Search results

Geotechnical fills are used for building roadway embankments, filling in behind retaining walls, and as backfill above buried pipelines. Lightweight fill reduces the load so structures can be built more economically. A new lightweight geo‐material made from recycled plastic bottles glued together in their original post‐consumer form was developed. The purpose of this work is to explore the use of this new material as a lightweight geotechnical fill.

Through a preliminary laboratory and field study, aspects of the physical and mechanical characteristics of the recycled plastic bottle blocks were investigated. This new material is currently undergoing field trials behind a retaining wall on a bicycle path.

It was found that the average density of this new material is very low, at 32.63 kg/m³ (2.04 lb/ft³), with 59.5 percent of a block made up of recycled plastic bottles. The plastic bottle waste stream obtained from a recycling plant is gap‐graded having approximately 25 percent of the bottle volume at the 2 l bottle size with the remaining 75 percent at the 500 ml bottle size. Unconfined compression tests on small ten‐bottle samples produced strengths of 60 kN/m² (1,250 lb/ft²).

Testing indicates that this material may be useful as a lightweight geotechnical fill over soft soils or behind retaining walls; as an energy‐absorbing crash barrier for highway, race track, or airport safety; as ground and building insulation for Arctic construction; as floating barriers or platforms for offshore work; or for acoustic or vibration dampening for manufacturing processes.

This work explores the use of large volumes of recycled plastic bottles as an environmentally friendly geotechnical engineering material. Engineering parameters for this new material are presented as well as a discussion of an ongoing field study. The information presented here is the first step in understanding this new material with respect to civil engineering applications.

Ensuring high water quality is crucial for safeguarding public health, as contaminated water can pose significant risks to consumers’ well-being. This study aims to evaluate the microbiological and chemical quality of bottled water brands commonly consumed in Dodoma, Tanzania.

A total of 36 samples from 12 brands were collected between January and March 2023 and analyzed for microbiological and general water quality parameters.

Microbial analysis found that 42% of brands tested positive for coliform bacteria, while opportunistic pathogens Aeromonas hydrophila and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were detected in 25% and 17% of samples, respectively. For chemical composition, 42% of brands exceeded the World Health Organization guideline value of 1.5 mg/L for fluoride. However, no other parameters exceeded national drinking water standards. Statistical analysis revealed significantly higher measured fluoride levels compared to values declared on product labels (paired t-test, p = 0.003). A moderate positive correlation between fluoride and conductivity (r = 0.52, p = 0.045) indicated possible geological influences on water chemistry.

To enhance the study’s comprehensiveness, exploring temporal and spatial variations among water brands, including samples from typically clean environments such as supermarkets, could have been beneficial in identifying underlying factors. Additionally, investigating the entire manufacturing process, from production to end-user, could have provided insights into unforeseen deviations in quality. Furthermore, the use of pour plating techniques at 37°C for microbial analysis, while suitable for resource-limited settings, may not have fully captured coliform diversity compared to membrane filtration and differential temperature incubation as per standard methods. This could partly explain the detection of heterotrophs without higher coliform counts in some samples.

This study provides baseline data on the bacteriological and inorganic chemical quality of bottled water in Dodoma. Detectable microbial contaminants and significant exceedances of fluoride guidelines in some products raise public health concerns.

While existing studies focus on bottled water quality at production facilities, this research highlights the overlooked risks at retail points, where consumers are directly affected.

The purpose of this paper is to present an original model for the production-recycling-reuse of plastic beverage bottles.

It is assumed that discarded two-liter plastic polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles are collected from the market. The bottles are then sorted into non-contaminated and contaminated streams. The non-contaminated PET bottles are either remanufactured or used as regrind mixed with virgin PET to produce new bottles to satisfy varying demand. The contaminated bottles are either sold to industries using low-grade plastic or disposed of in a landfill. Numerical studies are used to illustrate the behaviour of the model, with an emphasis on exploring the reduction of total system cost and the amount of bottles going into a landfill.

Numerical analyses conducted on the model found that the amount of bottles collected had the largest influence on the outcome of the total system unit time cost. Alternative materials to PET are surveyed and used to demonstrate a significant reduction in the cost of landfill disposal due to their more rapid degradation in the landfill.

Several areas for future work are highlighted. Potential modifications to the model could focus on accommodating bottles made of material other than plastic, incorporating the effects of learning on manual tasks, and on accommodating shortages or excess inventory.

The model incorporates several unique aspects, including accounting for the cost of land use and associated environmental damage through the calculation of a present value that is charged to the manufacturer.

During a short two‐decade period (1879‐1903) processes for making food packages – paperboard cartons, tinplate cans and glass bottles – were mechanized by American inventor/entrepreneurs Robert Gair, Edwin Norton and Michael Owens, respectively. This paper aims to describe the context for packaged, processed food at the time, and to explore the men, their inventions, and the modern packaging industry that they collectively developed.

Biographies and patents were reviewed as well as contemporaneous and retrospective trade publications, newspapers, censuses and commentary.

Packaging's industrial revolution played a key role in the development of modern marketing. Mass‐produced cartons, cans and bottles collectively became building blocks for mass markets. By the time of the first supermarket in 1920, annual sales of packaged breakfast cereal, crackers, biscuits, canned fruits and vegetables, preserves, soft drinks and other prepared foods had increased by 60‐fold over 1880 levels, 80 percent of which occurred after 1910. The packaging companies of Gair, Norton and Owens capitalized on new methods of production and business integration (and collusion) to profit from the trend, and enabled emerging national brands like Nabisco, Campbell's Soup and Coca‐Cola to successfully lead a revolution in mass marketing.

This paper shows why and how the practically simultaneous invention of machines to make cartons, cans and bottles was able to accelerate the development of national brands and supermarkets. Inasmuch as the histories of the three packaging forms are not considered to be in the same “industry,” this research represents a fresh interpretation of secondary sources.

At every period of time marked by years, the seasons by turns and twists in history, among country folk especially, the years of great storms and hard winters; in law enforcement, the passing of some far‐reaching, profound statutory measure, there is this almost universal tendency to look back—over your shoulder‐assessing changes, progressive or otherwise, discerning trends and assaying prospects. We are about to emerge from the seventies—battered but unbowed!—into the new decade of the eighties, perhaps with a feeling that things can only get better.

The purpose of this study was to identify how to reduce bottled water use on our campus, given that the majority of students were bringing it onto campus from outside sources. Bottled water bans have been implemented on several college and university campuses in an effort to reduce the consumption of bottled water and the associated waste. Observations on the campus of Allegheny College demonstrated that while bottled water was being consumed, students were not purchasing those bottles on campus.

To identify methods to reduce bottled water prevalence on campus, alter negative perceptions of local tap water and create behavioral changes among student, an environmental science class surveyed the student body. Students were asked about their preferred type of drinking water and why they preferred one type to another, as well as additional questions about reusable bottle ownership and usage.

The data identified that disposable bottled water was most commonly consumed by first year students, with rates of use decreasing the longer students are on campus. Many students were concerned about the safety of tap water and did not like the taste.

As a result of this survey, Allegheny College has increased the number of filtered, bottle refill stations throughout campus and provides a high-quality, metal water bottle to all students upon beginning their first year. Students are also provided information about the safety of Meadville tap water, as well as the environmental and social benefits of choosing tap water over bottled water.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the factors affecting consumer demand for and the effects on tax on sparkling and non-sparkling bottled water in the USA.

Using nationally representative data from 62,092 households and tobit econometric procedure, conditional and unconditional factors affecting the demand for sparkling and non-sparkling bottled water were estimated.

The own-price elasticity of demand for sparkling and non-sparkling bottled water is −0.664 and −0.229, respectively. Coffee, fruit drinks, whole milk and tea are substitutes for non-sparking bottled water. Non-sparking bottled water, coffee, fruit drinks and whole milk are substitutes for sparking bottled water. Household income, race, region and presence of children significantly affect the demand for bottled water. A 10 percent increase in price due to a tax on bottled water decreased plastic use by 50 grams per household per year. This is equivalent to saving 9.5m pounds of plastic annually.

Data used in this analysis only captured at-home consumption of bottled water by US households. While tax on bottled water may reduce the consumption of bottled water, it may increase the consumption of competitive beverages such as carbonated soft drinks or fruit drinks. Although the use of plastic with regards to water bottles may go down as a result of the tax, the plastic consumption could go up with regards to consumers’ increased purchase of other beverages. This might contribute net increase plastic bottle consumption, undermining the effects of a bottled water tax.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to look at demand and tax aspects with regards to disaggregated bottled water products.

This paper aimed to examine the impact of the removal of bottled water on the campus community. This paper presents the findings of a survey conducted at the first Australian university to remove single-use bottled water from sale on a small regional university campus. The removal of bottled water from sale at the university formed part of the university’s commitment to environmental sustainability.

The study was conducted substantially by undergraduate students who participated in an action learning project in which they assisted in the design, implementation and analysis of an online snapshot survey made available to all staff and students of the university.

The results indicated some evidence of changes to pro-environmental behaviors such as increased use of re-fillable bottles, but there were less desirable outcomes such as drinking less water. Community perceptions were dramatically polarized. Restrictions on freedom of choice, concerns about health as a result of increased use of high-sugar drinks and the continued availability of other plastic drink bottles were provided as strong objections to the removal of bottled water from sale on campus.

The study provides useful insights for university sustainability planners and administrators about the complex range of issues associated with the implementation of sustainability initiatives on a university campus.

While extensive literature exists about the environmental impacts of bottled water, few studies have explored the impacts or community responses to the removal of bottled water in the university context.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how a web‐based virtual ideation tool, dialogr.com, can be used to capture insights from consumers and to gain an understanding of consumer satisfaction with package design during and after product use. The authors also demonstrate how the resulting rich qualitative data can be combined with output from traditional survey research, to provide insight into the impact of satisfaction with package design on purchase intent.

A mixed‐methods approach was employed that captured qualitative insights from a large number of consumers regarding their experience using product packaging and combined the quantitative rigor of survey research to capture brand familiarity and perceptions, as well as brand preference and loyalty.

Results demonstrate that design is important to consumers and also that consumers are increasingly design literate. The perceived quality of the package design does impact brand evaluation. Negative reactions to product packaging adversely impacted intent to purchase and intent to recommend the product to others.

Results show that the mixed model is a promising method for gaining feedback on new package designs. Substantive implications include: design drives purchase, consumers want to be involved in design, and getting user input on design is important.

Consumer packaged goods companies often test packaging prototypes in a limited way – they either ignore qualitative measurement completely or use small sample focus groups. This quali‐quant method offers two advantages over the methodologies most commonly used to study package design; it has the capacity to engage large numbers of consumers and it can be set up to gather data from consumers during or immediately after product use.