AliprandoJoannaAnnotation12

Addicted to Plastic

Addicted to Plastic, Ian Connacher, 2008 The film takes the viewer on a journey to understand the prevalence of plastic in our lives. It argues plastic is in some way a part of everything we use and everything we enjoy. Plastics are described as our "modern clay" in that it is a highly transformable material that can easily and cheaply change color, style or form to be worked for just about any use. The film does not aim to depress the viewers but rather it seems to want to inform for the most part and present some alternatives to our dependency. 3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? Numerous ecological concerns are presented in the beginning and throughout the entire film. The film begins taking us to the North Pacific Central Gire or the Eastern Garbage Patch. From an at-sea research scientist we learn that even when you can't see them, the ocean is filled with plastic particles. He terms the ocean appropriately as Plastic Soup since even samples of ocean water that appear clean still test positive for levels of plastics contamination. The film also shows a great representation of Nerdle pollution. Before the film, I had never even heard of a nerdle let alone nerdle pollution as a serious issue affecting ocean toxicity levels. When dropped into the ocean, nerdles actually act as pollutant magnets, absorbing toxins in the ocean and becoming a highly toxic piece of plastic. Yet this piece of plastic resembles food to some marine life which results in the introduction of these poison pills to the food chain--a chain that likely ends with us.
 * 1. Title, director and release year?**
 * 2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?

The film presents the overwhelming usage of plastics as a contributor in creating a "throw away" society. The introduction of such so much plastic into so many dimensions of our lives has promoted a buy cheap, buy often mentality. Culturally, Life magazine deems us a throw away society of which, touting the many benefits of disposables. Predominately celebrated was how plastics benefit mom by allowing her to spend less time on the dishes and more time with the family!

The viewer also understands through the difficulty many recyclers face that there is an organizational issue between recyclers and producers. Lack of communication between the two parties leaves recyclers in the dark about what products they will receive, many of them are even unsure what the bottle is actually made of. It seems that bottle suppliers could work with recyclers to make a big impact on recycling efficiencies. By at least letting the recyclers know what the product is made of and by simply not mixing different plastics (of different densities, therefor very difficult to recycle on the same line) on the same bottle recyclers would see much greater returns.

4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? The presentations of recycling communities from developing nations were compelling in that these nations recycle materials they don't even use. UniquECO takes used plastic bags and weaves them into purses. Another woman single handedly began her own business off the same service of cleaning and weaving found plastic bags into purses. This one woman provides living wages and teaches valuable skills to over 400 employees, while also creating an economy for her town. Her business even helped to build the community's school. It's compelling to understand how individuals have created such success for themselves through recycling. ** They are motivated individuals who view waste and disposability on such different levels than our society. **And even more compelling is how developing nations may recycle so successfully with such a low (if any) level of technology. Recycling in developed nations is so industrialized and processed that by the time you get a use-able product from the system you put in more than you got out. This form of recycling has 100% efficiency and is an example of up-cycling (creating a product with a greater second life than its first) something our industrialized recycling plants are not able to do.

I also found the beginning of the film, the at-sea voyage extremely thought provoking. The fact that the boat traveled hundreds of miles away from human civilization and yet, we can still see our own footprint. Not only is our footprint still visible this far away but the effects it has on the oceans ecosystem and bio-productivity is just tragic. Images of floating trash in a location so desolate were tragic. Not to mention once the narrator mentioned only half of all plastics actually float - to understand there is a whole other ecosystem of trash in the ocean we can't even seen is just depressing. The scientist's plastic soup sampling found that plastic out ratio plankton 10 to 1. There is a 10 times higher concentration of plastic, in one of the most remote places on earth, than naturally occuring nutrients - nutrients by the way that through the biological pump sequester carbon from the atmosphere to the ocean floor. Something we could use from the CO2 all this plastic production has pumped into the air. 5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Towards the end of the film, we are presented with alternatives or solutions addressing our society's abusive plastic use. However, I have a few issues with some of the "solutions" the film presents. The first of which, was during an interview with a Sony executive explaining Sony's adoption of PLA plastic in their manufacturing process. PLA plastic is a bioplastic made from corn rather than petrolium. It follows a similar production process in which the corn is shipped hundreds of thousands of miles during a just as advanced (high energy) production process. However, Sony executives tout the biodegradability of PLA verses traditional plastic, which is true yet not as good as it sounds. Traditional plastic does not biodegrade, we heard from the film there is no organism on earth that can process or digest the substance -- it remains on earth for hundreds of thousands of years. Polystyrene packaging (those clamshells you get when you can't finish your meal at a restaurant) take over 100,000 years to bio-degrade. So yes, PLA plastic is more bio-degradeable than regular plastic yet in order to bio-degrade in the time period the film presented (10 years i believe) the PLA must be in a **[|heated] ** landfill, since landfills do not reach a high enough temperature, PLA will not degrade unless additional energy is added to the equation. After which, i question the net value on energy and environmental savings in using this type of plastic. Please see my Matrix1 for additional criticisms i have on PLA plastic. The executive also mentioned we have the ability to grow more corn to produce PLA plastic on a scale larger than our plastic consumption today. Her aim in stating this is to present PLA plastic as an overly sustainable solution...we can make more than we use now. My response to that is that is a great reason for PLA plastic to be a very unsustainable solution. What does that mean that we can product more than we use now? Well that means we will use more plastic than we use now. Terrible solution resulting in no net reduction of use.

Another less compelling segment of the film was his presentation of e-waste in china. He presented that industry as a look into another culture where nothing is wasted and everything is used. Yet he made no attention to the the highly dangerous and corrupt business of e-waste recycling. While the message of cultures that reusing our waste is powerful, that scene did not strike a cord with me because of my previous research on e-waste recycling. ** I cannot help but see a connection between plastic corporations and the tobacco industry. An interviewee in the film was discussing BPA in plastics and the plastics industry's standpoint on it's affects to public health. He informed us plastic companies claim they know the levels of which BPA is a proven toxic substance so as long as they stay under that, it's not dangerous. This scene is a direct correlation to the tobacco industries responses to cigarettes as a public health issue. 7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems? The film could really be viewed by any audience, young or old due to its lighthearted nature of a very complex, depressing issue. I do think the film will change the way viewers think about all the plastic they consume since i'm sure many people just don't understand how ubiquitous it has become in functioning as a member of our disposing society. I'm so sure, which i do comment on in the next section, whether it will really change how people consume plastic. I could see the film having a short term effect on people (like stop buying bottled water for a week) but I'm not so sure of it's long term effects. 8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film? The film was not entirely specific with suggesting action points but rather it does show a portfolio of small businesses and researches looking to curb our plastic addiction. Towards the end they also presented some interviewees who have changed their consumption habits. ** ** I'm not entirely convinced that this film left the viewer with much call to action, since a advocate claiming he has abolished all poly carbonates from his life is a rather unrealistic call to action. Rather, i think the film just sought to call to action or attention our dependence on plastic. ** ** 9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? I thought some of the solutions presented could have been a little more researched since i don't necessarily view them as solutions. I also would of liked to understand a little more of what goes into the production and distribution of these plastic products (specifically bottles). The film did a nice job using animation to illustrate nerdle production, so i would have liked to see that used more. **
 * 6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?