Search

Disposable paper cups comprise typical single-use plastic items, as they are lined internally with a thin plastic coating for waterproofing. They are consumed at a staggering rate worldwide, with the UK alone consuming around 7 million cups daily, thus annually producing around 30,000 tonnes of paper cup waste. Contrary to popular belief, less than 1 in 400 paper cups is currently recycled in the UK, which is in stark contrast to the waste hierarchy and the European Commission's ambitious Circular Economy Action Plan. Paper cups typically end up in landfill sites or even improperly disposed of, contributing to (micro)plastic waste and potentially polluting the world's oceans. The implications of the latter are not fully known yet and cannot be quantified by existing life cycle impact assessment methods. By employing the life cycle assessment methodology, UK's annual carbon footprint from paper cup consumption was found to be 75 kt of carbon dioxide equivalents, which is similar to that of manufacturing 11,500 mid-size passenger cars. Globally, their environmental footprint was found to be comparable to that of some 1.5 M average European inhabitants, indicating the nature and extent of the single-use plastics problem, which paper cups are just a typical example of. Paper cup recycling could reduce this environmental footprint by up to 40%, whereas switching to reusable cups appears to be more environmentally sustainable, achieving a threefold reduction in carbon emissions, which at global scale is more than twice Malta's annual carbon footprint. Results indicate that consumerism along with small daily choices, such as using reusable cups or bags instead of their disposable counterparts, could play a huge role in climate change. At policy level, no concrete measures to curb the superfluous consumption of paper cups, as well as of other single-use plastic items that are becoming increasingly ubiquitous, have materialised. Furthermore, it appears that decision- and policy-makers tend to step in to curtail wasteful and polluting practices only when environmental problems have started to generate widespread concern, instead of undertaking preventative policy measures. Image 1 • The environmental sustainability of disposable paper cups was examined. • 75 kt CO 2eq are emitted annually in the UK and 7.5 Mt CO 2eq globally. • Switching to reusable cups axes carbon emissions by threefold. • Robust LCIA methods should be introduced to account for (micro)plastic pollution. • Existing policy on single use plastics appears to be too little too late. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Maximising resource‐use efficiency, productivity and environmental sustainability are all fundamental requirements to raise global food production by ~70 per cent in order to feed a world population of ~9.7 billion people by 2050. Perhaps the most vital resource within our capacity to achieve this goal is our soil. Broadly, the fundamental question concerns whether or not satisfying this production demand will accelerate soil degradation, climate change, and the loss of soil carbon stocks. This paper builds upon the outputs of the UK Charity 'Food & Farming Futures' (chaired by Lord Curry of Kirkharle) virtual workshop held on 23 March 2021, entitled 'Capturing the Potential of Soil'. The event focussed on the link between soil health, primarily soil organic carbon (SOC), and agricultural productivity. Supported with commentaries by Professor Pete Smith (University of Aberdeen and Science Director of the Scottish Climate Change Centre of Expertise) and Professor Steve McGrath (Head of Sustainable Agricultural Sciences at Rothamsted Research), specific focus will be given to the research challenges within the UK's ability to improve soil health and functionality, the implementation priorities that must be held in order to improve soil management by 2050 and what the potential co‐benefits could be. These co‐benefits were scattered across environmental, economic, social and political issues, yet they may be summarised into six primary co‐benefits: developing natural capital, climate change mitigation, carbon trading, improvements in crop yield, animal performance and human health (nutrition). Additionally, the main barriers to improved soil management practices are centred on knowledge exchange‐regarding agri‐environmental techniques—whilst the most impactful solutions rely on soil monitoring, reporting and verification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biscuits are a major product category in the global confectionary sector. Despite this, their environmental impacts are poorly characterised. Therefore, this paper sets out to evaluate the life cycle environmental sustainability of the following widely-consumed types of biscuit, both at the product and sectoral levels: crackers, low fat/sugar, semi-sweet, chocolate-coated and sandwich biscuits with chocolate or vanilla cream. The results obtained through life cycle assessment demonstrate that, in addition to being healthier, low fat/sugar biscuits have the lowest impacts across most of the 18 categories considered. Chocolate-coated biscuits are environmentally the least sustainable. The most significant life cycle stage for all types is the raw materials production, causing 41%–61% of the total impacts, with flour, sugar and palm oil being the key hotspots. Replacing palm with rapeseed oil would improve five impacts but worsen another five, including a 34% increase in agricultural land occupation and marine eutrophication. Therefore, the cultivation and production of palm oil, rather than its replacement, should be targeted for improvements. The second most crucial stage is manufacturing, contributing up to 54% of the impacts, followed by transport with up to 35%. Reducing energy consumption by 25% in manufacturing would reduce primary energy demand by 8%–12%, fossil fuel depletion by 9%–12% and global warming potential by 6%–9%. The latter would increase by 55% if land use change related to cocoa was involved, despite a very small amount of cocoa in the biscuits (∼1%). The analysis at a sectoral level in the UK, the leading consumer of biscuits in Europe, reveals that biscuits contribute 7.4% of primary energy demand and 0.5% of greenhouse gas emissions of the whole UK food sector. These results can help guide manufacturers in mitigating the hotspots in the supply chain and consumers in selecting environmentally more sustainable biscuits. • The environmental sustainability of six types of biscuit is evaluated for the first time. • Low fat/sugar biscuits have the lowest impacts and chocolate-coated the highest. • Global warming potential of chocolate biscuits is 55% higher with land use change. • Flour, sugar and palm oil are the key hotpots, followed by biscuits manufacturing. • Biscuits contribute 7.4% of energy demand and 0.5% of GWP of the UK food sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years within the UK, behaviour change as a policy tool has gained popularity. Concurrently, the role of local authorities in both tackling unsustainability and reducing carbon emissions has become more prominent. This paper describes a recent study in the UK that aims to understand how local authorities are working to tackle unsustainability and encourage pro-environmental behaviour change in the population. Through interviews with local authority sustainability officers from London, this paper reviews the extent of sustainability work currently being undertaken by local authorities to assist residents transition to a more sustainable lifestyle. The study discusses key findings from the interviews, drawing on the commonalities and factors that influence local authority sustainability programmes. The key finding from these interviews is that there is a need for more robust monitoring and evaluation of local authority sustainability programmes. Robust evaluation would improve understanding of the potential contribution that local authority sustainability work could make towards addressing unsustainability and meeting national emission reduction targets. In addition, it would assist the development of the evidence-base on behaviour change interventions and their effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In the interest of climate change mitigation, policy makers, businesses and non-governmental organisations have devised initiatives designed to reduce in-use emissions whilst, at the same time, the number of energy-consuming products in homes, and household energy consumption, is increasing. Retailers are important because they are at the interface between manufacturers of products and consumers and they supply the vast majority of consumer goods in developed countries like the UK, including energy using products. Large retailers have a consistent history of corporate responsibility reporting and have included plans and actions to influence consumer emissions within them. This paper adapts two frameworks to use them for systematically assessing large retailers' initiatives aimed at reducing consumers' emissions. The Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD) is adapted and used to analyse the strategic scope and coherence of these initiatives in relation to the businesses' sustainability strategies. The ISM ‘Individual Social Material’ framework is adapted and used to analyse how consumer behaviour change mechanisms are framed by retailers. These frameworks are used to analyse eighteen initiatives designed to reduce consumer emissions from eight of the largest UK retail businesses, identified from publicly available data. The results of the eighteen initiatives analysed show that the vast majority were not well planned nor were they strategically coherent. Secondly, most of these specific initiatives relied solely on providing information to consumers and thus deployed a rather narrow range of consumer behaviour change mechanisms. The research concludes that leaders of retail businesses and policy makers could use the FSSD to ensure processes, actions and measurements are comprehensive and integrated, in order to increase the materiality and impact of their initiatives to reduce consumer emissions in use. Furthermore, retailers could benefit from exploring different models of behaviour change from the ISM framework in order to access a wider set of tools for transformative system change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports an investigation intended to obtain some understanding of how the working environment might influence the practice and knowledge of those involved in the management of healthcare waste. The National Health Service (NHS) has a continuing waste problem, and the way it manages waste harms the environment and consumes resources. It has been estimated that the carbon footprint of the NHS in England is approximately 20 million tons of CO2e. It has been suggested that better waste segregation could lead to more effective recycling, saving up to 42,000 tonnes of CO2. This qualitative study employed nonparticipant observation and semi-structured interviews. The interviews were carried out with the key informants within the participating neonatal intensive care unit. Findings from this study indicate that space and the physical arrangement of the environment are significant and influential factors in clinical practice. Where the clinical environment is not supportive, poor infection control and waste management practice is likely to occur. However, proximity of staff caused by a lack of physical space might facilitate situated learning and a collective development of knowledge in practice. The implementation of sustainable waste management practices would be more likely to succeed in an environment that facilitates correct waste segregation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The existing paradigm of UK flood risk management that privileges structural solutions over non-structural ones is evolving in response to threats posed by climate change and higher environmental standards required by the EC Water Framework Directive. This paper examines the contrasting reactions of DEFRA and the Scottish Executive. The Scottish ‘experiment’, which embraces a strong definition of sustainability, is contrasted with a weaker version emerging in England and Wales. Divergent levels of risk and histories of managing that risk explain many of these contrasts. Scotland's more radical approach has the potential to become a new paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]