Biodegradable - Myth or Reality? Black hole: why are wet wipes thrown down the toilet dangerous? Face mask
Everything that is created on earth from artificial objects was created by a person who thought a lot about his creation. But it often happens that this person has not thought of it or has not thought everything through. Having missed some important details, in the end, from his creation, a disaster can turn out, as, for example, is the case with plastic bottles. A similar situation develops with wet wipes ...
Wet wipes have become so popular that many people panic if they are not available at a nearby kiosk. But are they so convenient for environment? In fact, these disposable wipes spread bacteria, clog city sewers and stomachs of hungry animals. Avoid them at all costs!
"Disposable wet wipes Is the biggest evil of 2015, according to The Guardian. These wipes are essentially an instant soapy washcloth that does not require rinsing, is disinfected, and is simply thrown away after use. They have become extremely popular - too popular, in fact.
Parents carry baby wipes in their strollers and use them whenever they need them. Nursing staff and class teachers often wipe surfaces with antibacterial wipes. Travelers stock up on wipes to wash their hands on the road.
They're all over the place, and in the UK alone, wet wipes are hitting the £ 500 million mark a year.
And these super-handy little wipes that are widely used are huge problems.
4 reasons why you should avoid using wet wipes.
1. Environmental chaos
Just because wet wipes are technically “disposable” doesn't mean they magically disintegrate; instead, they simply disappear somewhere else, out of sight, where they continue to wreak havoc on the environment.
Wet wipes contain plastic fibers that are not biodegradable. For example, when napkins are released into the ocean, they are eaten by sea creatures such as turtles, who mistake them for jellyfish and eventually die. (The same happens with plastic bags.)
“Wild animals often gorge on plastic stuffed into their stomachs and eventually starve to death,” says Charlotte Coombs of the Marine Conservation Society (MCS).
Napkins are washed off beaches around the world. MCS estimates that in 2014 there were approximately 35 napkins per kilometer of beach in the UK - 50% more than in 2013.
2. Clogged toilets and sewers
Many users mistakenly throw wet wipes down the toilet, thus clogging and clogging the drain. According to the Guardians, residents of the small town of Kent buried 2,000 tons of wet wipes in the sewers.
When sewerage is clogged with wet wipes, fat accumulates. In 2013, a bus-sized piece of frozen fat was found in a sewer in London.
3. Toxic chemicals
According to Reuters, the wipes can cause rashes in uncomfortable places. The Mayo Clinic report cited the example of one person, a postman, who “had a rash around his anus so painful that he could not walk for months ... As it turned out, he often used wet wipes, some of which contain methylchloroisothiazolinone.
Baby wipes contain preservatives and fragrances that should not come into contact with human skin, in particular with the skin of babies and young children. Approved in the environmental report on the hidden dangers of antibacterial wipes.
4. Spread of bacteria
When hospital staff use wet wipes to wipe down surfaces, it essentially only spreads the bacteria further. Researchers at Cardiff University have found that wet wipes give bacteria a second life. It looks like good old fashioned soap and water would be a much better alternative.
WET WIPES DO SKIN HARM
The researchers were able to find out that in the wipes themselves there is a serious threat to the body, which in no case should be left unattended. A similar statement applies to absolutely all wipes, and even those that are intended for babies, and should be completely safe.
This hygiene product has been studied very carefully by dermatologists. Based on the results obtained, experts insist that wet wipes can be harmful. Cases of severe allergic skin reactions that are Lately began to occur more and more often. Moreover, medical statistics confirm that doctors from different countries report such phenomena.
The press turned out to be data that, in fact, shocking. Most likely, they should not have become the property of the broad masses. Nevertheless, the journalists provided this information to the public for acquaintance.
In particular, it was reported that with the use of wet wipes, more than eleven percent of serious skin reactions were recorded, which were recorded during the past year in three hundred and fifty patients. Previously this topic was studied several times, but it should be noted that at that time the rates were lower. So, in 2012 the indicator is equal to eight and a half percent, and in 2011 there were even fewer reactions, only three and a half percent.
The doctors also expressed concern about the fact that the statistic readings also include those products that are intended for babies. After all, we are used to thinking that a priori they must undergo a more thorough check in order not to become a source of harm. This information, long unknown to anyone, was released by the Sydney Morning Herald.
Allergists and dermatologists in the United States have conducted research on the safety of wet wipes, which are used to care for the skin of children. To test the sanitary napkins, the composition of their impregnation was examined. It turned out that chemicals - fragrances, preservatives and others, harm the delicate skin of the child.
American pediatricians strongly recommend that parents exclude or significantly limit the use of wet wipes for the care of not only the skin of infants, toddlers, preschoolers, but also for children. school age as well as in adults prone to allergic reactions.
Chemical substances for sensitive skin, they turn out to be the most powerful irritants and very often irritation, contact dermatitis, and an allergic rash are mistaken by doctors for psoriasis, impetigo, eczema, unaware of the real cause of skin reactions that are caused by wet wipes.
Scientists researchers from the University of Connecticut have established a connection between dermatitis on the face, buttocks, and arms of children with methylisothiazoline.
This preservative is part of the antibacterial impregnation of wet wipes. It was noticed that after the cessation of the use of such wipes, skin manifestations in babies disappeared on their own within a week.
Pediatricians recommend replacing the use of wet wipes with regular, simple, standard water treatments. And use modern wet wipes only in extreme cases, when there is no other way to carry out skin care (travel, trips, walks) by choosing high-quality, non-antibacterial wipes.
Even in these cases, an ordinary, dry, soft cloth made of cloth moistened with plain water will be more effective and safe than dubious antibacterial wet wipes soaked in harmful substances. If irritation, redness, rash occurs, the use of these wipes should be discontinued.
Bacteria, fragrances, preservatives - how else are baby wipes dangerous?
What to look for in the squad? What substances in wet wipes can be harmful? These questions will be answered by the Product-test.ru expert Elza Akhtyamova:
“Not all components in baby wipes can be safe for a baby's health. For example, alcohols (such as ethyl alcohol, isopropyl alcohol). In the composition, you can see it under the names: alcohol, denatured alcohol, ethyl alcohol, isopropyl alcohol. If it is found in the baby wipes that you are going to buy, then it is better to put this pack aside. Alcohol in high concentrations is known to dry out and irritate the skin and can damage the skin barrier. In addition, children very often experience irritation and diaper rash, wipes with alcohol will burn the skin a lot.
Phthalates, phthalic acid - used to make the napkin as soft and elastic as possible. In tests on mice, phthalates accumulated in the liver and other organs and tissues, and also led to a disruption in the production of hormones in the body. It has not yet been proven that they really harm a person, but nevertheless, it is recommended to avoid these substances in children's hygiene.
Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), aka sodium lauryl sulfate, is recognized as one of the most irritating detergents found in cosmetics, and is often included in sanitary napkins. It can cause dryness, irritation, itching, and increase the absorption of other substances. Many cosmetic companies are already abandoning its use, replacing it with softer betaines and other active ingredients.
Of course, it is advisable to avoid potentially allergenic fragrances such as limonen, linalol, menthol, mint, grapefruit oil, hexyl cinnamal, lemon, butylphenyl methylpropional, etc. It is better to give preference to odorless hygiene products, especially if the baby has a tendency to allergic reactions ".
Now, we hope you understand that perceived convenience and comfort can wreak havoc on your skin and the skin of your children. After all, we somehow lived without these chemical napkins, and were healthier!
Looking ahead. About the competent disposal of the most "repulsive" fractions of solid waste, problematic from the epidemiological and aesthetic points of view
Everything in a person should be beautiful: face, clothes, soul, and thoughts ...
A. P. Chekhov
Perhaps someone will accuse the author of an unhealthy interest in unearthing "all sorts of abominations", of exaggerating a problem that is not so significant against the background of others, more significant, of cleanliness and "obsession with cleanliness and hygiene." But I think the problem of the "most disgusting" household waste is very relevant in modern living conditions. In our poor, rich industrial world, in search of physical and spiritual purity, aesthetics and harmony ... However, see for yourself.
Introduction
Type 1. Waste hygiene and contraceptive products
Subtype 1.1. Toilet paper
Subtype 1.2. Used feminine hygiene products (pads and tampons)
Subtype 1.3. Baby diapers
Subtype 1.4. Used sanitary napkins (wet from non-woven material)
Subtype 1.5. Contraceptives used (condoms)
Type 2. Used medical products (medical waste at home)
Subtype 2.1. Used dressings (cotton wool, plaster)
Subtype 2.2. Used syringes (needles) for injection
Subtype 2.3. Other used medical products used on an outpatient basis for various diseases and pathologies
Type 3. Products of light industry and personal hygiene items that have lost their consumer properties
Subtype 3.1. Underwear
Subtype 3.2. Daily dental hygiene and skin care items
Summary
Introduction
Periodically, in publications of Greenpeace and other environmental public organizations there are speculations about how carelessly most city dwellers spend Natural resources on their hygiene procedures and the level of comfort: long washing in the shower or regular soaking in the bathroom; brushing your teeth and shaving with an unforgivable amount of water draining out; descent of a full toilet bowl, when "it could have been a little bit"; uneconomical consumption of gas and electricity to achieve a room temperature above the standard, and much more. Calls to limit consumption in everyday life, sometimes resulting in such extremes as campaigning for a "zero" haircut in order to save resources on washing their hair, or refusing to use hair removal for women for the same purpose, are, in my opinion, rather one-sided. After all, each person not only consumes resources for hygiene and aesthetics, but also produces various biological waste, oh further destiny which are not accepted to worry, but which, if improperly handled, can carry a rather serious environmental, sanitary and epidemiological hazard and negative aesthetic impact.
And what is the “aesthetic pleasure” for those involved in the conveyor sorting of garbage, which is still carried out in some enterprises? You can often hear that people who work there are degraded, asocial, accustomed to everything and ready to do dirty, low-skilled work for a pittance, which they immediately rush to spend on a drink. But is it permissible, no matter what the contingent of workers may be, to create conditions under which the work of processing useful recyclable materials is inextricably linked with the obvious impurities that pollute it? And since a significant part of MSW can be mixed with extremely unsightly components, the idea that "this dirt and infection" should be buried somewhere further away (at a landfill or at an ordinary landfill), or burned (regardless of the danger air pollution by combustion products). The presence of just used toilet paper in the general composition of household waste is enough for a waste container to be perceived as something disgustingly dirty and foul smelling, and not as a container for 80% recyclable materials.
The reader, perhaps accusing me of being preoccupied with "toilet problems", will certainly object that spoiled food can also have a disgusting smell and appearance and pose a sanitary and epidemiological hazard. Of course, the problem of organic fractions of solid waste is comprehensively important (in the EU, a ban on waste organic waste at landfills (solid waste landfills) in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council 2006/12 / EC of April 5, 2006 on Waste is enshrined), but the same fecal contamination initially carries a much greater sanitary and epidemiological hazard than ordinary food waste, not to mention the aesthetic aspects. For example, the few conscientious dog owners who pick up excrement after their pets for a walk basically throw this organic "treasure" in a plastic bag into a common trash can or trash can.
Within the framework of the indicated problem, I want to present a classification of the most unpleasant elements of household waste (the problem of which is not only not solved, but even, as a rule, is not highlighted in the framework of considering the issue of introducing waste sorting), an analysis of adopted in Russia and the best possible practices for their neutralization and disposal , a review of foreign practices for handling such problematic waste.
The text turned out to be quite long, therefore, for easier perception, it is divided into separate series.
Type 1. Waste hygiene and contraceptive products
Things, or rather, hygienic consumables, from this section are used to one degree or another by everyone, regardless of gender and age. And try to abandon them by switching to a burdock leaf, lint and sphagnum!
Subtype 1.1. Toilet paper
In Russia...
This "unaesthetic" consumer waste is perhaps the most common of its kind. In the introduction, in order to prepare the reader for the fact that it will not be about the most beautiful, but very necessary, I have already given an example of the obvious unaesthetic and sanitary-epidemiological unfavorableness of this waste.
In most households with sewerage systems, the used toilet paper ends up in the sewer and eventually ends up in the sludge at the sewage treatment plant. Perhaps on this moment this is the most civilized way to dispose of this waste. In St. Petersburg, sludge from sewage treatment plants is burned using modern equipment. And, although the environmental safety of most combustion technologies today is not at the highest level, for waste containing a large amount of pathogenic microflora, thermal neutralization is often the only acceptable one.
In garden and summer cottages, as a rule, such waste is burned openly. Of course, this practice introduces a certain amount of pollutants into the atmosphere (nitrogen dioxide, soot, and other impurities). But against the background of traditional stove heating systems, as well as burning dry foliage and garden scraps, emissions from toilet paper burning do not seem to be so significant.
In many public non-residential buildings, due to the large number of visitors to the toilet (due to fear of clogging the sewer), it is a practice to throw used toilet paper into the trash bin. I believe that I am not alone in my disgust when, entering a public restroom, I see the inscription “ toilet paper Don't throw it down the toilet! ”and next to this very plumbing device there is a trash can filled to the brim with used pipifax. Where will the contents of this bucket go after the cleaning staff take care of maintaining order in the booth? It's not hard to guess what's in a nearby dumpster. From where it will most likely be poured onto the landfill along with the rest of the "morphological composition of solid waste" and rolled from above with a bulldozer. And then, perhaps, monitoring soil samples will show that the soils in the immediate vicinity of the landfill are contaminated with E. coli and other pathogenic microflora. And the point here is not only and not so much in rats and seagulls, but in people.
But the international magnate-manufacturer of hygiene products, Procter-and-Gamble directly declares its long-term prospects for reducing the negative impact on the environment through the use in the manufacture of products and packaging exclusively suitable for reuse or recycling materials, reaching a zero indicator of the amount of consumer waste disposed of by disposal at landfills, reaching a zero indicator of the amount of industrial waste disposed of by disposal at landfills, etc. At the same time, at the moment, the lion's share of the products of this company in many countries is not only at landfills, but also at unauthorized dumps, mixed with large volumes of unclaimed secondary resources.
Subtype 1.3. Baby diapers
In Russia...
Probably, the current amount of such waste in Russia is quite comparable with the American situation 25 years ago (see below). And this percentage at the source of waste generation (in a container or garbage chute) is quite enough to make it difficult to manually sort waste and make some of the potentially useful raw materials from other fractions unsuitable for recycling.
Some especially child-loving people will argue that this type of waste is not so terrible, since it is produced by the "flowers of life", which are "pure and infallible by definition." Yes, it is possible that the risk of spreading dangerous infections in such materials is somewhat lower than in the waste from the previous and subsequent points. But this does not mean that it does not exist at all. And the whole thing is not "fragrant" with roses. We have had to make sure of this for certain and repeatedly on volunteer eco-clean-ups, removing the “picnic” parking lot behind some uncultured young parents.
And, by the way, diapers are not only for children - if you remember the sad thing - for bedridden patients this is an irreplaceable means of hygiene.
This type of waste is disposed of in the same way as the previous one (1.2).
Abroad...
American researchers-garbologists (from the English garbage - garbage), since the beginning of the 80s of the XX century, who have been conducting research on large urban dumps in order to study the morphological composition of waste and their impact on the environment, have found that this type of waste, together with plastic packaging from fast food and foam packaging, is no more than 3% of the total morphological composition of landfills.
Modern handling of baby diapers is similar to that of adult hygiene products. It is estimated that in the first 2.5 years of life, a child in developed countries, on average, uses such a number of diapers, which, in terms of the environmental impact, is comparable to covering 2100-3500 km in a car with a gasoline engine.
Several manufacturers' websites also offer biodegradable (2/3 decomposition - where the remaining 1/3 goes, remains unclear) diapers, touting their dermatological and environmental benefits.
Subtype 1.4. Used sanitary napkins (wet from non-woven material)
In Russia...
In the past few years, this product has been widely represented on the domestic market. On the shelves of the household and hygiene departments of stores there are many colored packages: "wet, refreshing wipes", "antibacterial", "for removing makeup", "for intimate hygiene", etc.
We have to admit that in many cases, when there is no way to properly wash your hands or something else, such consumables are very convenient (the word "antibacterial" especially warms the soul; for example, after the same eco-Saturday, albeit with gloves, but you never know what). But. At every cleaning of recreational areas, these disgusting pieces of paper, smeared with anything, are often found.
When delivered to the common trash can, they will add to the general morphological composition of MSW a certain proportion, as a rule, of the polymer composition, organically and / or bacteriologically contaminated.
On the website of domestic manufacturers of such products, only the manufacturing details for the customer are indicated and the packaging material is described in some detail: multilayer roll materials such as aluminolaminate (paper, aluminum, polyethylene) and combined triplex (PET, aluminum, polyethylene). For the manufacture of the wipes themselves, two types of material are used: crepe paper or non-woven material, impregnated with an odorless or fragrance-added cleansing lotion.
Obviously, such a composite can be classified as practically non-recyclable waste, given its polycomponent nature, organic and possible bacteriological contamination. There are no special methods for processing and neutralizing this waste.
Abroad...
It was possible to find not so much foreign information about wet wipes. It can only be noted that some manufacturers of wet wipes pay special attention to the biodegradability and environmental safety of their product.
Subtype 1.5. Contraceptive used (condoms)
In Russia...
This "good" is thrown away, maybe not so much in percentage terms, but on the other hand. And I am not advocating that they should not be used for the sake of reducing the amount of unpleasant waste in the common container. On the contrary, it is precisely because of the neglect of elementary contraceptives that our society acquires many additional problems. But that's not what this study is about.
Let's dwell on the most common and easy-to-use barrier contraception - condoms. Most of them are made from latex - a natural material containing the sap of hevea (a genus of evergreen trees of the Euphorbia family), in other words, natural rubber. There are modifications made of artificial polymers, as well as on a rubber base (remember "rubber product No. 2").
Repeatedly discovering these used products on subbotniks in the forest and on the picturesque shores of the lake, in the bushes (obviously, romance in the open air is attractive, but for some reason many are not able to clean up such spicy garbage after themselves), I wondered about their biodegradability. In the open spaces of the Runet, information was found only about the environmental friendliness of balloons made of natural latex: "Careful studies have shown that a balloon made of latex is completely biodegradable in natural conditions in the same time it takes to decompose an oak leaf." In support of these words, one blogger spoke out in the discussion of the component composition of the garbage collected at the subbotnik. He said that once, during his student days, he was on duty to maintain cleanliness in the courtyard of the hostel. There, reckless students threw used condoms out of the windows. And the one who was authorized to maintain cleanliness, not wanting to get dirty, raked all this with a fan rake into a pile and sprinkled autumn leaves... After winter, unaesthetic debris disappeared, mixing with rotted foliage.
However, this type of waste, due to its biological content, also falls under the definition of "class B medical waste" specified in SanPiN 2.1.7.2790-10.
In addition, when disposing of such waste in the summer recreation area, the packaging made of hardly decomposable or practically non-decomposable materials adds “unaesthetic” to this garbage, which clearly indicates the intimate leisure of uncivilized fellow citizens.
Abroad...
For the environmentally friendly handling of used condoms, some guidance is given in the English-language article "Common Sense: Condoms and the Environment." It is strongly not recommended to flush used contraceptives down the drain due to the risk of clogging. Even if clogging does not occur, the used protective agent will end up on the trash grates of the wastewater treatment plant or in the sludge. That is, it will be in the same composition of solid waste, delivering additional unpleasant emotions to the employees of the water treatment plant, or, having overcome the water outlet, will pollute the reservoir. Attention is also drawn to the fact that condoms are biodegradable (latex or from calfskin, although, it seems to me, the latter is already some kind of archaic exotic) and non-biodegradable (polyurethane and other polymer compounds). The author of the article does not recommend trying to compost biodegradable contraceptives on your own in open spaces, due to the attractiveness of this kind of "treasure" for various animals that will begin to dig up intimate garbage. It is best to wrap the used contraceptive in a piece of toilet paper or paper towel and throw it in the general trash. It is also noted that the packaging of these products from plastic and foil, which does not decompose, is not environmentally friendly.
The information on how thorough the approach to such problematic waste in developed countries is in practice is rather general. In Germany, for example, such waste ends up in the so-called. "Other garbage" collected in black bins, the contents of which are taken out every 2-4 weeks. Apparently, the handling of such garbage consists in its thermal destruction or burial at specially equipped landfills, depending on the adopted circulation scheme in a particular area. That is, separately collected recyclable materials in Germany and a number of other developed countries are largely separated from such unseemly waste already at the stage of their formation.
And only in one English-language article devoted to the communal problems of the Indian city of Pune (the city is located 150 km east of Mumbai and has approximately 5 million inhabitants), it was possible to find information about "unsightly" waste as a significant communal problem requiring a special solution. For example, the city's nine sludge treatment stations report the problem of large quantities of used condoms entering wastewater treatment plants, especially on weekends and holidays... On average, the number of condoms collected at all wastewater treatment plants per week is about 20,000, which have to be separated from the sludge and sent to the landfill. The Pune administration's environmental and health departments have announced their intention to develop a policy for the management of used condoms and hygiene absorbents, which are biomedical waste and must be disposed of separately from other types of household waste.
Type 2. Used medical products (medical waste at home)
In Russia...
The rules for handling them are spelled out in the aforementioned SanPiN 2.1.7.2790-10. These rules are rather general, universal, and also do not take into account the need to introduce the best available technologies in this area. But even the basic requirements for the disposal of hazardous medical waste from medical institutions, given in SanPiN, are often unsatisfactory: according to various estimates, only 1-3% of healthcare facilities in the Russian Federation have special installations for the disinfection of waste, other institutions neutralize infected waste using artisanal methods. Often, the total mass of medical waste of different hazard classes, without sufficient preliminary treatment, is disposed of at solid waste landfills or landfills under the guise of low-hazard household waste.
Subtype 2.1. Used dressings (cotton wool, plaster)
It should be borne in mind that hazardous medical waste is generated not only in hospitals. Obviously, even minor household injuries in absolutely or relatively healthy people cause the appearance of class B medical waste in a mixed trash can: cotton wool, bandages, plasters soaked in blood and medicinal and disinfecting ointments. It seems like little things, but it is unpleasant to find them in the volume of valuable recyclable materials. And if this slightly injured person is sick, for example, with hepatitis B, then it is also not safe.
Subtype 2.2. Used syringes (needles) for injection
And there is also a significant contingent of people who constantly have to undergo various medical procedures at home, and sometimes outside the home. These are not necessarily bedridden patients of advanced age. Often these are young, energetic people, adolescents, children, from whose appearance one can hardly guess that they are "rewarded" with luggage chronic diseases, live only thanks to substitution therapy with medications and various medical manipulations carried out as routinely and regularly as a "relatively healthy person" is in the habit of brushing his teeth and taking a shower.
So, for example, in some diseases (insulin-dependent diabetes, multiple sclerosis, various severe pain syndromes, etc.) people are forced to constantly inject themselves with vital drugs. Obviously, the most hazardous waste In the home of those in need of such therapy, there will be injection devices with blood-contaminated needles. One should not believe in such a deep consciousness of people exhausted by their own health problems, which will induce them to take used materials that fall under the definition of "class B medical waste" for disposal at the nearest or attached healthcare facility. And practically none of the healthcare institutions, with all their might, is given such an opportunity (remember: only 1-3 (!)% Of healthcare institutions in Russia have the opportunity to safely dispose of highly hazardous and potentially hazardous medical waste on their territory, in accordance with SanPiN).
There is also another, asocial, contingent of people with whom the average person who is illiterate in medical matters, in the first place, associates independent injections. These are, of course, injection drug addicts. It should be noted that waste from injecting drugs poses a much greater danger than waste from injecting drugs used for various non-communicable diseases (of course, there are combined forms of diseases), since people who use intravenous drugs are a reservoir of pathogens of hepatitis B, C, D and HIV infection.
How many of you have never seen thin syringes with green rods scattered in the park, on the playground, in the front door ...? Sometimes they show up in the mailbox. Never fumble with your hand in a semi-dark box in search of a letter or receipt lying around: it is quite possible to stumble upon the needle of an infected drug addict syringe! True, infectious disease researchers have long established the fact that HIV is not resistant to environmental conditions and quickly dies outside the human body. However, for the purpose of preventing injecting HIV transmission, it should be assumed that a used syringe or needle (without sterilization) may contain live virus for several days. Other dangerous viruses, such as hepatitis B, are much more resistant to external environment than HIV. In the external environment at room temperature, the hepatitis B virus can persist for up to several weeks: even in a dried and invisible blood stain, on a razor blade, or the end of a needle.
Obviously, with the possible manual sorting of solid household waste, such inclusions not only cause extremely unpleasant emotions, but also can turn out to be very hazardous to health.
Subtype 2.3. Other used medical products used on an outpatient basis for various diseases and pathologies
In this group of waste, one can recall many unpleasant and even shocking objects for a relatively healthy man in the street. For example, fragments of a dropper system, elements of dialysis machines used at home, used test strips to determine the level of glucose and other substances in blood and other biological fluids, etc.
At the same time, even the simplest and familiar devices, for example, for the treatment of ENT organs (pipettes, spray bottles) can be a source of foreign pathogenic flora.
What about disposable handkerchiefs thrown into the general trash? There can certainly be found host of unpleasant living creatures from the microworld: from the simplest ARVI to highly pathogenic influenza and even tuberculosis.
Or, for example, such a small-scale waste as contact lenses that have reached the recommended wear period? It seems to be a negligible waste of polymeric material (are there negligible waste of regularly produced products?), But at the same time it was in contact with the mucous membrane and lacrimal secretions of a person.
Perhaps the allocation of such waste against the background of other, global, problems with the same waste, this is "catching fleas" on the present stage technological development of the sphere of handling household waste... But, on the other hand, it is impossible to deny the sanitary and epidemiological ill-being of the mass of solid household waste.
Abroad...
I will briefly describe the materials on foreign experience in solving the problem of this type of waste.
For example, the US Municipal Solid Waste report categorizes medical waste from households as other non-durable mixed waste. In 2005, the amount of such waste in the United States amounted to about 4.3 million tons, or 1.7% of the total amount of solid waste.
The Colorado Department of Environment and Public Health issued a special bulletin in 2005 on the management of medical waste (including used injection materials) generated at home. It strongly recommends not throwing such waste into the general trash, but contacting specialized organizations for their disposal (although it does not say how expensive the disposal of such waste is for citizens and what percentage of the population uses such services). This document also states that, if it is impossible to contact one of the specialized organizations, medical waste (especially containing points contaminated with blood or other biological materials) should be packed in a tightly closed container made of dense plastic or tin. At the same time, it is not recommended to use a container made of recyclable material (it can probably be mistakenly sorted at the station), and, in the case of using such containers, they should be clearly marked with information about the contents with a potential infectious hazard.
Type 3. Products light industry and personal hygiene items that have lost their consumer properties
Subtype 3.1. Underwear
In Russia...
Such a widespread element of women's wardrobe as nylon tights and other hosiery, as a rule, very quickly loses its consumer properties, it simply breaks. Sometimes such a product is generally disposable. If you are a woman who at least sometimes wears a skirt outside the summer season, then you probably remember how sometimes with annoyance you throw new tights or stockings into the trash bin, by chance, caught on the furniture on the day they were removed from the plastic-cardboard packaging. V Soviet time nylon products were in short supply and were worn more carefully, and holes and "arrows", at times, were repeatedly sewn up. In everyday life, the product of their disposal, the "reuse" step, was also popular - knitted washcloths and door mats made of old tights and stockings cut into strips (Fig. 3.1).
Rice. 3.1. Rug from nylon tights (
Wet wipes are comfortable and make life easier. They are especially appreciated by travelers and parents of small children. But such wipes are not at all environmentally friendly - they are practically not recyclable.
Wet wipes, which appeared in the 70s of the last century as a means of hygiene for babies, certainly made life much easier for parents. Thanks to them, you can not worry if a child gets dirty during a walk, throws a toy on the dirty ground, or wants to eat a freshly bought fruit. Over time, their convenience was appreciated by people. different ages and type of activity. They are used for removing makeup, when traveling, for antibacterial purposes and for household use.
Even astronauts on the ISS use wet wipes to protect themselves from radiation during solar flares. According to Russian cosmonaut Sergei Prokopyev, during magnetic storms packets of wet wipes are laid along the walls of the cabins - they, like any wet object, reduce the amount of absorbed radiation.
Maybe in the case of radiation, napkins really save, but in most cases people use them even when it is possible to simply wash their hands with soap and water.
The Marine Conservation Society estimates that there are about 27 napkins for every 100 meters of UK beach.
Some of them are washed off into the sea and, as a result, end up in the stomachs of marine animals, which mistake the tissue for jellyfish.
At the same time, napkins are made from a mixture of synthetic cellulose and plastic fibers, impregnated with a solution of chemical ingredients, including softeners, fragrances, preservatives and antibacterial agents. With this composition, the wipes do not decompose, so they cannot be washed off or composted. However, many throw them into the toilet, this becomes the cause of the sewer blockage.
Once on landfills, they dry out and become so light that they take off from the slightest breath of wind. As a result, along with the bags, wet wipes dot all the space around the polygons.
In addition, the artificial flavors and antibacterial agents that saturate the fabric poison the soil.
At the same time, wet wipes are very difficult to recycle, therefore, even in countries of the world with a developed system of separate waste collection, they are sent to common containers for non-recyclable waste.
However, there are exceptions: special technological lines capable of successfully processing waste of used wet wipes.
For example, Tekstrim Group of Companies in Ivanovo declares its readiness to buy waste of wet wipes in order to then process them into regenerated fiber.
If it is not possible to hand over napkins for processing, you need to pay attention to the fact that they are made from natural fibers when buying. A number of manufacturers - including Natracare, CannyMum and others - have opted for a material that, when released into its natural environment, is easily compostable.
In addition, they add a minimum of preservatives and fragrances to the wipes, which makes the products even safer for the environment. Such napkins even to the touch differ from ordinary ones - they are more like wet paper than fabric, they tear more easily, but they also decompose more easily.
Another eco-friendly alternative is a germicidal lotion or gel that is easy to wipe on your hands while walking.
You can even make your own reusable wet wipes. This will require soft pieces of cloth such as flannel, olive oil, castile soap, and essential oil.
In a glass warm boiled water pour a tablespoon of oil and soap and drop a few drops essential oil for the scent. Stir the mixture and pour over the fabric. After 10-15 minutes, drain the excess liquid and place the napkins in a storage container. These pieces of fabric can easily replace wet wipes, and after use they can be washed and re-soaked in solution. You can also make disposable napkins by replacing the tissue with a roll of paper towels.
Guys, we put our soul into the site. Thank you for
that you discover this beauty. Thanks for the inspiration and the goosebumps.
Join us at Facebook and In contact with
What people do not throw into the sewer. Among the unpleasant plumbing finds are plastic bottles, bricks, and even clothing. Of course, intelligent tenants would never dispose of waste in such a barbaric way. But who would have thought that harmless items like dental floss or face masks could cause blockages?
Today site prepared a list of things that should not be thrown into the sewer under any circumstances.
1. Toilet paper
There are serious arguments about whether or not you can flush toilet paper down the toilet. Most experts are inclined to believe that this will not do any harm, but only if the house has a central sewage system. However, if a septic tank was designed during construction, then it is strictly forbidden to throw foreign objects into it.
However, in different countries the attitude to this sensitive issue is also different. Traveler and enthusiast Matt Kitson has created a whole, where he tells in which countries you can flush toilet paper, and where it is better not to do it.
2. Dental floss
Dental floss is made of fibrous material. Therefore, it can collect inside the sewer pipes and form blockages. In addition, throwing the thread down the drain is very unfriendly - synthetic fiber does not decompose and is harmful to the environment.
3. Chewing gum
Chewing gum does not dissolve in water, and it can easily stick to pipes and form a blockage. It is for these reasons that the gum should not be thrown down the drain or flushed down the sink.
4. Fish
The situation when the deceased aquarium fish washed down the drain, it seems quite common. However, this is not a good idea - the bodies of the unfortunate fish can clog the drain, and besides, it is extremely unhygienic.
Representatives of municipal services in Canada have gone further: they ask residents of the province of Alberta not to flush live fish down the toilet. Experts note that goldfish, let down by careless owners into the toilet, take over the ponds, displacing local living creatures.
5. Plaster
An ordinary adhesive plaster has a rather complex composition. It is made from an alloy of fats, wax, resins, rubber and other ingredients in various variations. Such a "cocktail" does not dissolve in water and can cause clogging of sewer pipes.
6. Contact lenses
Contact lenses are made of polymer material that does not degrade for years. Of course, a tiny lens is unlikely to clog a sewer pipe, but it can harm the environment. Experts estimate that more than 20 tons of lenses end up in the sewers every year and pollute the water.
7. Cat feces
Sewerage is designed to remove water-soluble waste, which includes the excrement of domestic animals. However, experts strongly advise against flushing the contents of the litter box down the toilet. After an hour or two, the cat's waste turns to stone and can get stuck in the maze of sewer pipes. Remember, the entire contents of the tray must be disposed of with your solid household waste.
8. Chlorine bleach
Chlorine-based sanitary ware cleaners are highly corrosive. So aggressive that they can damage pipes if used too often. In fact, the toilet does not need to be cleaned daily with industrial cleaning products. Vinegar is preferred instead to help get rid of lime deposits.
9. Face mask
Clay face masks cannot be rinsed down the sink. Small particles settle on the inner surface of the pipes and over time contribute to the formation of a large blockage. It is better to remove the top layer of the mask with a napkin, and rinse the remaining small particles with water - they are safe for sewage.
It is no secret that some companies misuse the terms “green”, “green”, “biodegradable” to play down the impact of materials and the negative effects that occur after a thing ends up in a landfill. In reality, decomposition can take many decades. We offer you to study popular myths about the so-called biodegradable things and find out what to choose if you want to really take care of nature.
Compostable VS Biodegradable
First, let's figure out what is the difference between words.Compostable and Biodegradable... The first means that the product is most likely completely safe for nature and after a while it will continue to exist in the cycle of substances, turning into carbon dioxide and water.CompostableProducts are often made from natural materials such as cellulose, corn and potato starches, and other plant materials.
It is quite another matter with the "biodegradable" thing destroyed in nature by bacteria and fungi - here the manufacturer has a lot of ways to evade the question: "When will it decompose?" The decomposition period of some goods can even reach 300 years, since there are simply no conditions at the landfill that provide this process.
It would seem, why is it worse than ordinary bags or disposable plastic goods? The fact that the production of things from starch and other "biodegradable" materials is irrational in countries where it is impossible to properly compost and recycle them. Also, production costsmuch more resources - to ensure the rapid decomposition of such plastics, special additives are used (for example, d2w), which accelerate the decomposition of the material under the influence of sunlight, heat and oxygen. Such plastic products break down into plastic fragments, which eventually turn into microplastics, which penetrate into soil and water and begin to travel along the food chain, entering living organisms, including human bodies.
Myths as they are
Myth # 1. A paper bag is more environmentally friendly than a plastic bag.
If after the purchase and the first or second transportation of goods, it would not break, and you could use it for many more years - perhaps! Often, this opportunity disappears with the first wet, the bag is easily torn, leaks and goes to the trash. It will not bring any benefit to nature.
Why? After all, this is not plastic, and it will decompose faster.
Yes, indeed it will decompose much faster than plastic and after it becomes garbage, it will bring less harm to nature. But let's look more broadly. To create one paper bag goes away about the same amount of energy as three plastic ones need. The production of paper is one of the most polluting nature. In addition to a large amount of energy, it also requires a huge expenditure of water, which is seriously polluted by chemicals. The service life, strength and practicality of this bag is inferior to the plastic one, so buying them for a large amount is pointless.
What are the options?
The best option is to use reusable items. A tote bag that will last you for years is a really working way to cut down on trash and keep the environment safe.
Myth # 2. Disposable takeaway cups are made of paper and are environmentally friendly.
Every morning, thousands of coffees are poured into disposable to-go cups called paper cups. However, few people think that to ensure integrity and waterproofness under the influence of a hot drink, there is a thin plastic film on the inside. According to the company I-Marketing , annually Russian networks use approximately6 billion"Paper" cups that are bound to go to the landfill and spoil the environment. In addition, the lid of the glass, made of polystyrene, when heated, can release carcinogenic substances that will enter our body along with a hot drink.
And remember: if you throw a "paper" cup into a waste paper bin, you will not only force employees processing plant do double work (they'll have to sort the cup and send it to the landfill for you, as the film makes it unrecyclable), but you will also stain clean waste paper! In addition, plastic, polystyrene, from which lids for "paper" cups are made, are accepted for processing in a limited number of cities in Russia, which can be counted on the fingers of one hand.
But this problem also has a solution. And you already know him.Enjoy drinking on the go - get yourself a reusable thermo mug or a small thermos. Zero waste, zero problems.
The movement to move away from disposable cups in favor of reusable alternatives"My cup, please" explains why it is important to use your thermos mug and provides a map to find points where you will definitely have coffee or other drinks in it. Find out exactly how to achieve this from
Myth number 3. Wet wipes are made from natural materials and do not harm the environment
Wet wipes, of course, make our life easier - they can wipe dirt from the body when there is no water and soap nearby, some have antiseptic properties and are used to treat wounds. But very often people abuse this product and use it even when their hands can simply be washed.
What is the problem? Cloth wipes won't hurt anyone.
The main material used to make wet wipes is synthetics. Even in developed countries, there are problems with the correct disposal and recycling of synthetics, so they are sent to unsorted waste and landfills. Also, their antibacterial impregnation strongly poisons the soil, and animals can choke on the napkin itself.
However, in addition to this, there is also many reasons why it makes no sense to use wet wipes: they do not cleanse the skin well, clog the sewer system and can get into the stomachs of animals that have taken the wipes for food.
Are there any alternatives?
You can replace wet wipes with damp paper ordo it yourself reusable wet wipes. Better yet, not be lazy and wash your hands, or in extreme cases, use a tincture of calendula or a bactericidal gel (after which bottle for recycling).
Myth # 4. Biodegradable dishes and bags decompose quickly in landfills.
Many companies are really thinking about protecting the environment by refusing or replacing disposable plastic tableware with more environmentally friendly alternatives like starch. Starch spoons are not much more expensive than plastic spoons and, it seems, should be less hazardous to nature and humans. Unfortunately, there are a couple of "buts".
First, this material is compostable in the presence of targeted collection and conditions for composting, since starch spoons, in addition to starch, also contain "bonding" compounds that are potentially hazardous to nature when they go to a landfill. That is, throwing such dishes into unsorted waste, and not composting it at home, in the country or in a special place, we send to the landfill, again, a potentially dangerous thing, but also made from food crops. Hence the second "but" follows: starch is obtained from potential food - corn, potatoes, etc. These resources are also very valuable when food is scarce in many places on earth. With packages, the situation is the same more difficult : in many stores there are "oxo-degradable" bags, which also pollute the environment with microplastics, but disintegrate into it within a couple of months.
But won't it all decay in the end?
Yes, but it is not known when and mixed with all substances polluting the soil and water. In this case, oxo-degradable bags will add even more dangerous microplastics to this mix.
What to do?
Influence delivery services, cafes and restaurants. Disposable tableware and bags should be a thing of the past, giving way to compact and durable reusable appliances that you want to take with you and beautiful shopping bags.
Myth number 5. Cotton swabs, discs and other hygiene items must be disposable
For the production of cotton swabs, about 32 billion liters water. This makes their one-time use irrational, because both the rod made of polypropylene and the soft synthetic material will decompose for an extremely long time in a landfill, namely, about 400 years.
How do you clean your ears then?
You can buy a bamboo or iron stick, on which it is convenient to wrap the required amount of cotton wool (ear cleaning or mimikaki). It is much more comfortable and possibly safer for your ears, although cleaning your ears with sticks or other foreign objects is not recommended. Also, it is worth getting reusable makeup remover pads and just rinse them well or wash them after use.
If polypropylene takes 400 years to decompose, can't disposable straws either?
Yes, and also desirable refuse from disposable plastic dishes, appliances, balloons and tissue paper. In many cafes, iron or glass tubes (even made from pasta) began to appear, which can be used many times. You can also buy them for yourself - it is more pleasant to drink from such a straw, and a brush is often included in the kit to facilitate cleaning. The production of other things, again, is irrational - the ball will burst very soon and end up in the stomach of the animal, forests are dying for the sake of making paper handkerchiefs and napkins.
Yes, perhaps it is worth reconsidering your whims for the sake of saving nature, because such a culture of consumption is useless will not lead to good .
Prepared by Marat Shakhgereev
Image source: Depositphotos