I don’t consider myself particularly green. Probably greener than most people; I’ve never owned a car, recycle most everything I can, shop with reusable bags, carry water around in Nalgene bottles. But I’m certainly not as green as I could be. I fly long distances several times a year, don’t always buy products made from recycled goods, sometimes throw away recyclable scrap paper, and I’ve been known to leave the water running while brushing my teeth.
Perhaps worst of all, I use disposable diapers.
During the first few weeks of CJ’s life, I rationalized this by using the “eco-friendly” diapers, which, though still disposable, are a bit more green than the big brands. They use a chlorine-free manufacturing process that prevents toxins from leaching into the environment, but they still use the same absorbent gelling material (AGM) as the major brands. This, some claim, is detrimental to the baby’s health.
Unfortunately, when I started looking into this, I could find no actual data about AGM causing ill health effects. There were many, many assertions, but no one actually cited evidence. A Wired article, The Poop on Eco-friendly Diapers, quotes a newsletter from a cloth diapering service that states, “AGM is linked to an increase in childhood asthma and a decrease in sperm count among boys.” The article goes on to state, “However, no studies indicate that the absorbent substance used in disposables harms babies.”
The article does cite a study from 2000, in Disease in Childhood (free registration required), that indicates that disposable diapers can increase the scrotal temperature of male babies. The scientists speculated that this could be a reason for a decline in spermatogenesis and called for more research. The study does not even mention AGM, nor did it actually measure sperm production. The newsletter jumped ahead of the findings and just stated a link between AGM and decreased sperm count.
Another health argument is that disposables contain dioxin, a carcinogenic believed responsible for toxic shock syndrome when used in tampons. According to a study in Environmental Health Perspectives from January 2002,
analysis showed that exposure to dioxins from the diet is more than 30,000-2,200,000 times the exposure through diapers in nursing infants. Although dioxins are found in trace amounts in both cotton and pulp sanitary products, exposure to dioxins through tampons and diapers does not significantly contribute to dioxin exposures in the United States.
Another common claim is that disposable diapers, because they need to be changed less frequently and do not allow skin to breath, cause an increase in diaper rash. I could find no study to support this claim. However, a 1990 study in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine found “that infants in diapers containing absorbent gelling material had significantly less diaper dermatitis than those in conventional disposable diapers.” This study did not include cloth diapers, but, pure speculation here, perhaps the cloth advocates are making old arguments, against old disposable diapers. I can only speculate, because I could not find any data to back up their claim. I did, however, find a statement from the University of Michigan Children’s Hospital that said, “One type of diaper is not better than the other for preventing diaper rash.”
As there doesn’t seem to be much evidence that disposables have any ill health effects, the more important consideration for many is environmental impact. No matter how green a disposable diaper is, you still have to throw it away. According to a 1998 EPA study, diapers accounted for 3.4 million tons of waste, or around 2% of all garbage in US landfills. Because landfills do not allow for much exposure to air or sunlight, even the “greener” disposables such as Seventh Generation can sit in them for decades without breaking down.
But others argue that cloth diapers have their own environmental issues. Because cloth diapers are not as absorbent as disposables, they need to be changed about twice as often. These diapers, on average 10 a day, require washing. And once they are washed, they need to be dried. Both of these tasks require energy, and therefore have their own environmental impact.
A 2005 study by the London-based Environmental Agency found that “disposable diapers have the same environmental impact as reusable diapers when the effect of laundering cloth diapers is taken into account.”
Not surprisingly, this study is somewhat controversial. The Women’s Environmental Network said,
the study focused on terry-cloth diapers, which take more water to wash and more energy to dry…. the study also assumes parents are not using energy-efficient washer/dryers and that they’re washing clothes at a high temperature setting.
If parents use 24 nappies and follow manufacturers’ instructions to wash at 60 degrees C [140 degrees Fahrenheit] using an A-rated washing machine, they will have approximately 24 percent less impact on global warming than the report says.
And I’m sure any true environmentalist would follow these instructions to the letter.
The core finding of the London study is summed up by Tricia Henton, director of environmental protection at the Environment Agency.
Although there is no substantial difference between the environmental impacts of the three systems studied, it does show where each system can be improved.
This is the key to any discussion of green products. Don’t just rail against those that don’t do what you do, look for ways to improve the whole system.
Cloth-diaper advocates are certain of their rectitude, and have already reached a conclusion. Perhaps this is why I found so many unsupported assertions. It is so obvious to them, it’s just seems like common sense. Said one owner of a cloth diaper service, “You’ll never convince me that something you reuse is not better for the environment than something you throw out.” Forgive me if I don’t take his utter certainty as evidence.
I admit that I might be falling into a bit of confirmation bias here myself, as I’d love to use disposables guilt-free; but, the data just isn’t there to state that cloth diapers are either healthier or more environmentally friendly.
The difference is, I can be convinced. Don’t berate me, just show me the evidence.
Related Posts:
{ 12 comments }
{ 12 comments }
Ah, yes, “is linked to.” The best phrase ever, if you’re trying to sell someone on a theory unsupported by any meaningful evidence — just seeing it makes me automatically suspicious. Of course those things are linked… that newsletter just linked them! Sigh.
I use disposables, too.
On the other hand, I think I would have thrown myself in front of a train if I had tried to use cloth diapers, on top of all the other stresses of being a new parent. Heck, I still have the occasional train-desiring day!
No reason to make the frowny face. From all of the evidence I found, neither is better, neither is worse. I think this is just a case of humans having an environmental impact from the moment they are born. We haven’t found a perfect solution for this, and need to keep looking for ways to reduce our eco-footprint.
This is one of my new favorite blogs. Thanks for the dose of rationality.
As a father of two boys, one still in diapers, I can tell you that cloth diapers sounded good in theory, but were a real hassle in practice. We were paying a service to come and get them and clean them, but we had to do some of the work for them already, and they STILL sat in the pail and stunk up the place. AND THE FLIES
We were initially concerned about the environmental impact of diapers too, which is why we wanted the cloth ones (that, and there’s some possibly inaccurate conventional wisdom suggesting kids in cloth diapers potty train earlier), but we eventually resigned ourselves to the idea of the disposable ones. Here are some considerations: there is transport to and from some laundering facility, which uses fossil fuels; there is the water used in cleaning, the energy used to heat the water, the detergent, and the energy used to dry the cloth diapers; and there are plastic bags in the diaper pail and daily water flushes to clean out the dirty diapers. Bottom line: unless you are cleaning them yourself (a less-than-enjoyable chore) using the greenest methods you can come up with (collected rainwater, maybe?), cloth diapers are incredibly unlikely to have a smaller environmental impact than disposable ones.
Needless to say, we’ve been using disposables for quite some time, just accepting it as a necessary evil until the kids are out of diapers for good. That said, diaper manufacturers have a duty to come up with eco-friendly solutions, since diapers are pretty easy to find in landfills.
Aaron-
Thanks for the kind words!
That more needs to be done on both sides to lessen the environmental impact is essential. What you say about the impact of the diaper services is what made me look into this in the first place. While I’m not proud that we use disposables, I’m certainly not ashamed of it either.
I use cloth diapers, but I use them because they’re cheaper, not because I believe that using them makes me a better person. I don’t really mind them, they’re not hard to take care of and I love not buying new diapers constantly.
The interesting thing about saying that people need to use energy-efficient washers is that from what I’ve read, they aren’t recommended. Front-loaders are especially discouraged. My understanding is that because the clothes don’t sit in the water the whole time, they don’t rinse as completely. I don’t know any of that for certain, though, because I’m using a hand-me-down top loader washer.
We use cloth as a back-up, and practice elimination communication. It would be nice to include a skeptical look at EC. It seems obvious that the best diaper is no diaper, but as you said, you can’t already have the conclusion picked out.
I know a lot of cloth users who don’t EC and they all launder them themselves, as do we. Of course it’s less than enjoyable, but all laundry is. Big deal.
Lisa & Ada-
Thanks for your comments! It’s good to have your perspective as cloth users. I am definitely not anti-cloth (nor pro-disposable), and I agree that if neither is worse nor better, everyone should use what works best for them.
Lisa-There is definitely an argument to be made for cloth diapers being cheaper. I didn’t look at it too closely, but everything I saw indicated that they are.
Ada- I’d love to see an examination of EC. I read a little about it while researching these articles, and it fascinated me. I just wonder how a study could be done, beyond anecdotal evidence. I may look into it for a future post.
Alot of the issues cited here for the argument that cloth diapers are not more environmentally friendly can be resolved — solid waste (ie, poop) is simply knocked off (or scraped w/a spatula if sticky) into the toilet, the diaper is stored in a dry pail which is lined with a washable bag, wash diapers in warm water with an eco-friendly detergent and line dry. Yes, it’s definitely more work, but definitely more environmentally friendly in my book. As for 10 diapers a day, well I usually go through about half that. And while I know it’s only anecdotal evidence, my daughter had chronic yeast diaper rashes as a baby until we switched to cloth (the initial reason we made the switch). We’ve had my son in cloth from the time he was born and he almost never gets a rash. Oh, yeah, and it is a lot cheaper!!
I do like the Seventh Generation diapers for traveling.
Did you look at gDiapers as an alternative? I started using them about a year ago with my son. They are a little more expensive than disposables, but I really liked that they are made from all natural materials so that the wet ones are compostable and the poopy ones are flushable, so nothing was filling up a landfill. They also don’t sit around in stinky pails waiting for trash day or the diaper service. I do use regular disposables at night and when we are out of the house, just because it’s easier.
This is not a particularly scientific comment, but it addresses something that didn’t come up in your links or any of your finds. My understanding of the environmental impact of disposables isn’t that the diapers themselves are ending up in landfills, but that the poop is. When landfills were originally designed, my understanding is that they were never meant to handle organics of any kind, and are now always on the brink of explosion because people throw out food (the argument for garbage disposals) and poopy diapers. This is why when you drive past a covered landfill, you see small methane burns that, like pilot lights, keep the gas from building up.
I’ve got almost the same environmental habits as you, though this year I’ve been forced to own my first car (like NY, you’d be mad to buy one in Chicago unless you had to). I use disposables because
1. I tried gDiapers, and though I know this isn’t anywhere near universal and everyone should give them a try, the baby does not like them and screams uncontrollably.
2. I live in a small apartment with no washing machine and not even one in the basement.
3. As far as the landfills go, that ship has seemed to have sailed.
I didn’t look at the impact of bio-material in landfills, as that is a much larger subject, and as you pointed out, it wasn’t discussed in these studies. I’d be interested to look at that data, if anyone can find it.
I’d like to see the other side of it too: what is the impact of washing/flushing vs landfills in drought areas like California?
I’m just waiting for the time when we pull up to the landfills’ methane vents in our flying cars and fill up the tank for free.
Comments on this entry are closed.