June 2005. There has been recent publicity about how an independent study has found disposable nappies environmentally comparable to cloth nappies. Sadly this study is misleading parents yet again, as it presumes parents boil nappies, soak them in chemicals and don't have modern efficient washing machines. To read more about how disposable nappy companies are using this information to misinform parents view the Women's Environmental Network website.

Comparenappies has been set up primarily as a means of displaying the results of my Open University project for the course U316 - The Environmental Web. This project is a comparison of the environmental impact of disposable nappies compared to reusable/cloth nappies

Source : Illustration by Jem Sullivan taken from Diaperdilemma

Before you read my findings it is very important that you remember I do not sell nappies. As a parent his subject was important to investigate, particularly as much information available could be accused of having bias, regardless of whether it actually does, this is because it is usually only nappy sellers who take the time and trouble to collate data. the information is concise and easy to read. Please do get in touch at if you have anything you would like me to add or spot anything that needs developing.

I have chosen to write about the environmental impact of nappies; more specifically comparing the impact of reusable nappies compared to disposable nappies. I am an Open University Environment student and a mother of three children.

Source: WEN

A quick browse of parenting websites shows that there are two opposing camps within the nappy debate, each throwing accusations of propaganda and fabrication. I feel unbiased, honest evidence is needed and the aim of this site to be a concise amalgamation of research that has already been carried out. It is my intention that this website will be of use to NGOs (non government organisations) such as the Womens Environmental Network(12) and the Nappy information Service(1) and to aid the local authorities that are supplying grants and incentives for parents to switch to reusable nappies. Most importantly though I want to produce this website so that parents can make an informed and honest choice for their babies, households and the environment.

Impact

As a mother, I became well aware of the debate between which type of nappy is best; disposable or cloth. There has been much research done on this subject with both sides claiming superiority for environmental and health reasons. This report is focusing on the environmental impact of the different types of nappy, using evidence already gathered, with the aim of bringing together the most important points in as unbiased a way as possible. There is however one thing that all sides of the debate agree on. Using any kind of nappy is going to have some impact on the environment. It is the responsibility of the government and the parent to find a way to minimise impact on their local neighbourhood and global neighbourhood, with minimal impact on their own enjoyment of life.

For research purposes nappies have been divided into three recognised categories:

• Disposable
• Home washed reusable
• Service washed reusable

Every nappy has an environmental impact. The life cycle of a nappy can be split into three components: Manufacture Use Disposal. Follow the links on the contents page for more details. Disposable nappies have the most impact in the manufacture and disposal stage. Reusable nappies have most impact in the Use stage. There is much controversy surrounding the value of the data that has been produced, with the disposable nappy companies under tremendous economic pressure to maintain the popularity of their product. This is heightened by the drop in birth rate in the western world.

Variables with Reusable Nappies

There are many variables within the impact of reusable nappies: There is the choice between purchasing organic or non organic nappies. How you wash and treat the nappies. For example more water is used if you soak and pre-wash your nappies. More energy is consumed if you use hotter water, tumble dry and wash fewer nappies per load. You are in control of the level of chemicals you allow to enter the water systems during the soaking/washing stage. Using reusable nappies would save the tax payer £40million per year. (2) which could be spent on improving environmental technologies.

There are two bodies that are pushing the nappy debate and each has an opposing point of view.

There is a growing number of parents, organisations and local authorities that are supporting the claims that reusable nappies are better for the environment. This side of the debate is lead by the Women's Environmental Network which is a UK based Charity.

An organisation called The Absorbent Hygiene Products Manufacturers Association (AHPMA) is making the claim that disposable nappies are no worse than cloth nappies. They have produced research supporting this claim, though it must be noted that this organisation represents Arquest Ltd, Kimberly-Clark Ltd, Procter & Gamble UK and SCA Hygiene Products Ltd, which are the key UK disposable nappy manufacturers. (1)

These two sides of the debate have spent much time and effort reporting each other to the Advertising Standards Authority for making untrue claims about their products. Many points have been upheld on both sides, though this is an ongoing battle, with one side a consortium of multinational companies and the other a charity. More details of this can be found on the WEN (12) and AHMPA(1) websites.

Environmental Footprinting is a useful tool used to measure environmental impact in terms on land use. In this sort of study service laundered nappies have the smallest overall impact, with Home laundering coming next. Disposables use the largest area of land. The results are shown below:

Source : Best Foot Forward

Service laundering has a lesser footprint due to the fact that more nappies are being washed at a time, using more cost efficient machinery.

Disposable Nappies

Disposable nappies are made predominantly from paper pulp, plastics, and absorbent gel. The picture below shows the quantities present in an average nappy.

The wood pulp to make paper is sourced from managed monoculture plantations, they are not rich in biodiversity and do not absorb CO2 like ancient forests.(11) The 1992 WEN report Forests in Crisis(6) outlined how monoculture plantations threatened wildlife, decreased diversity and degraded river systems. These forests are intensively managed using pesticides and fertilisers. Sawdust is also used to make the paper pulp in nappies.(2)

The two studies carried out to ascertain which type of nappy was better for the environment did not take the wood used to manufacture paper into account. This was because it was classed as a renewable source . These studies appeared to make the environmental impact of disposable nappies comparable to cloth nappies. (Lentz (7) and Little (8).) More recent studies have taken these factors into account.( Landbank (9).)

More information on these studies can be found on the Life Cycle Analysis page.

Plastic

It takes a cup of crude oil per nappy to manufacture the plastics used in one disposable nappy(16) Oil is an unsustainable,fossil fuel. There are a few more biodegradable nappies which do not contain plastics (17)

Reusable Nappies

These are predominantly made from cotton, which is the crop which is treated with the most fertiliser and pesticides in the world. This can have major biodiversity implications. It is not relevant to discuss the heath implications of the cotton pickers within this report, but suffice to say their working and living environments can be severely degraded.

Not only this, but some cloth nappies are bleached, the by products of this impact on the environment. It is possible to use organic, non bleached nappies, though this choice is up to the individual parent.

Nappies can also be made from hemp, polyester fleece and flannelette. The associated wraps or outers are made from PUL, nylon, laminated cotton/polyester, wool or fleece. Although some of these contain plastics or made from non renewable materials, the fact that they are re-used hundreds of times negates their environmental impact.

Disposable Nappies

Disposable nappies are a one use only product. They do not contribute to the environment in any negative way during this stage.

Reusable Nappies

This is, on the other hand, the most environmentally damaging stage in the life cycle of a reusable nappy These nappies are destined to be used again and again, so need washing and drying. There are many variables present when trying to calculate how much energy, water and detergent are used, but a standard has been agreed on and is regularly used by organisations and interested parties such as DEFRA . The Womens Environmental Network website has worked out that a washing machine doing a load of nappies every couple of days over 2 and a half years uses 2.8 KW of energy (5)

Source : Tameside

Abit About Service Laundering

Service Laundering means that the dirty nappies are picked up from your house, taken away and washed then delivered back to you. This option is more expensive than washing at home, though it uses less water per nappy than home washing. The environmental impact of the delivery and pick up vans needs to be considered though.

Source : Tameside

Disposable nappies

Source : Number-10

Disposable nappies are said to be 4% on the total waste in the UK. This is a large amount if you consider that not every home is using nappies. Using disposable nappies is said to double your weekly amount of rubbish.

Governments waste minimisation strategy in 2003 sited composting and using reusable nappies to lead waste prevention in the UK (DEFRA WIP 2003). It has been shown that in the UK nearly 8 million disposable nappies are disposed of a day, with 7.5 million ending up in landfill sites (1)

Source : Tameside

The Nappy information Service (AHPMA) states that 80% of a disposable nappy is biodegradable in the correct conditions. This of course includes the contents. Despite various correspondences with the organisation I have been unable to ascertain these conditions and verify whether they occur on a regular basis in landfill sites. What they do state however is that the plastic 10% is not biodegradeable and common estimates maintain it could take up to 500 years to disappear.(1)

The World Health Organisation states that it is technically illegal to not remove the faeces from nappies before disposal.(3)Nappy companies do not publicise this information and solid contents are left in nappies when they are thrown away. When in a landfill site this is potentially exposed to the public (through rodents, sea birds etc) and can have a negative effect on the surrounding environment. Although 80% of homes in the UK are within 2 km of landfill sites (14) the Nappy Information Service states this type of waste does not pose any health or environmental threat. (2). There is also an environmental risk from seepage to nearby groundwaters.

As Governments try and fulfil landfill Directives (DEFRA WIP 2003) there could be more pressure on incinerators. The incinerating of nappies contributes to greenhouse gasses and any increase in burning will of course increase greenhouse gas

Reusable Nappies

The fabric of old, worn out cloth nappies biodegrade within 6 months and do not add any significant contribution to landfill sites. These are frequently used for subsequent children, passed on or recycled in some way.

In 1991 two life cycle studies were carried out by Lentz (7) and Little (8) both funded by Proctor and Gamble a leading disposable nappy company. The WEN commissioned a critique from the Landbank Consultancy (9)which showed that the earlier studies had concentrated on the use stage, not focussing on the manufacture and disposal part of the nappys life. The results of this study are shown below:

Source : Wen

You can see from the table that the Landbank study shows that disposable nappies use 3.5 times as much energy, 8 times as much non-regenerable raw materials and 90 times as much renewable material as reusable nappies.

They produce 2.3 times as much waste water and 60 times as much solid waste, and require between 4 and 30 times as much land for growing natural materials as reusable nappies.

The study also showed that both systems used similar amounts of fossil fuel energy. (Ann Link WEN 2003)

It must be accepted that both types of nappy will have an impact on our environment.

This website has shown that fossil fuels are burned during their manufacture, energy is used to clean cloth nappies and methane (which is a greenhouse gas) is released from landfill sites. Although only accounting for 10% of waste disposal in this country, plastics release cocktails of chemicals into the environment when disposable nappies are incinerated. This 10% seems more considerable though when we realise it is 10% of 8 million nappies a day.

Source : Illustration by Jem Sullivan taken from Diaperdilemma

Problems Encountered

Whilst doing research for this, it became obvious that nearly all of the research carried out is by organisations which have a vested interest in the results. Clearly this is perpetuating misinformation and is of no long term benefit to the environment or to parents who wish to make an informed choice. The studies that have been carried out are economics driven and only of benefit to each side of the market.

It must be accepted that both types of nappy will have an impact on our environment.

Disposable nappies have become a huge marketing success story in the last 20 years, developing alongside the throw away culture of the nineties.They publicise research which shows them in a more favourable light and it would be naive to expect this to be any different in the foreseeable future.

The declining birth-rate in the west has put further economic pressure on the disposable nappy companies and the Nappy Information Service (NIS)(1) represents the main UK disposable nappy companies, This organisation has spent a lot of time and money targeting the legitimacy of the main reusable nappy voice in this country; the Womens Environmental Network.(12) There has been a number of ASA rulings brought by the WEN and the NIS about the data and wording of each others literature.

Local councils and the national government need to address the marketing and publicity that is given to new parents, with disposable nappy samples are given away in hospital Bounty Packs. (13) These provide financial support to the hospital.

Local Authorities are starting to appreciate the financial benefits of converting their constituents to cloth nappies. Many are now offering a subsidy or grant to help with the purchase of nappies. A list of the participating areas is below:

Kent County Council : East Staffordshire Borough : Camden Council

Council Norfolk County : Council East Sussex : County Council

Essex County Council : Three Rivers District Council : Harrow Council

Oxfordshire County Council : East Renfrewshire Council : Wrekin Borough Council

Hertfordshire County Council : West Sussex County Council

Aberdeen City Council : Leicestershire County Council

Edinburgh Real Nappy Project : Warwickshire County Council

Suffolk County Council : Cheshire County Council Telford

Cloth nappy users are in control of how much impact they have on their environment.

They can reduce impact by:

Disposable Nappy Users

Disposable nappy users could consider the impact they are causing the landfill sites and possibly switch to more biodegradable nappies (15). They could also consider combining cloth and disposable nappies.

I hope that once parents are informed they can make the choices that are best for themselves, their babies and their environment. It would be niave and simplistic of me to assume that all parents will make the best choice for the environment, so the uptake to local authority encouragement is important at least until habits are formed. Noone knows what the future holds but many scientists and environmentalists are saying that if human beings wish to continue to live on this planet, the attitudes towards how we treat it need to change. This includes recycling, reusing and working with, not against our environment.

AHPMA: The Absorbent Hygiene Products Manufacturers Association (1)

Cloth Nappy – another name for a reusable nappy, though it can be made from a number of materials. See manufacture page for more details.

Diaper : The American name for a nappy. This is used occasionally throughout the text.

Disposable Nappy: The common name for a one use, nappy, made predominantly from paper pulp.

Home laundering: this is where the nappy is picked up from your home, taken to be washed then delivered back to you when clean and dry.

Life Cycle Analysis: A type of study where all areas of the productss life are taken into account, from manufacture to use through to disposal.

Nappy : An item put on a babys (usually) bottom to catch the urine and faeces.

Nappy Information Service: Website ran by AHPMA(1)

NGO : Non Government Organisation

WEN : Womens Environmental Network (12)

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. Surely there are other factors to take into account when deciding which nappy to use, what about cost and health benefits?

A. I do not have room within these pages to discuss the health and financial differences between cloth and disposable nappies. There are many websites that already give us this information, for example:

Wen - Womens Environmental Network

The Nappy Lady

The words nappy and diaper and reusable nappy and cloth nappy are interchangeable within this website.

(1) Nappy Information Services - The Absorbent Hygiene Products Manufacturers Association (AHPMA) which represents key UK manufacturers of disposable nappies, Arquest Ltd, Kimberly-Clark Ltd, Procter & Gamble UK and SCA Hygiene Products Ltd. last accessed 24/03/08

(2) NANS, National association of Nappy Services Change a nappy accessed 24/03/08

(3) Idirect Link Dead : March 08

(4) Lehrburger, Mullen, Jones. Diapers: Environmental Impacts and Lifecycle Analysis, January 1991

(5) Womens Environmental Network

(6) Forests in Crisis, Helen O Hara, WEN, 1992

(7)Lentz; Comparison of environmental balances for products taking as an example disposable and cloth diapers. In: Konzept in der Abfallwirtschaft 2, pp 367-392, International Recycling Congress, Berlin, 1989

(8)Little; Disposable versus reusable Diapers: Health, Environmental and Economic Comparisons. Report to Procter & Gamble, March 16, 1990.

(9)Landbank Consultancy; A review of Procter & Gamble's Environmental Balances for Disposable and Re-usable Nappies, July 1991.

(10) WEN - Disposable nappies case study last accessed 24/03/08

(11) A Changing Future for Paper; prepared for the World Business Council for Sustainable Development by International Institute for Environment and Development, May 1996.

(12) Women’s Environmental Network Website last accessed 24/03/08

(13) WEN -Nappy Report last accessed 24/03/08

(14) Number-10.Gov.Uk Government Website: Waste not, Want not - A strategy for tackling the waste problem in England. The report calls for greater efforts to reduce the rate of waste growth and for more re-use and recycling to combat the country's growing rubbish mountain. Report no longer available 24/03/08

(15) Earthlets.co.uk A company that sells biodegradeable disposable nappies last accessed 24/03/08

(16) Cuddlebabes - Reusable nappy information from a nappy seller last accessed 24/03/08

Government Website Memorandum submitted by Absorbent Hygiene Products Manufacturers Association (AHPMA) to the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs detailing points they would like to be considered when discussions on promoting reusable nappies and waste minimisation are held. Link dead : March 2008

Good Environmental Choice criteria for nappies and similar products. Prepared on behalf of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation Gothenburg,December 1, 1993 by:Envira Miljökonsult, Susanne Svensson. The report presents environmental criteria for babies' nappies and sanitary towels.Link dead : March 2008

Why Use Cloth Diapers? by Kim BeckerThe baby marketplace - A document promoting the use of cloth nappies last accessed 24/03/08