Source: www.geocities.com/Wellesley/Atrium/8608/cloth-vs-disposable.htm

During the 1970s and 80s, throwaway diaper usage changed from an occasional-use product to an almost exclusive way of diapering babies. Perhaps as the disposable product became more available, the convienence of throwing it away after use was "too good to be true" for many busy parents. So in no time, disposables were found in almost every baby's household.

Now several generations of babies have been completely diapered in disposables. Since this is the standard practice in our society, few people even consider alternatives to disposable diapering. But as enviornmental issues became important to the mainstream public, and the practice of recycling became more common, people began to rethink the use of throw away products like diapers.

Cloth diapering proponents bring up the fact that tons of used disposables have piled up in our landfills. In fact, throwaway diapers make up the third most common item in our landfill spaces, behind paper products and food containers. Since the average disposable takes about 500 years to break down in a landfill, the proportion of diapers there is ever-increasing.

In addition to the sheer numbers of diapers in landfills, there is the concern of what they contain. The discarded human waste contains bacteria and viruses that cause intestinal illnesses, and also other illnesses that are excreted through the digestive tract, like polio and hepatitis. Even though polio isn't common in the US and Canada, the polio virus is shed from the intestines of every baby who has received the oral polio vaccine. I read somewhere, (and I will locate the source and list it here in the future), that it is illegal to deposit untreated human waste in landfills, because of the possiblity that landfill contents could seep into the ground water supply below. It seems though, that this law isn't enforcable at this time.

So in the 1980s, the ecological debate began. As the pro-cotton crowd pointed to the extreme numbers trees and plastics being used to make disposables, disposable diaper companies brought up the pesticide use in growing cotton. (although unbleached, organic cotton diapers are now available.) When the disposable companies mentioned that pollution is created in harvesting and transporting cotton to be made into diapers, the pro-cotton crowd pointed out that pollution is created in the manufacturing of disposables and their transport to the stores. And, when the disposable companies stated that human waste of babies was dumped into the local water supply through laundering, cotton proponents replied that laundered baby human waste goes where adult human waste goes: into the sewage system (which currently is our best choice of breaking down municipal waste and reusing our water resource) And what about the water used to launder cotton diapers? The amount of water to wash diapers is about the same as it is for a potty trained child or adult flushing the toilet.

It is true that diapering practices in general do leave their mark on the earth, just as simply being and living on this planet uses it's resources. We can help slow down the use of our resources, and even reuse them, if we tread as lightly as we can. It seems sensible to say that the reusing and recycling of products and resources of cloth diapering best preserves our enviornment.

bibliography and interesting reading

The Joy of Cloth Diapers Mothering, number 88, May/June, 1988

Diaper Wars Mothering, number 60, Summer, 1991

The Flagstaff Green Pages 2nd edition, November, 1993, published by the electronic graphics group, Flagstaff, Az.

The Diaper Debate – examining both sides of the cloth vs. disposable diapers debate
By Terri Shobbrook (Copyright 2005)

In 1961 Proctor and Gamble gave us Pampers – the one-use paper/plastic disposable diaper. Ten years later a Pennsylvania Boy Scout group, after conducting a highway cleanup, reported “that the largest single source of litter [was] the disposable diaper.” Today, one-use disposable diapers comprise 2% of the solid waste diverted to landfills. US Senators have introduced Bills designed to ban the use of disposable diapers and in 1990 twenty-four US States introduced legislation to reduce the use of disposable diapers.

Hundred’s and thousands of dollars are spent by both sides conducting studies comparing cloth and disposable diapers. In 1990 Proctor and Gamble sent “more than 14 million copies of a pamphlet [which included coupons] to US households stating that their diapers can be effectively composted in municipal solid-waste plants.” In 1991 The American Public Health Association and the American Academy for Pediatrics recommended that “only modern disposable paper diapers with absorbent gelling material” met their suggested standards for daycares. Others advocate that disposable diapers are more sanitary. In 1994 Proctor and Gamble settled out of court for misleading advertising regarding their claims of composting and recycling.

By 1998 only one in ten Canadian and US households were using cloth diapers. The National Association of Diaper Services membership dropped by 37% and 35% fewer cloth diapers were produced in 1997 as compared to 1996.  A 1999 study shows that certain disposable diaper brands released chemicals into the air causing eye, nose and throat irritation which included asthma-like symptoms. A German study in 2000 links disposable diaper use to male infertility.
(From:  The Politics of Diapering:  A Timeline of Recovered History.  Mothering, Issue 116, Jan/Feb 2003).  

Even now, over 40 years later, the cloth vs. disposable debate rages on. With advocates on both sides of the debate claiming that their diaper is more economical, healthy, convenient, and environmentally friendly how does the consumer decide? Let us look at the facts.

The Environmental Impact

• It takes 250,000 trees annually to produce diapers in the US or one-billion trees world-wide.
Although wood and wood products such as paper can be considered a renewable resource we need to remember that our forests are complex, fragile ecosystems. Selective logging, the practice of removing some trees and leaving the healthier ones standing, creates a more stable, sustainable environment for the water, fish, and the wildlife on the land. Clearcutting, a common practice, is the removal of all the trees and vegetation. Pine seedlings are then planted in rows and thus transform a once diversified forest ecosystem into a barren plantation of same-age, same-species trees.

• Annually In Canada 75.5 million pounds of paper goes into the production of 1.7 billion disposable diapers and in the United States 800 million pounds of paper goes into the manufacture of ten billion diapers.
In 1981 a proposed Disposable Diaper Ban Bill from Oregon reported that all of this paper, which could not be recycled, was only used once and then thrown away. It further stated that the diversion of this precious pulp/paper into disposable diapers was diminishing valuable resources and could be better used elsewhere.

• It takes about 30 lbs of cotton to manufacture 6 dozen diapers
Growing cotton can have a negative environmental impact. Cotton growers are a major user of harmful pesticides but organically grown cotton is becoming more readily available as is unbleached cotton or cotton bleached with hydrogen peroxide instead of chlorine bleach.

• Dioxin, a bi-product of the production of wood pulp, is a highly toxic chemical that has been linked to health issues such as cancer, birth defects, miscarriage, and immune-system depression.

• Waste water from the production of pulp, paper, and plastics used in disposable diapers contains harmful ingredients such as dioxins, sludge, solvents, and heavy metals.

• Waste water from washing cloth diapers is generally benign due to the use of biodegradable detergents.
Many cloth diaper manufacturers recommend the use of environmentally friendly laundry products. My Lil’ Miracle Inc. does not condone the use of chlorine bleach on their diapers. Its usage causes the product warranty to be “null and void”.

• A valuable, non-renewable, and diminishing resource, petroleum, is used to produce the plastic in the disposable diaper and in the packaging. 3.5 billon gallons of oil are used to produce 18 million disposable diapers each year.

• Cloth diapers require a cover or wrap.
The manufacture of the synthetic covers does have a negative impact on the environment. If you compare 25-30 covers (and that number may be high) to 6006 disposable diapers (and that number could go as high as 10,000) per child the negative impact of the covers can be put into perspective.

Advocates of disposables diapers claim that cloth diapers “consume more water and produce more sewage than disposables”. (Proctor and Gamble, Diapers and the Environment, 1991)

• It is unclear as to whether the P&G study refers to the actual production of the disposable diaper or if they are including the production of its components as well. The actual amount of water consumed is not indicated. 

• We do know that you use approximately 50 gallons of water every three days washing those cloth diapers. This is equivalent to an adult (or toilet-trained child) flushing the toilet 5 - 6 times per day. 
Let’s put this into perspective. Washing cloth diapers for approximately 2 ½ years will use about 20,000 gallons of water. Two adults taking a 5 minute daily shower each (and how many of us take a 5-minute shower?) will use, in those same 2 ½ years, almost 60,000 gallons of water. 

• As for the claim that cloth diapers create more sewage
… well, technically they are correct. Technically. Dumping human waste into landfills violates the World Health Organization guidelines and is technically illegal. Depositing feces laden disposable diapers into landfills creates a potential biohazard. There is the risk leakage which could cause the contamination of our drinking water with bacteria and live viruses. Fortunately, Landfills are fairly well constructed in North America and the risk of contamination is more of an issue in developing countries.

Disposable diaper packaging contains instructions on the proper disposal of the feces. The inner liner is supposed to be removed and flushed away.

• Most reports on both sides of the debate agree that disposable diapers contribute to 2% of the solid waste that goes into landfills. That 2% represents the 3rd largest contributor after newspapers and food and beverage containers.
Bluewater Recycling, from Grand Bend, Ontario (Canada) recently conducted a Waste Audit. They studied 83 households in a user-pay community over a one-month period (during the winter). They concluded that each household produces 360 kg of residential waste per year. Of that, 48% was directed to the bluebox. That left 187 kg that was directed to the landfill. Almost 25 kg/household/per year, 13%, was disposable diapers.

Despite Proctor and Gamble’s claim in 1991 that disposable diapers can be effectively composted in municipal solid waste plants the reality is that these facilities are not setup to compost diapers and likely will not be. The financial costs are too high. There are only 14 composting facilities in the United States and none in Canada.

• It takes a disposable diaper 500 years to decompose (contained in a plastic garbage bag and buried in a landfill).
This disposable diaper has only been used once.

• It takes a cloth diaper about 6 months to decompose.
This discarded cloth diaper has been used countless times as a diaper on at least one child in the family and then it has been turned into a rag or donated to a developing country for further use as a diaper. It has many practical uses before it eventually goes to the landfill.

Sources:
•The Diaper Dilemma:  The Environmental Cost of Diapers, The Diaper Dilemma:  Your Baby’s Health and The Diaper Dilemma:  The Opportunity Costs - By Susan Crawford Bell
•The Joy of Cloth Diapers, by Jane McConnell (Mothering Magazine, Issue 88, May/June 1988)
•The Diaper Debate, by Fiona Hill (Indisposables?)
•The Loma Prietan, March/April 2002 (Clearcutting: Serious Trouble in Our Forests by Karen Maki, Forest Protection Committee Chair)
•Various In-House Training Publications

Cloth Vs Disposable Diapers

Source:www.mscsports.com/partners/tv/consumer/partners-tv-consumer-980818-172107.html

The cost of using disposable diapers can be daunting to many parents. So can the labor of laundering less expensive cloth diapers. Consumer Reports has some facts that can help parents choose between the two.

Whether to use cloth diapers or disposables is one of the many choices new parents have to make. And cost can be a factor. Consumer Reports has added it up.

"We've calculated that disposable diapers can cost between $1500 and $2100 over the course of the three years it takes the average child to be toilet trained," Diane Weathers of Consumer Reports said.

Compared to disposables, using cloth diapers can save a bundle. But they're not necessarily better for the environment as some parents believe.

"Generally, creating waste in landfills by using disposable diapers is no more environmentally harmful than using water and energy to wash cloth diapers," Weathers said.

So the environmental impact of cloth and disposable diapers is roughly the same unless you live in an area where water or landfill spaces is in short supply. another factor to consider is disposables tend to do a better job keeping kids dry and free from diaper rash. And they're also helpful in controlling germs.

"Daycare centers prefer them because they help keep germs from spreading."

If you do choose disposables, don't be swayed to spend more money because they have skin-care additives like aloe or baking soda. Consumer Reportssays such additives are more of a marketing gimmick than skin-care for the baby.

Another new finding: Consumer Reports also tested disposable training pants and found those by Drypers to be superior overall.

CLOTH VS. DISPOSABLE DIAPERS

Source:www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/diaper2z.htm

Dyes found in some disposables are known to damage the central nervous system, kidneys, and liver. The Food & Drug Administration (FDA) received reports that fragrances caused headaches, dizziness, and rashes. Problems reported to the Consumer Protection Agency include chemical burns, noxious chemical and insecticide odors, reports of babies pulling disposables apart and putting pieces of plastic into their noses and mouth, choking on tab papers and linings, plastic melting onto the skin, and ink staining the skin. Plastic tabs can also tear skin, and disposables may contain wood splinters.

In 1987, the Sunday Democrat and Chronicle published news about the new Pampers Ultra. The new gel they used caused severe skin irritations, oozing blood from perineum and scrotal tissues, fever, vomiting, and staph infections in babies. Employees in Pampers factories suffered from tiredness, female organ problems, slow-healing wounds and weight loss. According to the Journal of Pediatrics, 54% of one-month old babies using disposable diapers had rashes, 16% had severe rashes. A survey of Procter & Gamble's own studies show that the incidence of diaper rash increases from 7.1 percent to 61 percent with the increased use of throwaway diapers, great for manufacturers of diaper rash medicines. Widespread diaper rash is a fairly new phenomenon that surfaced along with disposable diapers. Reasons for more rashes include allergies to chemicals, lack of air, higher temperatures because plastic retains body heat, and babies are probably changed less often because they feel dry when wet.

Disposables and Public Health & Landfill Concerns

About 5 million tons of untreated body excrement, which may carry over 100 intestinal viruses, is brought to landfills via disposables. This may contribute to groundwater contamination and attract insects that carry and transmit diseases. In 1990, 18 billion disposables were thrown into United States landfills. Is it wise to use 3.4 billion gallons of oil and over 250,000 trees a year to manufacture disposables that end up in our already overburdened landfills? These disposables are not readily biodegradable. The paper must be exposed to air and sun to decompose. Thirty percent of a disposable diaper is plastic and is not compostable. Even if the rest of the diaper could be composted, these plants could only handle 400 of the 10,000 tons of diapers tossed in landfills EACH DAY, assuming they didn't have to process any other compostable garbage. Biodegradable diapers have cornstarch added to the plastic to break it into tiny pieces. The pieces still end up in landfills.

Inaccurate and Misleading Information from Disposables Manufacturers

It's the late 1980's, people are becoming concerned about the environment. Disposables are on the decline. The disposables manufacturers fight back. Articles and advertisements say disposables are OK. Many mothers, glad to hear that and relieved of guilt, switch to disposables. Disposables manufacturers say energy usage is the same for cloth or disposables, but the fact is that throwaways use five times more energy than reusables.

Cloth Diapers Are Easy, Simple, Inexpensive

Diapers do not need to be presoaked, I don't even rinse mine. Just dump solids in toilet, if it does not fall out then put in hamper, the washing machine will do the rest. No pins are necessary. Two loads of laundry a week.

You have a lot of options available through several mail order companies. There are diaper and cover combinations or All-in-one diapers which are as easy as disposables. The representatives at these companies can assist in your choice. The total cost runs from $200-$300 to get started but will take you through the first year or so.

Article written by Ginny Caldwell of Ecobaby

Proctor and Gamble's Toxic Tea

When Joy Towles Cummings moved back to her family's farm in Taylor County, Florida in 1981, one of the first things she noticed was how polluted the water in the Fenholloway River had become since she left the community in 1965.

Her teenage son, Trev, urged his mother to do something about it. "Mom, that's the nastiest thing,"he said. "You need to make them clean it up."Touched by her son's faith in her maternal abilities to set things straight, Joy began investigating.

What she discovered was that the river was being polluted by effluent from Proctor and Gamble'sBuckeye pulp mill, which produces pulp for such products as Pampers® and Luvs® disposable diapers, Attends® incontinence pads, and Alwayssanitary napkins.

Despite the fact the river water was dark brown, Joy was shocked to discover that the company wasn't violating any state laws. In 1947, local residents andProctor and Gamble officials had convinced the state legislature that classifying the Fenholloway an"industrial river" would bring jobs into the area. Under that classification, the plant has the right to"deposit sewage, industrial and chemical wastes and effluents, or any of them, into the water of the Fenholloway River and the Gulf of Mexico."

As Towles Cummings explains, "The only restriction on the company is that they are not allowed to dump anything that interferes with the navigation of the river."

For Joy, enough was enough. "A kind of funny thing happens in your head when you realize that your community has been sacrificed so that a company can make huge profits," she says in her soft, southern drawl.

Getting Proctor and Gamble to clean up the river proved to be a much tougher task than Joy could have imagined. When she spoke out in her community, the local media labelled her an"...armed, radical, environmental terrorist." Local business leaders in support of Proctor and Gambledubbed her group, Help Our Polluted Environment (HOPE), a "pseudo-environmental cult", in a letter to state environmental regulators.

Joy laughs when she describes herself in her attacker's words. She believes that what makes her so threatening to company officials is that she is a well-respected member of the community, not a radical extremist.

"All we asked for is clean water. My God, that isn't so outrageous, is it?" says Towles Cummings.

Joy's fears about the quality of the river water were substantiated by a 1990 Environmental Protection Agency study that showed the Fenholloway had dioxin levels 1,900 times higher than what the agency considers an acceptable risk. Local residents were advised not to drink the water, and in 1991Proctor and Gamble began distributing bottled water in the community, rather than clean up their mess.

Debate over what Proctor and Gamble is doing to the river has split the community. "People who were best friends since they were born are no longer speaking to each other," says Joy. Tensions came to a head in April 1992, when Stephanie McGuire, a colleague of Joy's, was brutally beaten and raped by three men who told her to stop battling Proctor and Gamble.

For McGuire, the attack was enough to make her leave the community. As Joy explains, "She will probably never recover from the emotional scars."

For Towles Cummings, however, the work is only beginning. She is currently one of over 200 local residents suing Proctor and Gamble to make the company pay for its damages.

Last fall, Joy spoke at a rally outside Proctor and Gamble's Toronto office. Clutching a bottle of dark brown "toxic tea" taken from the Fenholloway River, she called upon demonstrators to boycottPampers® and Luvs® disposable diapers,Attends® incontinence pads, and Always®sanitary napkins.

As Joy explained, the degradation of her community is a direct result of our consumer lifestyles. "We need to understand that my community is suffering from one kind of pollution in order to provide communities across North America with disposable products that create a different kind of environmental problem in everybody's community."

AUTHOR'S NOTE: Despite numerous attempts, officials at the Proctor and Gamble plant in Florida refused to comment on this issue.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
WEED Foundation, 736 Bathurst Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 2R4 (416)531-621