Discover and share stories

of adventure, connection, and change making.

292 people think this is good


  1. {{}}
  1. {{fields.video_link.url}}

Ready to post! You’ve uploaded the maximum number of images.

Your video is ready to post!

Oops! Nice pic, but it’s just not our (file) type. Please try uploading a .jpg or .png image.

Well, this is embarrassing. Something went wrong when posting your comment. Care to try again?

That image is too large. Maximum size is 6MB.

Please enter a valid URL from YouTube or Vimeo.

Embedding has been disabled for this video.


Posting comment...

  • Kristine Brooks

    I'm happy that I'm not the only one to disagree with this infographic. It's a process of downsizing, it's not zero waste! It includes 'recycling' and "reusing" but goes beyond recycling by taking a 'whole system' approach to the vast flow of resources and waste through human society.


  • babsbehan

    This is called "Downcycling", the process of converting waste materials or useless products into new materials or products of lesser quality and reduced functionality.
    This is not an approach to creating zero-waste.
    P&G clearly have not grasped the idea of "Closed-Loop Production".
    Who are these jokers..?

    • Mainak Banerjee

      Well said! Let me tell you that these jokers are from Procter & Gamble!!

  • jade.lauron

    So wait, if you use that used dish soap to wash trucks, doesn't it then still run off and end up back as waste in the environment? And what about the other products? Can you recycle those roof tiles, those broom handles, that upholstery stuffing? Is that stuffing off-gassing toxic fumes? Is putting shaving foam into the soil healthy for it, really? It's not exactly organic. And they're talking about growing grass with it; does that mean it isn't safe around things grown to eat?

  • Jackie Cleary

    ???? What about all those gazillion plastic bottles, diapers and razors that will never be recycled by consumers??? Am I just being negative, or is better biodegradable packaging not important?

  • theapostrophe

    Our little company is trying to change the words we use in Australia from waste to materials / resources. Manufacturing facilities have high quality residual resources that makes up a valuable revenue stream - that's the other side of this for P&G. It's profitable.

    I'm not sure that disposable nappies/diapers and chemical based dish washing liquid are the best products for the environment, we need to start thinking a bit bigger picture than just 'end of pipe'.

  • alicemorgan

    Nappies are made of plastic. This is so wrong.

  • rbdancer

    This strikes me as the usual self-serving BS dished up by big corporations to greenwash their actual impact on the environment.

    For a look at some of the things P&G isn't publicizing, check out:

    Certainly, by corporate standards, P&G is squeaky clean. But the economies of scale mean that their impacts, both positive and negative, are large and widespread. Caveat emptor!

  • pulecz

    Yay! to any honest effort like this...but not so fast. I really wonder how would Gillette (P&G's branch) explain why they sell 4 razors in housing that has room for 5? The fifth housing is always empty for no apparent reason. That might sound like nothing, but the total impact on wasted material, space and transportation here is huge. So P&G, it would be really nice if you put some effort into lowering the input usage of materials and energy in the first place, before you start thinking what to do with all the waste you produce afterwards.

    • rbdancer

      They were preparing for escalation in the blade wars by tooling up for five blades. Just in time, too.

  • Sam

    This is so great to know! Now it's time for them to focus some of their good efforts towards eliminating animal testing.

  • Annie Wadhams

    This is awesome! I've wondered about trash, recycling, and who does what with our used-up stuff...

    • Thierry Phillips

      This has nothing to do with post-distribution R-R-R, that is still almost entirely dependent on how WE deal with OUR waste. Kudos to P&G for them actually paying attention to the really huge ROI good reuse/recycle processes enable, but they might have ignored it 'til the past few years or for another decade, had not people raised a big enough stink in the '70's, '80's, and '90's.
      The bottom line is that efficient, zero-waste operation is fabulously worthwhile for most companies, but many tried to avoid facing that truth for decades.