigate the threat,
    researchers have now exhumed a total of more than 200 diapers from
    landfills in New York, Florida, and Arizona. They tested fecal samples
    from each soiled diaper for a host of common childhood intestinal
    pathogens, including rotoviruses, hepatitis A virus and the protozoans
    Giardia and Cryprosporidium. After an average of two to 10 years of
    burial, none of the diapers showed evidence of viable pathogens.

    A report released last month offers environmentally conscious parents
    futher license to consider the convenience of disposables.  Consultants
    with Franklin Associates in Prairie Village, Kansas., compared all
    costs associated with disposable diapers against those for cloth
    diapers. Their environmental audit considered not only the costs of
    diaper production, packaging and disposal or washing, but also those of
    products used with cloth diapers, such as pins and plastic pants.

    Per year of diapering, the team found that disposables require about
    HALF as much energy as cloth diapers (the equivalent of about 53
    gallons of gasoline), use only one-quarter as much water (2570
    gallons), produce half as much air pollution (16 pounds of combusion
    products) and generate about one seventh as much water pollution (3
    pounds). Solid waste was the one category where disposables did not
    come out ahead: They send four times as much garbage to landfills.

    The overall comparison lumped commercially laundered cloth diapers with
    those washed at home. Yet even these differ on several environmental
    measures, the team found. Home washing consumes 19 percent less water 
    but requires 79 percent MORE energy and contributes twice as much air
    pollution, according to the calculations.

    Makers of disposable diapers remain concerned about public perceptions
    of their product as an environmental nuisance, with disposable diapers
    now constituting 1.5 to 2 percent of all paper products in U.S. land
    fills. Procter & Gamble Co. announced this fall that it is developing
    fully 'compostable' diapers and will commit $ 20 million to advancing 
    municipal composting worldwide.  The Franklin Associates audit
    indicates that if other makers follow suit, the new compostables will
    beat out cloth diapers on all environmental counts - provided the
    throwaways end up in municipal compost systems rather than in
    landfills."

T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
539.1PHAROS::PATTONTue Dec 04 1990 12:284
    Oh no, all my angst was for nothing!! :-)
    
    Lucy
    
539.2SCARGO::GALPINTue Dec 04 1990 14:535
         Thanks for sharing this with us.  My guilt of using Pampers is now
    gone!
    
    Diane
    
539.3We can't win!CRONIC::ORTHTue Dec 04 1990 15:0811
    It's funny. We use home-washed diapers strictly for cost sake...no one
    will ever convince me it *costs* more money to launder at home! But we
    use disposable when going out or going away. And it's amazing the
    condemnation we've heard (subtly, of course) from those who know we
    wash our own at home!I guess they assumed we were some sort of super
    environmentally consciuos consumers and found it incongruous that we
    wouldn't care to lug bags full of dirty/wet cloth diapers around with
    us! Now we can tell them that they can rest easy about the
    disposables...and bug us about the cloth, I guess!
    
    -dave--
539.4Only diaper debate we had was WHICH disposable to buy!CSDPIE::JENSENTue Dec 04 1990 15:517
    
    Well, go ahead, F-L-A-M-E O-N me!  But Jim/I never once considered
    anything BUT disposable diapers.
    
    Sorry!!!
    Dottie
    
539.5Don't trust the quick "bottom line" news reportsMINAR::BISHOPTue Dec 04 1990 17:4443
    I've read some honest attempts to do similiar long-term analyses of
    various competing technologies (cotton shirts vs. drip-dry comes to
    mind).
    
    Which technology "wins" winds up depending on lots of debatable
    assumptions: in the wash-at-home vs. disposable question, those
    asumptions would include:
    
    o	How many washings a cotton diaper can take;
    o	How much detergent is used, and how much it costs;
    o	Whether hot water is used, and how it is heated;
    o	Whether a dryer is used, and how it is heated;
    o	Whether other chemicals are used, and how much they cost;
    o	How often both kinds are changed, and whether they are
    	changed at the same rate;
    o	How many cloth diapers one buys;
    o	How many children one has (to re-use diapers on);
    o	What the residual value of cloth diapers is when the child
    	no longer uses them;
    o	How much shorter a life-span the washer and dryer will have;
    o	How much to value your labor time washing;
    o	How much time it takes;
    o	Number of shopping trips for disposables vs. detergent;
    o	Cost and pollution result of extra car trips or extra load;
    o	What is the pollution cost of distribution of the diapers
    	to supermarkets;
    o	Ditto the distribution of water and electricity;
    o	Ditto garbage pick-up;
    o	and on and on...
    
    It's very possible that some people who use a small number of cloth
    diapers which they air-dry in the summer and have cheap gas heat
    and many children, and use low amounts of cheap detergent, etc. would
    produce very little pollution compared to average usage of disposables,
    while a family with one child who wash with super-hot water heated by
    electricity and use lots of bleach, flabric softener and and so on would
    be far more polluting than that average usage of disposables.
    
    So don't rely too heavily on the "bottom line" of a report like the
    one cited; unless you can compare your usage pattern to the ones in
    the report, you might be way ahead or way behind in cost and pollution.
    
    			-John Bishop
539.6Right... butEXPRES::GILMANTue Dec 04 1990 18:454
    John, generally the reports state only the horrors of disposables. By
    posting the article I was trying to point out just what you said about
    the disposables.... its not that simple.  But it was refreshing to see
    something good said about a convenience item.
539.7Not MY PhD Thesis!POWDML::SATOWTue Dec 04 1990 19:504
Exhuming landfills to find 10 year old baby poops?  Yuck!  THAT'S dedication 
to science.

Clay
539.8Consider the intangible benefits of cotton ...SCAACT::RESENDEDigital, thriving on chaos?Tue Dec 04 1990 23:478
    But what the article didn't mention was the wonderful, soft, fluffy
    feel of a clean, white cotton diaper.  We too use disposables when we
    travel, but there's nothing like patting that little butt with a *real*
    cotton diaper on it!
    
    Just MHO...
    
    Steve
539.9PHAROS::PATTONWed Dec 05 1990 11:369
    Steve,
    
    ...Not to mention that cute little duck-waddle when they start walking,
    and they're wearing two cotton diapers and a double-thickness wool
    diaper cover...Daniel's butt stuck out about 6" behind him. When he
    gave up diapers it looked like he'd lost several pounds!
    
    Lucy  
    
539.10CLUSTA::BINNSWed Dec 05 1990 15:479
    And at the risk of soundly too cynical, who are Franklin Associates of
    Prairie Rapids (or whatever), Kansas, and who paid them to do this
    study?
    
    $10/week to wash diapers?  Highly unlikely.
     (make that $20/week until recently when we got down to only one in
      diapers) 
    
    Kit
539.11Hope it worksWR2FOR::BELINSKY_MAWed Dec 05 1990 19:5513
    I was ready to use disposables when Ellen was born in September, but my
    husband convinced me to go with cloth. We are really happy with them,
    and are planning to continue using them.  However, Ellen wears a thick
    disposable at night - she sleeps 11 hours - and wet cotton worn for
    that long is not comfortable. I don't want to double up.
    
    It would be nice if Proctor & Gamble's efforts to make their
    disposables degrade work out.  Aside from the concern over bacteria,
    viruses and the like, the sheer amount of diapers that we as a society
    throw away bothers me.  (And now we have throw-away cameras thanks to
    Kodak.  Where will it all end?)
    
    Mary
539.12NOTIME::SACKSGerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085Thu Dec 06 1990 11:567
re .11 (a slight rathole)

>                            (And now we have throw-away cameras thanks to
>    Kodak.  Where will it all end?)

Since the cameras are sent in to processing plants, they're easy to recycle
(unlike disposable diapers).
539.13Just a couple opinions!NRADM::TRIPPLFri Dec 21 1990 15:5713
    re the previous reply....those throw away cameras are sent WHERE?  Have
    you checked out Spags school house film developing operation lately?  I
    have, I dropped my first AND LAST disposable camera there last week,
    they just drop the shell in the trash!  As for picture quality, in a
    word NEVER AGAIN...Lousy!
    
    I second the sentiment of .7 that has to be dedication!
    
    By the way...is there *anything else* beside disposables?  I always
    thought the bags of cloth diapers should be renamed Dusting Cloths!!
    
    Lyn