Material Matters

Keith O'Brien's article ("In Praise of Plastic," September 28) fails to ask if we as a society really need to consume so much plastic in the first place. Why are we buying bottled water when Boston has one of the best municipal water supplies in the country? Unquestionably, there are appropriate uses for plastic. But we need to be thinking about how to reuse (and plastic is limited in its ability to be reused, unlike glass) and how to consume less in the first place.

MARK CAREAGA
East Boston

I was pleased to see the Globe Magazine answering the mindless hysteria over plastic with a well-reasoned article. But I was surprised your article did not touch on the biggest misconception of all: biodegradability. Biodegradability is a meaningless environmental concept, because we don't leave our trash in open fields exposed to the sun and rain. We bury it in airtight, watertight landfills where nothing will biodegrade after 100 years. All materials have their pros and cons. We should promote truly useful waste management concepts - like reduce, reuse, and recycle - and drop the slogans that mean nothing.

CATHERINE MARENGHI
Needham

Without a doubt, glass packaging has many environmental advantages over plastic. Unlike glass, plastic packaging cannot be recycled back into its original form. Every piece of plastic will eventually end up clogging our landfills and/or destroying our oceans. Glass, on the other hand, is made of all-natural raw materials, is 100 percent recyclable, and can be recycled an infinite number of times to create new glass containers that are just as pure as the originals.

JOSEPH J. CATTANEO
President, Glass Packaging Institute Alexandria, Virginia

Many coastal birds have a lot of plastic taking up valuable food space in their stomachs, resulting in weight loss or outright starvation. Fish also mistake plastic debris for food. More dramatic examples of plastic pollution are the "garbage patches" that accumulate in oceanic gyres and are composed primarily of the remains of plastic bags, plastic containers, and fishing nets. I would like to see all coastal communities ban plastic bags and work harder to keep other plastic packaging from reaching the ocean.

DUNCAN COX
Salem

Plastics do provide many benefits to society. But their overuse in some areas was glossed over in this article, which almost totally represented the perspective of the plastics industry and downplayed conflicting viewpoints. One example is the ubiquitous single-use plastic grocery bag. Its manufacture may not consume much oil, but so few are being recycled that it has become a significant environmental problem. An increasing number of people are switching to reusable fabric bags in the belief that this simple action to reduce oil use and avoid unnecessary waste is worth the small effort involved.

JOHN BRAZIER
Mashpee

I want to commend you on one of the best balanced and most rational articles I have read on what I'll call the "plastics dilemma." I teach an upper-division polymer science and engineering course in the chemical engineering department at Oregon State University. Once we understand that plastics are made from a non-renewable resource that may not be available in 30 to 50 years, we need to look at the problem we have today, which is the best use of that non-renewable resource.

Burning plastics is like a sin against humanity (pollution) and the environment. It should be outlawed immediately. Next, we should ban plastics in landfills. Then we should use those talents that have put a man on the moon to address effectively the recycling problem. It can and should be made efficient and affordable, such that not a single plastic article or component is not recycled many times.

SKIP ROCHEFORT
Corvallis, Oregon

WHAT'S FOR DINNER?

While it is nice to know that Ted Turner's restaurants will use recycled menus (First Person, September 28), what seems to be overlooked is that the meals offered on these menus are hardly environmentally friendly. Overuse and degradation of land, water shortages, and air and water pollution are a direct result of raising livestock. Although rarely cited, raising animals for food is a primary cause of global warming emissions. There are the green charlatans with their concerns about paper straws and light bulbs, yet driving Hummers and traveling in their own private planes. Then there are those who recognize that correcting this mess will require a sea change in our behavior. We must alter our habits and break our obscene addiction to meat.

CYNTHIA HAIGH
Milton

I was speechless after reading that bizarre interview with Turner. I walked around for several minutes, shaking my head, finally going back to reread it and make sure I hadn't been mistaken. If that's the best we can come up with for a beacon in our environmental future, then maybe we will be cannibals with 80 percent of our population wiped out in 50 years!

LIZ HUNT
Hamilton

SECOND ACTS

I am fastidious at home about trying to recycle everything that can be recycled ("How to Recycle (Almost) Anything," September 28). That's why I get so frustrated when it's impossible to find a recycling bin in public buildings and outdoors.

LAURA BARDFIELD
Watertown

One great use for those foam packing peanuts is as a drainage base for planters. Not only do they lighten heavy planters, they leave plenty of space for roots to grow through. Also, they make a wonderful "popcorn bag" Halloween costume for youngsters; cut arm and leg holes in a clear dry-cleaning bag and fill with foam peanuts.

CYNTHIA MCNUTT
Gilford, New Hampshire

IT'S A WRAP

I had to laugh about what author Silvia Spring wrote about her partner's reasoning for not wanting to use cloth diapers ("The Great Diaper Debate," September 28): the trouble of "coordinating a collection time with a diaper service." I wash diapers myself every other day. Many people who use cloth diapers are doing it to save money. A diaper service would be a luxury. I wish I had this problem.

NAN SULLIVAN
Ipswich

SEEN ON THE WEB

From the blog Newser:

For green parents, the choice between disposables or cloth diapers may seem like a catch-22. Silvia Spring weighs the issue in the Boston Globe, but finds no easy answer. While disposables produce up to 70 times more waste than cloth, the latest study concluded that disposable diapers have the same environmental impact as reusable diapers when the effect of laundering cloth diapers is taken into account. Even though research shows little evidence supporting one over the other, blogs, books, and online forums show that many people take the benefits of cloth diapers on faith. "You'll never convince me that something you reuse is not better for the environment than something you throw out," said one owner of a diaper service.

From the blog Spindrift:

What I still don't understand, though, is that a plastic diaper is one use and then goes into a landfill and takes hundreds of years to break down (the plastic parts of the diaper will never biodegrade). On the other hand, a cloth diaper doesn't create landfill waste except for that one time you finally throw it out (and then it is cotton so it will break down). How could that NOT be better for the environment?

COMMENTS? Write to magazine@globe.com or The Boston Globe Magazine/Letters, PO Box 55819, Boston, MA 02205-5819. Please include a daytime phone number. Letters are subject to editing; short letters are preferred.