Grow Your Own...
Tim Hunt asks, how do we get a clean shave and cut the environmental costs of razors and shaver?
From bio-plastics to cut-throat razors, we look into the market for wet and
dry shavers. We also investigate ways to combat waste from disposables, and
look at different shaving technologies. Towards the end of the report two women
explore the social pressures that drive us towards hairlessness.
A Disposable Culture
As you would expect from a product that is used by most adults, the UK market
is huge. Around £265m per year is spent on wet-shave razors and £104m
on electric or dry shavers.(8) From packaging to handles and blades, much of
our expenditure on wet shaving ends up in landfill. It is estimated that in
the USA over 20 billion disposable razors are thrown into landfill every year.(3)
So the big question is: How can we combat this waste problem? There are several
shaving options that definitely won’t help.
The Economist recently came to the conclusion that, based on what mathematicians
call the ‘power-law curve’, the “14-bladed razor should arrive
in 2100”.(3) In the meantime we will simply have to make do with the five
blades of Gillette Fusion. This is probably among the least environmentally
friendly razors. It comes in a mass of packaging and its disposable head is
large and unnecessarily elaborate with many components. You may be able to reuse
the handle but Gillette could be criticised for periodically bringing out new
models and phasing out old ones. This means that within a couple of years your
handle is likely to become obsolete and that too will end up in landfill.
The standard disposable razor (classically the orange BIC or Tesco’s own
brand) is another environmental non-starter. You will only get a couple of uses
out of it before it goes into landfill. It is not recommended that consumers
break it down into component parts for recycling due to health and safety concerns.
One solution to this waste problem could be taxation. A report recently suggested
re-categorising disposable razors as luxury goods. This would allow them to
be taxed at a higher rate, raising prices, reducing demand and therefore helping
to cut down on landfill.
The report, commissioned from Eunomia Research & Consulting by the Department
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), says: “Some products
considered ‘luxury’, such as alcohol and tobacco, have heavy duties
on them. If disposable products were categorised in a similar way they could
be subjected to similar duties.” The authors claim that if disposable razors
were taxed at the same rate as cigarettes – about 80 per cent of the price
goes to the Treasury – a single Gillette Mach 3 would leap from £1
to £5.(5)
A similar report was released by the Institute for Public Policy Research and
the Green Alliance. They also suggest that a tax should be placed on disposable
products. Talking to the BBC, IPPR director Nick Pearce said it was up to businesses
to take “greater responsibility for the whole life of products, by paying
a product tax that goes towards payment for disposal”.(6)
Taxation has worked in the past. The landfill tax has helped reduce the volume
of waste going to landfill by 28% since 1997.6 Denmark has taxed some disposable
products since 1982 and many forms of packaging since 1999. Since the taxes
were introduced sales of these products have declined. In Belgium, levies have
been threatened on disposable razors, while disposable cameras and batteries
are already subject to additional taxes.(7)
However, a report from right wing group the Tax Payers Alliance recently claimed
that families in the UK were already paying an average of £783 in environmental
taxation every year.(5) This claim can be disputed. A look at the methodology
suggests that it is based on the theory that all extra costs of production will
be passed on to the consumer, which is not always the case. Despite this it
must be borne in mind that much proposed environmental taxation is regressive
(i.e. people would not be taxed according to income – those who earn more
pay more – but on a flat rate, such as VAT). For instance extra duty on
fuel (a carbon tax) would raise prices for all, adversely effecting those who
could least afford to pay such as the old, the unemployed and large families.
In Manchester a proposed congestion charge, that would have been charged at
a flat rate irrespective of income, was rejected in a referendum.
Conversely it has been suggested that tax breaks could be introduced for environmental
alternatives making them more attractive to consumers. There are tax breaks
for renewable energy producers such as the renewable energy production tax credit
in the USA. The Green Alliance have also suggested replacing VAT with a graduated
environmental taxation.(11) This would reduce tax on more environmentally-friendly
products. Other options could include a ban on advertising. In 2002 Gillette
was spending a massive $394 million on marketing campaigns.(10)
Eco alternatives?
There have been some eco steps forward in the production of disposable razors
(if that’s not a contradiction in terms). Recycline now offers the Preserve
recycled razor made from recycled oil-based plastic, polyethylene terephthalate
(rPET). The heads are detachable but not recyclable, however, the handle is
made from recycled plastic and can eventually be recycled.
BIC is the largest company to have tried to seize the eco-mantle. They have
recently released a bioplastic disposable razor. Its handle and part of the
head is made from Polylactic Acid (PLA) produced from corn. It contains no oil-based
additives, is biodegradable and is coloured using “bio-pigments of vegetable
origin”. The impact of the packaging has also been reduced: there isn’t
much of it, it’s made of 100% recycled bleach-free cardboard and printed
with bio-inks. BIC says the shaver has reduced the emissions of CO2 by 16g per
unit from the equivalent three-blade shaver made of regular oil-based plastic.
According to ENDS, PLA also compares well to recycled oil-based plastic. If
incinerated rPET emits 14% more CO2 over its life than PLA. Based on landfill
rPET releases 47% more emissions than PLA over its life cycle.(1) However at
the moment it is very difficult to recycle bioplastics. Due to the low volume
of bioplastic waste there are few facilities that offer the service. Conventional
plastic recyclers are now counting the cost as unknowing consumers dump bioplastic
in with their usual plastic recycling. Just one PLA bottle in 1000 PET bottles
can render the consignment useless.(1) In the long run it is hoped that bioplastics
will be used in the production of power within anerobic digestion. These giant
composting units break down organic matter using the gases for energy and the
residue for fertiliser.
However, the question arises, if more goods are produced from bioplastic what
will be the effect on food markets? Currently, corn dedicated to bioplastic
production represents only 0.04% of the worldwide estimated corn production,
but as the effects of peak oil are felt, bioplastics are likely to become a
more viable option and this could all change. It is already a problem with biofuels
which have exacerbated the current food crisis, and on current trajectories
would lead to a loss of food-producing land in the future. Lester Brown has
estimated that of the 20 million tonnes of increased world grain production
in 2006, 14 million tonnes were used to fuel US cars whilst only 6 million contributed
to the world’s food supplies.(2) This problem could be combated as manufacturers
aim to produce the next generation of bioplastics from non-edible parts of corn,
leaf, stem, etc, reducing the effect on food supply. In addition BIC admits
that almost all bioplastic suppliers are established in the USA and the product
contains GM material.(14)
Better options
Some razor sharpening products promise help with this waste problem by sharpening
used disposable razor heads. According to manufacturers, a disposable razor
could last for up to 130 shaves as opposed to the usual five or six. They usually
work by rubbing a dull silicon strip down the length of the blade a few times.
The metal of a razor blade is apparently extremely malleable at the edge as
it is very thin, so you don’t need a hard material to sharpen it. They
are hard to find these days, but we found battery-operated ones at www.clifford-james.co.uk
and on the Easy
Life website. At the time of writing, they cost £12.99.
A traditional razor may be a more environmentally-friendly option. The double
edge razor dates back to the early part of the last century. The only part of
the razor that is disposable is the blade. The handle and head can be reused
ad infinitum. Used blades are distinctly separate from the head and can be recycled
with care at a recycling facility (we wouldn’t recommend leaving them for
curbside collection). Some people set up their own blade banks to store blades
before being deposited at a recycling centre.
You can purchase a Merkur double edge razor at old style tobacconists or online,
while Boots sells its own version and the Wilkinson Sword Classic.
There is also the option of using an old fashioned cut-throat razor, but these
can necessitate the use of a leather sharpening strap and creams or shaving
gels like other wet shaves. They are not typically available on the high street
but can be bought from specialist shops or internet sites. A further option
may be to use a barber rather than shave yourself, cutting down on the amount
of equipment used. Clearly the most environmental option is not to shave and
to trim your hair with scissors.
Getting a buzz out of shaving
Electric razors are another beast altogether. Although they are clearly not
disposable they do have other impacts. The ones on the table can be divided
into two categories: those that only recharge via the mains and those that use
more environmentally-friendly methods.
New on the market since our last report are a solar-powered razor and a wind-up
razor. The Sol-Shaver solar-powered shaver, as you would expect, recharges from
sunlight rather than the mains. The PowerPlus Piranha wind-up razor recharges
by manually turning a handle on the razor (one minute of winding is claimed
to give you approximately two minutes shaving). Both are likely to save significant
amounts of CO2 over their lifetime compared with plug in re-chargeable versions.
However, like all the re-chargeable shavers they are complicated machines that
contain many different components, metals, plastics, batteries etc. It therefore
makes it difficult to assess their comparative life cycle impact when compared
with bioplastic, recycled disposable razors or double edge razors. The Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive that took effect in 2008
ensures that those manufacturing electrical items must now offer an end-of-life
take back service. This means you can send old electrical goods back to the
manufacturers for them to dispose of in a responsible manner, unlike the manufacturers
of disposable razors.
Wet shaving also uses water resources and necessitates shaving gels or creams
that have an environmental impact. But it would seem that wet shavers obviously
have less impact when it comes to energy consumption both from use and in manufacture,
though energy consumption of electric shaves is generally low at around 15 w/h.
The Culture of Shaving
Apparently since our early ancestors came down from the trees they removed
their hair. Evidence suggest that this may have come from the need to remove
lice and improve overall health.(12) Grooming techniques practised by early
humans are still visible in other apes. But with lice no longer a major problem
and soap in abundance why are we are still obsessed with hairlessness?
Below two members of feminist group AWOL (Angry Women of Liverpool) discuss
their shaving habits and how our culture affects them.
"I’m a feminist and I shave my legs. For a long time, I waxed my
legs, shaved my armpits, and submitted to the dreaded bikini wax on more or
less a regular basis. I enjoyed the feeling of smooth hairlessness, and the
accompanying feeling of having skin that belonged, that did not enjoin the rebuke
of others, particularly other women. It was a while before I joined in this
ritual, but at school, when short skirts were de rigueur, and you could no longer
get away with hairy stalks sticking out of your tights, I started to shave.
I remember this as being somehow shameful, as though I was supposed to be naturally
hairless, and the act of shaving was confession and penance for this sin all
in one.
At university, when I had my first proper boyfriend, who did not apparently
give a damn whether I was hairy, smooth or covered in scales (an attitude I
have found is not uncommon amongst males generally, although you do encounter
the odd one with a fetish for hairlessness or, more rarely, extreme hairiness),
my attitude to hair removal changed and became the whimsical habit it now is
today. Sometimes I am smooth and waxy like a Gillette girl, sometimes coated
in downy fur. Sometimes I have bald armpits, with very little scent. Sometimes
I have bristles of dark black hair which magnify the peppery, musky smell of
my natural body odour. I like the way my body can change in this way, and I
like experimenting with different extremes of hairlessness/hairiness, and I
no longer do it out of shame or disgust for the way my body is. The feeling
of smooth skin is lovely, so inviting to touch, for yourself and for anyone
else you might want to touch you, and I think this is the reason many women
shave, and the reason why I still do. There is no denying this physical frisson,
as tied to the airbrushed images of fake femaleness that are used to sell everything
from washing up liquid to tractors as it may be. That frisson is hard to give
up entirely, and I’m sure I will continue to experiment with body hair
for a while yet, although truthfully I think my hairiest periods often coincide
with some of my happiest."
Hannah Ryan
"The last time I removed my leg hair was about two weeks ago. The time
before that was about two months previously. Before that, I hadn’t for
some months. Summer always gets me – I can spend most of the year barely
aware of my legs except as ambulatory devices concealed by trousers, but as
soon as the sun shines and I think I might want to bare them, hair becomes an
issue.
I usually use a disposable razor. I used to get my own, but I use them so rarely
now I can get away with nicking one from my partner’s stash.
I do it to conform to patriarchal expectations of what a woman’s body
should be like. When I don’t do it, it’s to thwart patriarchal expectations
of what a woman’s body should be like. I switch between these tactics at
irregular intervals. Even though no individual man actually expects or demands
hairlessness of me, the call of the norm can nevertheless be so strong that
my self esteem suffers more for not conforming than for betraying my values.
I do it to conform. And I do it because it makes me feel better. Conforming
is a very quick and easy way to feel good about yourself. Not conforming is
hard work, especially in public or if your job involves working with people
who tend to conform. Sometimes we all need a break. The mistake many make is
in equating ‘feeling better about yourself’ with being empowered.
There’s nothing empowering about needing to painfully pluck the hair out
of your sensitive areas before you can feel sexy.
It’s not surprising that conforming to patriarchal expectations of beauty
can make us feel better about ourselves when we’ve been bombarded our whole
lives with unattainable images of what we’re supposed to be. Getting close
to that image has huge rewards within patriarchy (and dangers too).
No feminist has ever condemned women for shaving their body hair – feminists
do not condemn women for conforming to patriarchal expectation in a world where
not conforming invites punishments from name-calling to stoning and every stage
in between – we call this victim-blaming.
Feminists condemn the patriarchal system that has built these expectations
and maintains the punishments for deviating from them, not women who don’t
risk the public humiliation that comes with challenging those expectations."
Emma Pooka
Company Profiles
Recycline is a US company that only make goods from recycled materials.
They produce toothbrushes and table ware as well as the Preserve recycled razor.
Its products are available from UK ethical online stores such as Ethical Superstore.
Procter & Gamble owns a host of consumer brands. These include Gillette
and Braun which appear on the table, but also Pampers, Pringles and Vidal Sassoon.
It has been criticised by leading animal rights groups for its animal testing.
At the moment it is the subject of a boycott call from Uncaged through the Boycott
Procter & Gamble website and Hurtful
Essences campaign . Procter & Gamble is also a member of four international
free trade lobby groups and has operations in 16 oppressive regimes.
Wilkinson Sword is owned by battery company Energizer Holdings. According
to Naturewatch the company produces shaving gels that are tested on animals.(15)
DOVO, owners of Merkur, are a specialist razor company based in Germany.
They pick up marks in the animal rights category for selling leather products
such as sharpening straps for cut-throat razors and leather bags. They also
sell shaving brushes made from badger hair.
PowerPlus only produces power-saving products, such as wind-up shavers
and lower power light bulbs. It also gives a percentage of its turnover to the
PowerPlus Foundation that helps provide mains free (such as wind-up) technology
to people who have no access to grid electricity.
Further Reading
Biofuels Watch
Compassionate Shopper
Uncaged campaign
References
1 ENDS. March 2009. 'When will bio-plastics finally grow up.' 10/09/09
2 www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/sgr_boswell.pdf. 10/09/09
3 www.guardian.co.uk/money/2006/apr/04/ethicalmoney.leohickmanonethicalliving
10/09/09
5 www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/throwaway-razors-and-nappies-should-be-taxed-as-luxuries-says-defra-914041.html
10/09/09
6 www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6162452.stm 10/09/09
7 www.ippr.org/pressreleases/?id=2433 10/09/09
8 www.academic.mintel.com/sinatra/oxygen_academic/search_results/show&/display/id=220155/display/id=289782?select_section=289785
10/09/09
10 http://www.transnationale.org/companies/gillette.php 10/09/09
11 http://www.green-alliance.org.uk/grea1.aspx?id=2728 10/09/09
12 http://www.ehow.com/about_4605874_history-razor.html 10/09/09
14 http://www.bicecolutions.com/en/index.php/shaver last seen 17/9/09
15 phone call with Naturewatch spokesperson September 2009