Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1|Page
Student Number: 483563 Combining two of the beneficial scenarios -washing nappies in a fuller load and outdoor line dryingwould lower the global warming impact by 40 per cent from the baseline scenario, or some 200kg CO2 equivalent over the two and a half years,(Environmental Resource Management, 2008). Figure 1 shows the amount of energy used in the life-cycle of disposable, commercial and home laundered. The figure shows that there is a difference between disposable compared and commercially laundered. Developing the commercial laundry service provided to customer would help reduce waste energy, making a smaller environmental impact. This would entitle using larger industrial washers which would be used to its full capacity, as well as using natural drying methods, instead of the energy intensive dryers.
Figure 1 Comparison of net energy requirements of Single Use, Commercial and Home laundered diapers. (Le Van, 2007).
When developing this product and service, the packaging of the nappies needs to also be considered. Plastic is known to have the lowest position regarding the ecological compatibility. The reason for such relationship to the polymer materials was their resistance to the natural degradation, long persistence in the environment and long period of permanent alterations of natural relationship in the environment (Vujkovic et al, 2003). However, some plastics have been developed further after years of researchwhich enables it to break down rapidly once reaching landfills. These types of plastic materials known as Biopol- can be synthesized by number of species of microorganisms, serving them as a intercellular carbon and energy source, and that these polymers are biodegradable, (Khan et al, 2012). The product would also use paperboards which dates back to the 17th century with accelerated usage in the later part of the 19th century (Marsh et al., 2007) Paperboard is thicker than paper and is commonly used to make boxes which would be suitable storage for nappies, (Soroka 1999). The paperboard packaging is ideal because it is considered as the most ecologically compatible, such packaging does not alter the environmental equilibrium substantially. 3|Page
4|Page
5|Page
Section E: A strategic view of your product and its future in the industry/ marketplace
My product and service will be successful due to the nature of the product and the market. The UK sales figure for disposable nappies in 2001-2002 provided an average daily use figure of 4.5 nappies a day (Environment Agency, 2004). This statistic shows that demand for the product is high, consumption at a high rate. In addition, local councils in the UK are desperately trying to reduce their landfill tax bills and are setting up schemes and money back offers to encourage parents to use washable cloth nappies. Government schemes would help raise awareness and would increase sales in re-useable nappies. As the awareness of the environment increases, a larger amount of consumers are going to be willing to move towards a greener product. This switch will be helped along with the cheaper price of the reuseable nappies. Current disposable brand diapers cost near $0.20 per diaper with an estimated 3 years total of $1,752.00. In comparison, re-usable diapers cost much less, roughly $300-$1000 for those three years. As a result, the cheaper prices and the higher convenience would enable the business to create a larger market share in the nappy market, potentially conquering the best of the disposable market. Currently, disposable nappies account for some 95 per cent of the market and around 2.5 billion disposable nappies are sold in the UK each year, (Environmental Agency, 2005). This suggests that these re-useable diapers have a relatively small market share. However, sales and market share could rise with the increase in awareness, marketing and product pricing. It is also hopefully that the product and service will be successful by the expansion in the number of suppliers in the UK over the last few years, which may suggest the market share is growing. Furthermore, the Environmental Agency shows evidence that commercial nappy services that involve a centralised laundry are gaining in popularity and coverage in the UK. The waste generated by the re-useable nappies would be considerably less compared to the disposable nappies. Figure 1 shows the amount of energy disposable and laundered nappies use during its lifetime. The diagram shows that commercially laundered operations are the most affective in comparison to the other options, using roughly 1MJ less than home laundered or disposable.
Table 1: Energy Impact per infant per lifetime (Landbank Consultancy, 1991).
Re-useable Energy (MJ) Waste Water Raw Materials (KG) 2532 12.4 25
Student Number: 483563 Table 1 shows the comparison in waste between the two types of nappies over the period of its lifetime. The table suggests that re-useable nappies are more environmentally friendly. The re-useable nappies use less energy and 2.3 times less amount of water, mainly down to the manufacturing process of both the nappies. For reusable nappies, the baseline scenario based on average washer and drier use produced a global warming impact of approximately 570kg CO2 equivalent. However, according to the Environmental Resource Management, using a more environmentally friendly laundering service full capacity and natural drying- could reduce the amount of waste water and energy- as much as 16% and reducing 200KG of CO2 out of the atmosphere. Also, the raw materials used in the production of re-useable nappies are 8.3 times more than disposable. This means that the production of disposables require more than 8 times more material which creates a problem when referring to sustainability. Lastly, the domestic solid waste is the amount of waste which reaches the landfills. It shows that the reuseable nappies have considerably less amount of weight, compared to the disposable; having 60 times more weight which reaches landfills. Overall, I believe that the re-useable nappies and the laundry service which accompanies the product will be successful.
7|Page
Student Number: 483563 Bilbiography Anthony-Pillai, R. (2007). Whats potty about early toilet training? The Journal of Business Management, 334(10), 1166. Bond, A.B. (1999). A Guide to Cotton, Care to make a difference. Accessed April 10, 2012 from http://www.care2.com. Brammer, S., Jackson, G., Matten, D. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility and institutional theory: new perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 3-28. Design Council. (2011). Broader, Further, Closer and Leaner. Accessed April 1, 2012 from www.designcouncil.org.uk. Environment Agency. (2004). Time to change? An Environment Agency study of parental habits in the use of disposable and reusable nappies. Accessed April 8, 2012 from www.environment-agency.gov.uk. Environment Agency. (2005). Life Cycle Assessment of Disposable and Reusable Nappies in the UK. Accessed April 8, 2012 from www.environment-agency.gov.uk. Environmental Resource Management, ERM. (2008). Conclusions, An Updated Life Cycle Study -The Use of Disposable and Reusable Nappies in the UK. Accessed April 9, 2012 from publications.-environment-agency.-gov.-uk. Grundey, D. (2009). Eco-Marketing and Eco-Labelling: Does It Ensure Customer Loyalty for Eco-Products in Lithuania? Transformations in Business & Economics 8(1), 152179. Kawahito, M. (2007). A comparative study of Bamboo Shijira Fabric and Cotton Shijira Fabric. Seni Gakkaishi, 64(4), 108-112. Khan, M. A., Kopp, C., & Hinrichsen, G. (2001). Effect of Vinyl and Silicon Monomers on Mechanical and Degradation Properties of Bio-Degradable Jute-Biopol Composite. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 20(16), 1414-1429. Kinver, M. (2006). The next generation. Biofuels look to the next generation. Accessed April 5, 2012 from www.bbc.co.uk. Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J., & Wong, V. (2001). Principles of Marketing (Third European Edition). Prentice Hall : Harlow, England. Kusz, J.P. (2005). When Good Design Means Responsible Design. Design Management Review, 16(3), 2936. Landbank Consultancy. (1991). A Review of Procter & Gambles Environmental Balances for Disposable and Re-Usable Nappies. Landbank Consultancy: London, England.
8|Page
Student Number: 483563 LeVan, S. (2007). Life Cycle Assessment: Measuring Environmental Impact, Life Cycle Environmental Impact Analysis for Forest Products. Accessed April 8, 2012 from http://www.yellowstonebusiness.org. Marsh, K., Bugusu, B. (2007). Role of Food Packaging. Journal of Food Science, 72, 39-55. Moldan, B. Janouskova, S. Hak, T. (2012). How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecological Indicators, 17, 1-126. Soroka, W. (1999). Handbook of Food Engineering (2nd Edition). Taylor and Francis Group: USA. Vujkovic, I. & Matavulj, M. (2003). Environmentally Friendly Packaging, Annals of the faculty of engineering Hunedoara. Accessed April 5, 2012 from http://annals.fih.upt.ro.
9|Page