The figures:
According to the Australian Consumer's Association's article (Which is better for the environment - cloth or disposable nappies' first published by CHOICE in August 1999, the following figures were used:
The average baby uses 6 nappies per day for 2.5 years which equals 734kg of solid waste. According to statistics from the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and disposable nappy manufacturer Kimberley-Clark, 800 MILLION disposable nappies are used in Australia EVERY year, and this totals 111,220 tonnes of solid waste. As a total of urban solid waste (which includes everything - municipal, commercial, industrial, building and demolition waste) disposable nappies are about 0.71% by weight or 1.24% by volume (2% and 3.5% respectively of domestic waste). This requires 145,000 cubic metres of land-fill space - space that is costing us money and is quickly filling up. These figures are shocking, when there is a viable alternative available. (One approximation that I have read that I could relate to is that this amount is enough to fill the Melbourne Cricket Ground THREE times over).
It also takes one MILLION pine trees per year in Australia to make disposable nappies (that's about 2,000 per day or 4-5 trees per child). So far, I have been unable to determine the amount of non-renewable natural gas used per year or the amount of plastic and packing material used in Australia. (However as an indication, Canadian figures are 77,000 cubic metre, 8,800 tonnes 9,800 tonnes respectively).
Can you imagine chopping down 4 or 5 trees closest to your home, chopping them up and bleaching them with chemicals that will then get released into your backyard and your neighbourhoods air, and then dumping the 734kg of solid waste that will result into your backyard? (including all the raw fecal matter that most people don't empty into the toilet first). What's even worse - 67% of the parents around you will be doing the same thing (67% is the disposable use stated by Kimberly-Clark).
Incidentally, I have found no mention of the impact of disposable baby wipes and the chemicals that they contain, however, they (including the manufacture of the wipes) still must be considered in an environmental impact analysis.
'Disposable or Cloth Nappies?…the choice is yours'.
I recently obtained a leaflet from Kimberly-Clark Australia titled 'Disposable or Cloth Nappies?…the choice is yours'. Unfortunately, only big manufacturers like K-C have the money to publish propaganda to support their products, (as was the case of Proctor and Gamble's very successful multi-million dollar advertising campaign exposing the virtues of disposables despite the fact that they were later found guilty of using false and misleading advertising).
Personally, I find KCA's pamphlet misleading. I'm sure other parents would too, so I would like to make some comments on it.
Firstly they state that disposables keep babies drier. This is because of the super absorbant polymer gel used (which they quote a reference stating that is safe for consumers). Essentially, this gel means you can leave your baby marinating in his or her own excretion for a long time without it leaking onto clothes. Irrespective of wether a nappy feels wet or dry, it should be changed as soon as possible after it has been soiled to reduce bacteria growth. This is part of the reason that nappy rash has become an acceptable part of babyhood - the bacteria and heat build up in disposable nappies causes nappy rash - babies who are in cloth rarely get nappy rash, and if they do, it clears very quickly (reason: more frequent changes, and cloth breathes so the air can circulate). For what its worth, a fleece liner works to keep baby's bum dry, plus its re-useable. It is my personal belief that in 15 or 20 years from now, the disposable nappy industry will be facing the same situation as cigarette companies. It would not surprise me in the least if at least some of the new cancers and high rates of infertility problems, endometriosis etc get linked to disposable nappy use in the future. I think it worth mentioning that in the US there have been a number of infant deaths from choking and suffocation by plastic disposables and inhalation of the super absorbent polymer gels.
Next on the pamphlet is that faecal contamination is reduced by disposables because of leakage prevention. Personally, I've seen more explosions out of disposables than cloth, even towelling square. To be honest, my daughter has not had any leaks out of these cloth nappies because of the leg and waist elastic (but don't take my word for it, as I am selling theseJ aren't I?) Faecal contamination occurs when change areas are not cleaned properly and when hands are not washed properly. That's basic hygiene common sense.
Then the pamphlet says that cloth nappies have not improved in several decades. Hmmmm. Wrong. K-C needs to keep up with the times. Several decades ago, cloth nappies were single layer towelling squares that need folding. Today's cloth nappies are fitted with elastic, velcro or snaps and have been available around the world for a number of years. Kimberly-Clark can be forgiven somewhat as these products aren't available here (or at least I have not seen them yet), but seeing as I make and sell cloth nappies that are like disposables in design, I think that this makes KCA's statement that cloth hasn't improved in several decades completely false and misleading.
The next few items on the pamphlet are a good lesson in 'avoid the issue' answers.
The first - is washing at home economical? This should really be a yes or no answer. However, the pamphlet mentions the cheapest method of home washing as soak and wash on cold, using vinegar, cheapest detergent, no fabric conditioner and line dry then go on to say that the majority of people don't do this, instead they use a nappy soaker, detergent, fabric softener and tumble dry. Interestingly enough, according to the Australian Consumers Association research published in CHOICE November 1993, a survey they conducted found that name brand disposables will cost $3,055 (no-name disposables will cost $1,105) over the first 2.5 years and cloth nappies washed in warm water and dried in a drier would cost $845.00 (or if you soak in a Nappy soaker, rinse in cold and line dry it will cost $390.00). (for more info, read my article on washing instructions).
Also, I believe the daily water used by a toilet trained child or adult flusing a toilet several times a day would be a lot more than one or two wash cycles a week, and you can't exactly stop people from flushing the toilet can you?
The second - are nappy services a good option? They actually state here that 42 Huggies is the average rate of use, but nappy service requires 70 per week (10 per day) There's a subtle advertising gimmick - use Huggies=less time changing baby. I digress, but their point was Nappy services cost $21.00 per week, as does the cost of a toddlers supply of Huggies. The CHOICE report mentioned above states the cost as $2,145 to $3,055 so that's a fair statement. Of course K-C must then point out to the reader that you still have the issue of wet cloth on skin and leakage, and you must of course include the cost of overpants to 'minimise' (assuring you it will still happen) soiling of clothing bedding and furniture. And they remind you not to forget the huge cost of pins and other fasteners you will need. (I'll give you a hint - probably the cost of half a packet of Huggies).
The next point is whether or not disposables are competitive in pricing which for Huggies ranges from 33c each /$14.00 a week for newborn, 40 cents/$17.00 for crawler and 50 cents/$21.00 per week for toddler size. Average price per packet $11.00 to $13.00 and average use 42 per week. They forget to mention that many breastfed babies poop frequently (mine did 14 a day for the first 6 weeks).
52 weeks x 2.5 years = 130 weeks (most kids in disposables will go close to 3 years before training). Lets say for arguments sake, using KCA's figures:
10 weeks in newborn @ $14.00/week = $140.00
20 weeks in crawler @ $17.00/week = $340.00
100 weeks in toddler @ $21.00/week = $2100.00
Total: $2580.00
Considerably less than the figures stated by CHOICE magazine way back in 1993 ($3,055 for name brand disposables over 2.5 years), but maybe things were much more expensive then and maybe CHOICE also included the cost of baby wipes, lets say $4.50/week for 130 weeks: $585.00
So K-C premium disposables will cost approximately $3165.00 over 2.5 years (add another $500 or so if your child doesn't toilet train until 3 years). CHOICE'S cost of cloth, warm water wash and dryer $845.00 for the same time. And K-C calls those figures 'competitive'? Good towelling flat nappies will cost around $30.00 per dozen - but even if you spent $300.00 for two dozen fitted nappies, the savings are huge!
Next on the Huggies pamphlet is the environmental considerations.
They mention that cotton growth and manufacture has its own environmental impacts. I wish they had listed them in more detail than that, but they don't. They do say that the cotton plant is particularly attractive to pests (so are my roses) and that this requires significant pesticide input. Something I find unfortunate is that us Australians like a lot of cotton clothing - yet we are obviously not concerned enough about any environmental impact to insist on organic cotton - there is not one organic cotton grower here. Organic cotton would make this a mute point obviously, but the amount of cloth manufactured into cotton nappies is minimal, I believe that 10kg of cotton makes enough cotton nappies for one child which can then be re-used on subsequent children. Any residual chemical from cotton growth that may be left on the nappy is washed out after the first one or two washes.
Pulp manufacture is then discussed (minus any mention of pesticides, chemicals and water use for the pine plantations). They use pine thinnings for their pulp. What, all of the one million pine trees per year are pine thinnings? On a brighter note, K-C doesn't use chlorine bleach (too much research proving carcinogenic properties of that). Apparently hydrogen-peroxide produces oxygen (yippee we need that) and leaves negligible residue in the environment - they don't say what or how much but go on to point out that the impact of laundering at home (2 or 3 washes per week) uses large amounts of energy (and tree chopping & pulping equipment, disposable nappy plants, plastic packaging, and transport doesn't?) . They tell us that we must also consider the significant water use-age (I recommend draining grey water into the garden for home laundry) - they state around 19 tonnes for every tonne of nappy service laundry. A true comparison can't be made as they don't mention the total amount of water used in the growth and manufacture of wood and the manufacture of disposable nappies, however, I have found this quote from an objective source:
"Single-use (disposable) diapers consume 70% more energy than the average reusable diaper per diaper change."
In regards to disposables contributing to landfill, they re-iterate the less than 1% figures mentioned above, but ask us how interesting it is that food and garden waste account for 56% of our total domestic waste (NSW EPA State of Environment Report 1997). Then they go on to say how they have reduced the bulk of their premium nappies in the last five years.
The next point is a doozy (and will bring me back to the previous point as well). The pamphlet asks 'Are Disposables Biodegradable? This is a simple yes or no answer. Instead we are told that 75% of the material is disposable but for biodegradation to occur, environmental elements must be able to get to it. Although preferable to what we had in the past, our modern landfill sites minimise air and moisture access which breakdown waste. So it's the landfill sites fault and not the disposable nappy. Wouldn't have anything to do with the plastic cover of disposables that seals the contents when you roll it into a neat little bundle and stick it together with the sticky tabs, would it?
Going back to the previous point, I've got to mention that food and garden waste (as anyone who's been to a rubbish dump will know) are easily biodegraded. I have seen estimated reports of disposables taking anywhere from 100 to 500 years to decompose.
Finally, the pamphlet wonders if there are any 'Potential Health risks'? The answer given is a quote - Sobsey, MD, 1978. "Field Survey of Enteric Viruses in Solid Waste Landfill Leachates". Amer. J. Public Health, 68:858.
Firstly, I have to say that with all the research power and $$ that KCA have, couldn't they find a more recent study supporting this argument than one published in 1978? At a time, I might add, when disposable diapers (as they are called in the US) were not used as much as they are now, and when medical technology was in the dark ages compared to today?
Well, for arguments sake, here is a quote from about the same decade last century - According to the Baylor College of Medicine (1975), "babies and small children excrete large numbers of enteric (intestinal) viruses". This is especially so after inoculation when the infant will excrete live viruses for 24 hours. As a direct result of this, the World Health Organisation has called for an end to the inclusion of urine and feacal matter in solid wastes.
I have to ask the question - if it is not a problem as Kimberly-Clark claim, why is it ILLEGAL to put human waste into our land fill sites?
The concluding paragraph in the pamphlet tells us that it is important to include all factors as part of the debate. I hope that the information that 'I' have presented here assists you in making an informed choice. Oh - one more thing. This pamphlet didn't address the issue of what is more comfortable for baby - paper and plastic or cloth nappies. Personally, I would rather have cotton underwear than have to sit in a paper lined plastic garbage bag for two and a half years, which really is all a disposable nappy is. Older babies and children that are raised in cloth nappies are good indicators that disposables are uncomfortable because they usually won't wear one, and if forced to often develop nappy rash (especially with those Aloe Vera ones). You can see for yourself what feels better, just rub a soft flannellette nightgown and the inside of a paper disposable against your face.
"Parents have been deluged by confusing studies and advertising from the "disposable" diaper industry. Parents should remember that reusing materials is the best way to prevent waste and conserve resources - PERIOD!"
- Environmental Action Foundation, Washington, D.C. -- source: Lehrburger, Mullen, Jones, Diapers: Environmental Impacts and Lifecycle Analysis, January 1991