What is the most environmentally sound way to handle baby poop?
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Hutzpa (a host of the Frugal and Energy Efficient Living group).
Seriously...what kind of diapers do you use or don't use?
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)the down side is the cleaning.
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)Cloth was the only thing that came to mind for me, too. It just seems like someone would have thought of another alternative and marketed it. I mean...the average family with children must go through boatloads (another word came to mind) of diapers.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)The up side: They are reuseable. They do last a long time. They force you to change the baby more often, which is better for the baby. Kids will often toilet train easier because the diaper is not comfortable, while the disposables keep moisture away from the baby. It keeps all those diapers out of the landfill. And really, have you ever seen the goop that is inside a diaper??? No, I don't mean the baby's mess, I mean the gel that the diapers are made of---scary. I saw a disgarded diaper that had broke open and that gel was disgusting---it looks like a hazardous material to me.
The down side: They are labor intensive, with rinsing and washing. You will use a lot more of these diapers because you cannot leave a baby in a wet diaper---and especially newborns will be going through them often. They do not wick moisture away from the baby (hence the changing more often). The rinsing and washing uses water---and I have heard some environmentalist who are opposed to cloth for this reason. I suppose that it depends on whether you are living in an area with water issues or not on this one. Although I consider myself an environmentalist also, I don't have a problem with water use, since the water can be reused after treating while a landfill will be there forever---or close to it.
It all comes down to what your comfort level is. Don't let yourself be forced into using one or the other diaper. Consider your time and what you can do.
And the most environmentally sound way would be to let the baby be naked all the time, if you ask me. I guess that wouldn't work well inside a house!
kristopher
(29,798 posts)The Great Disposable Diaper Debate
What's an environmentally conscious parent to do? To save the earth she or he forswears disposable diapers, finds a diaper service or does a lot of laundry, and feels righteous. Then along comes the shocking news that reusable diapers might be as bad for the environment as disposables.
I kid you not. When the idea first surfaced it was ignorable, because it came from Procter & Gamble (which shares with Kimberly Clark most of the nation's $3.2 billion disposable diaper market). The company hired a consulting firm to compare the impacts of both kinds of diapers -- not only the landfilling bulk of disposables, but the water and energy demands of washables. The report concluded, "Neither product is clearly superior in all of the resource and environmental impact categories considered."
Ignorable, as I said, until that conclusion was seconded by no less an environmental hard-liner than Allen Hershkowitz of the Natural Resources Defense Council. He compiled data from all sources (the cotton manufacturers did their own counter-study) on the complete paths from cotton gin to diaper to washing machine, and from plastic factory to diaper to dump. He writes, "Disposables consume more raw materials and produce more solid waste ... but cloth diaper production and use consume more water and energy and produce more ... atmospheric emissions and waste water effluent."
Personally I'm not convinced. I'm glad the question has risen, because cradle-to-grave (oil-well-to-dump) impact analyses are exactly what we need to make responsible consumer decisions. But this example shows how difficult it is to do those analyses right.
Here are some of the facts of the case...
http://www.sustainer.org/dhm_archive/index.php?display_article=vn321diapersed
txlibdem
(6,183 posts)As global climate change will bring multi-year droughts in areas formerly water-rich.
Response to onpatrol98 (Original post)
Hutzpa This message was self-deleted by its author.