reusa-canThe Ultimate in Recyclingreusa-can what you put in your ‘Green Box’ or landfillReusa-Can is a revolutionary method of refurbishing (not recycling) metal cans such as baked bean, soup, pet food and beverage cans. Reusa-Can will cut CO² gas emissions; reduce the use of hundreds of millions of tons of oil, minerals, water and chemicals and cut the cost of canned food. It eliminates all recycling procedures for metal cans. By crushing these cans and exporting them as scrap when they could be refurbished and reused is a criminal waste of resources. By not supporting us the UK government is losing us a £300billion world market. The public are constantly being urged to recycle more cans, bottles and plastic. Recycling brings no visible rewards to the public who pay council taxes for ‘their cans’ to be collected whilst multinationals are making £millions from their effort. Reusa-Can wants a system that rewards council taxpayers and shoppers by returning most of its profits to them. This will encourage people to put more of their cans out for collection. Only about 56% of the 20 billion UK steel cans and about 31% of aluminium cans are recycled and even fewer of glass and plastic containers are recycled. Choosing the Reusa-Can reward scheme will encourage can collection worldwide. The British and world public is unaware how much they give to multinational companies every fortnight (Graphs 1 & 2). They are told to regard the millions of tonnes of cans they put out each week in their ‘Green Box’ as scrap metal. It is not scrap it is a precious resource and those cans are ‘your’ property until collected by a waste company. At present UK can recycling is the equivalent of putting £80 per annum of your money into your ‘green box’ every year to be shared between multinational companies. Council Taxpayers are unwittingly paying via their council tax for their £80 to be collected (Graph 3 & 4). In total the public are putting about 350,000 tonnes of high-grade steel and aluminium cans into their ‘green boxes’ each year and getting nothing in return. UK council taxpayers are being deceived. Our Prime Minister appears to be happy for this to continue because most profits go to multinational shareholders when his own people getting nothing in return. We doubt if many MP’s in his own Party or in parliament are aware of what the public is giving unknowingly to multinationals each year. The losses to this country and the world are astronomical. Shoppers bought these cans when they purchased food or beverages they should get some benefit. Reusa-Can wants to rectify this situation this but is being prevented by our government. 75% of food and beverage cans need not go anywhere near a smelter they should be refurbished in the country in which they are sold and then resold to food and beverage companies. A majority of this money should be returned to those people who donate the cans not shareholders of multinationals. It is generally recognised that between 20-40% of the value of canned food is in its can. For easy calculation we will work on an average price of 30%. Therefore, 30% of the cost of a can of baked beans priced at £0.64p is £0.19p. Having removed its lid when opening it, it reduces it value to about £0.16p. ,When you have washed it out and put it in your ‘green box’ you are, in affect, giving £0.16p away. That is the ‘true can value’. You then pay another fee, via your Council Tax, for your cans (money) to be collected. If a household puts out ten cans a week and their green box it is emptied every fortnight those cans have a true ‘can’ value of £3.20. They are handing over this valuable can resource (money) to multinationals for virtually nothing (Steel scrap is £10 per tonne 11/09/2009) to be destroyed when 75% of it could be refurbished and reused. On average these cans have a ‘true can value’ worth up to £80 per annum. Each household is paying council taxes for these cans (money) to be handed over ‘virtually free of charge’ and they see no direct benefit. Then it is transported thousands of miles, at great environmental and energy cost to a multinational steel company in another country (Present Day Recycling Chart). It goes through a polluting recycling process to be turned back into tinplate, which we import from the same multinational company at a £1,000 per tonne. To get some idea of the losses to the public see graph (Graph 5). We could refurbish these cans in the UK and resell them to food packers at a lower price than a new cans and this should reduce food prices. Presently we send 327,600 tonnes of steel cans annually to India or China to be recycled. This is equivalent to 6 billion cans. Selling this amount of ‘refurbished cans’ at £0.08p would produce £524.16 million in revenue per annum and would cut our imports by 327,600 tonnes. This money should go back to council taxpayers. Reusa-Can could refurbish the same cans ten times thereby increasing our profits and reducing our imports by ten. Refurbishing and selling the same cans ten times over would provide £4.65 billion and cut our imports by 3.276 million tonne saving up to £2.91 billion. The 44% of cans people throw into landfill costs the UK up to £257.4million as imported tinplate to replace (Graph 5). Do we want to give this money to multinationals? If we collected and refurbished 75% of our steel cans then sold them to food packer’s savings would be astronomical. reusa-can estimated cost of shipping our cans abroadWhen shipping our cans as scrap abroad the fuel ships use is bunker fuel. Most cans go to India or China and then we import tinplate from them to make new cans there is no saving. Bunker fuel is the dirtiest, most environmentally unfriendly low grade fuel available giving off more pollution than any other fuel. The shipping industry constantly pollutes the seas and shores with it in a most irresponsible way. The United Nations International Maritime Organisation expressed their concern about shipping pollution in July 2009. Recycling adds a considerable amount to the cost of our canned food. Recycling both steel and aluminium cans travel hundreds of thousands of miles each year before reaching the public. Shipping not only adds to the expense of our food it creates an enormous amount of pollution emissions and uses an enormous amount of energy. There is no point any government leaders talking about global warming and climate change in December 2009 in Copenhagen if they are not prepared to reduce industrial emissions. As I have informed our Prime Minister Reusa-Can will make a difference. Savings in shipping fuel for one year will pay for setting up all four refurbishing plants required to refurbish all the UK food and beverage cans. Wickipedia.org states: Shipping Pollution This extract from ship pollution and exhaust emissions illustrates shipping causes considerable pollution to land, sea and our atmosphere as well as using a considerable amount of resources. European shipping accounts for more pollution than all the cars, lorries and factories put together. Shipping Exhaust Emissions Exhaust emissions from ships are considered to be a significant source of air pollution. “Seagoing vessels are responsible for an estimated 14 percent of emissions of nitrogen from fossil fuels and 16 percent of the emissions of sulfur from petroleum uses into the atmosphere.”[2] In Europe ships make up a large percentage of the sulfur introduced to the air, “…as much sulfur as all the cars, lorries and factories in Europe put together.”[5] “By 2010, up to 40% of air pollution over land could come from ships.”[5] Sulfur in the air creates acid rain which damages crops and buildings. When inhaled the sulfur is known to cause respiratory problems and even increase the risk of a heart attack.[5] According to Irene Blooming, a spokeswoman for the European environmental coalition Seas at Risk, the fuel used in oil tankers and container ships is high in sulfur and cheaper to buy compared to the fuel used for domestic land use. “A ship lets out around 50 times more sulfur than a lorry per metric tonne of cargo carried.”[5] Cities in the U.S. like Long Beach, Los Angeles, Houston, Galveston, and Pittsburgh see some of the heaviest shipping traffic in the nation and have left local officials desperately trying to clean up the air.[1] Increasing trade between the U.S. and China is helping to increase the number of vessels navigating the Pacific and exacerbating many of the environmental problems. To maintain the level of growth China is currently experiencing, large amounts of grain are being shipped to China by the boat load. The number of voyages are expected to continue increasing.[6] Reusa-Can will help reduce these shipping emissions. Refurbishing each can up to ten times could save between 120,000 and 160,000 miles in transport energy alone. We estimate that it would take 33 x 10,000 tonne ships to take our cans to China and return with tinplate to make more cans. As a rough guide we estimate those 33 ship would use £16 million in fuel. If Reusa-Can could refurbish those cans ten times it would save £160 million. This is a considerable saving in energy, oil, atmospheric emissions also ocean pollution. Energy used for transport purposes have not been calculated into our estimated energy savings figures. The United Nations should welcome Reusa-Can and its contribution to cutting industrial pollution and shipping emissions!!! They should sign the petition and tell the British Government they should support Reusa-Can!! We will wait to see if they do so at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009. reusa-can versus Steel Can Production13 billion steel cans and 7 billion aluminium cans are used each year and the UK public is losing £billions each year. We could refurbish 75% of these cans ten times before they have to be replaced with new cans. For ease of calculation we have used 45 grams as an average weight of a steel can, steel food and beverage cans vary considerably in weight. The UK uses 13 billion steel cans per annum weighing 585,000 tonnes. We purchase this amount of tinplate each year to make food and beverage cans. From the 585,000 tonnes of steel cans 56% (327,600 tonnes) of steel cans are retrieved via various recycling schemes. Reusa-Can would like to refurbish as many cans as possible. The remainder, 44% (257,400 tonnes) of steel cans go to landfill or lost by other means.
For material and energy cost comparison between recycling cans and our Reusa-Can system see graphs 10,11, and 12. Aluminium can savings are even higher per tonne. Steel CansApproximately 20,000 (soup can size 45gram) cans make a tonne. Refurbishing one tonne of cans ‘just once’ would save:
By refurbishing a tonne of cans up to ten times this increases savings by ten.
It is claimed that recycling speeds up the time a can is returned into service and is blatantly untrue. As they use 75% virgin material, this has to be excavated, transported thousands of miles to a smelter. It takes weeks or months to go through this process. Only during smelting is 25% recycled can material added. It misleads the public when companies do not to give the full account of can recycling. They should include the cost of travel as well as cost of production when using a combination of virgin materials and recycled cans. It takes as long to make a recycled can as it does to make a new can. There is no significant saving between manufacturing a new can and a recycled can. Using our Reusa-Can system cans are collected then taken to a refurbishment plant where they are washed and de-rimmed. During the whole process they would be sterilised several times before being re-lacquered. No other new materials would be used. We would have surplus material (rim) that could then be sent for recycling. The only energy used would be to run machinery and we could have cans back on supermarket shelves within 2 weeks. See comparison charts Present Day Recycling (Present Day collection) and Reusa-Can (Reusa-Collection) refurbishing system. The quick turn around of cans would reduce the number of cans needed in circulation by about two thirds. This adds to savings of energy etc. There is no need for 75% of our cans to leave our shores they could be refurbished here. This applies to each country throughout the world that uses sufficient cans to warrant such a process. It is hard to calculate how incredibly big total savings that Reusa-Can would be able to provide over a period of twelve months when used to its full potential. The worlds' cans (600 billion) are a resource not scrap (Graphs 14 & 15). Reusa-Can will cut our imports and the imports of other countries of tinplate for cans to 1/3 of what it is today. This will provide further resource savings and help economies of many countries worldwide. We believe Reusa-Can would reduce UK imports of tinplate from 585,000 tonnes to below 150,000 tonnes. At between £500 and £1,000 per tonne our import savings could be as high as £435 million. This would benefit our economy and world energy reductions and emissions (CO² emissions from steel). If we mean to do anything about meeting Kyoto and European emissions targets Reusa-Can is a good start (Climate change). From excavation of ore to the final production of steel food or beverage cans, at every stage, Reusa-Can will give a considerable reduction in energy and pollution. Reusa-Can Steel Can Savings This is a very rough guide to show what Reusa-Can would save in coal, oil, energy etc if we refurbished the 327,600 tonnes of steel cans we presently crush and send as scrap to China or India. We could refurbish them ten times instead of recycling this would increase savings by ten. Savings based on refurbishing 327,600 tonnes of steel cans ten times:
America uses 100 million steel food cans per day and 99 billion beverage cans every year. Europe uses 38 billion steel food containers and 44 billion beverage containers. Savings of energy, oil, chemicals etc would be enormous. We could lead the world in this simple technology but we are letting it slip through our fingers. This is due to a lack of support, so far, from government despite the fact savings are so huge. We doubt if anyone could provide an accurate figure. By adding the value of aluminium cans that price goes through the roof. All council taxpayers who recycle cans are being deceived and let down incredibly by this government. reusa-can versus de-tinning cans (Another Saving)On the outside of each steel can is a very thin protective coating of tin only microns thick. That is why they are called ‘tin cans’. When cans are crushed into cubes they are sometimes sent to a de-tinning plant. They are put through chemical and electrolytic processes to recover the tin coating. This separates the tin from the steel can and recovers 68% of it. Every tonne of crushed cans produces approximately 7.5lbs of pure tin. Pure tin prices reached $26,000 per tonne in 2008 and the public did not receive any benefit from it. Tin values have dropped to $10,000 dollars because of the recession. Up to 975 tonnes of pure tin could have been retrieved from the 327,600 tonnes of steel cans we recycle each year. In 2008 pure tin was selling at $26,000 per tonne and 1096 tonnes would have been worth up to $28,518,750 per tonne (£19.01 million). That money went into shareholders pockets the UK public did not benefit at all. Eventually it may be possible to de-tin cans then refurbish them. The pure tin could be sold; this cash would benefit ratepayers and good causes. Reusa-Can would not crush the cans and this may help us to retrieve up to 99% of the tin. This may retrieve up to 11lbs of tin per tonne; if prices reached $26,000 per tonne again it would be worth $41,827,500. A majority of this could go back to council taxpayers. reusa-can versus aluminium cansReusa-Cans aluminium refurbishment system will reduce energy, water and chemical usage. Reusa-Can will cut mining production and reduce Perfluorocarbons (PFC’s), Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s) and Carbon Dioxides (CO²) emissions worldwide. Aluminium recycling technology has improved recently. Now it is possible to recycle a can and produce one can from that same amount of material that is recycled. This is good but not even close to Reusa-Cans emission and energy savings figures. The UK only recycles 31% of its aluminium cans. Over 69% of the 7.7 billion new cans we use go to landfill and have to be remade from virgin material each year. To produce a tonne of aluminium to the ingot stage requires 8 tonnes of bauxite 8 tonnes of refined oil and 15,000kwH of energy. 15,000kWh is enough energy to supply an average UK home for 3.6 years. Converting those ingots into a tonne of beverage cans increases energy use. The total ‘production energy’ used is equivalent to that use by a UK home for at least 4 years. Based on 50,000 cans per tonne, the energy used to remake 5.31 billion new cans is equivalent to energy supplied to 563,414 UK homes. Reusa-Can would save that energy. It is all very well building wind farms and nuclear power stations we should try to reduce energy use worldwide and conserve our precious resources. Reusa-Can would show a faster return on investment, it would conserve more resources. It could give us a breathing space; by reducing our energy needs ‘now’, we can prepare other sources of energy to meet our needs for the future. It is a practical quick solution. Recycled aluminium cans use 30% less energy but Reusa-Can uses almost none. 8 tonnes of refined oil is used to make one tonne of aluminium. That would provide enough petrol, for a car doing 30mpg, to drive 50,000 miles. Refurbishing one tonne of aluminium cans (50,000) ten times would save enough energy for 1½ times the lifetime of a car. We are using resources that could be put to better use. Reusa-Can would save this oil. Manufacturing a tonne of aluminium cans will generate 4 tonnes of CO² and many other harmful emissions etc. In the UK we use approximately 154,000 tonnes of new beverage cans each year, this produces about 600,000 tonnes of CO². Aluminium along with steel, glass and plastic are huge polluting industries. Aluminium produces PFC’s and CFC’s and other chemical emissions. CFC’s affects the ozone layer that protects our planet. We need to cut all chemical emissions that are shown to be having an affect (EU Minister) on our health as well as the planet. These pollutants will have to be cleaned up eventually and no doubt this cost will fall on the public. So why not reduce it now this will save more money in the long run for future generations. Reusa-Can produces a negligible amount of emissions per can. A huge amount of energy is used to destroy perfectly good aluminium cans to make new cans. Why? Reusa-can believes it could refurbish these beverage cans in such a way that external printing would not be damaged. In many cases it should be possible to return them to beverage manufacturers without reprinting them. reusa-can will save this energyIt would require 106,260 tonnes of aluminium to replace the 5.31 billion cans that go to landfill. Approximately 3 million tonnes of aluminium is used to make beverage cans worldwide. UK used 7.7 billion aluminium beverage cans approximately 154,000 tonnes UK recycled 31% or 47,740 tonnes To remake 69% (106,260 tonnes) of aluminium cans that went to landfill would require 1,6 billion kWH of energy (based on 15,000kWH) per tonne*
* Energy figures vary from one website to another for aluminium, steel, glass and plastic. For instance energy savings for aluminium vary from 14,000kWH to 64,000kWH. We have taken a figure used by the Indian Aluminium industry (15,000kWH). An astronomical amount of energy is used in all four industries. Whatever energy savings these industries claim they are making, none of them compare with savings figures that Reusa-Can will make. In comparison Reusa-Cans energy use is miniscule and our pollution is negligible. Reusa-Can would save almost all this energy. reusa-can could save the following amount of oilIn the UK 106,260 tonnes of aluminium cans go to landfill. It requires 8 tonnes of oil per tonne to manufacture a tonne of aluminium. To make 106,260 tonnes of aluminium would require 850,000 tonnes of oil. To give some idea of what this equates to in petrol terms:
In monetary cost this equates to:
reusa-can could save these minerals and energy
Trivia Facts quote: As a result of making a tonne of aluminium from raw materials it means:
To replace the 106,260 tonnes of aluminium cans we dumped in UK landfill sites would entail treating and disposing of:
We are unlikely to have any UK aluminium production plants after September 2009 according to a BBC report 2009. Apparently our last aluminium plant situated in North Wales will close; all of our aluminium will all be imported from then on. At the height of our 2008 production aluminium was £2,000 per tonne and beverage can prices increased accordingly. By using that figure of £2,000 per tonne and estimating that the UK uses 154,000 tonnes per annum this makes a grand total of £308 million. We must reduce our imports and the government should support such a move. We should not keep supporting multinationals to the detriment of our own citizens. It is vitally important we do this for our economy and the world economy. Under EU regulations and Kyoto protocol, local authorities have an obligation to reduce transport, energy use and CO² emissions. Reusa-Can will help them to do that. We hope, for that reason alone local authority councillors will support the concept of Reusa-Can by clicking here and signing our petition. Ask your Councillors the following questions:
Aluminium uses more energy than any other industry; our last UK production plant in North Wales will close in September 2009. Presently it uses 12% of energy used in Wales. All our aluminium will be imported. Let’s cut our imports of aluminium it makes economic sense. (Click here, sign the petition and tell a friend) reusa-can versus glass container productionAll these items in glass containers in picture 3 and many more could be put in refurbished cans. Each can could be reused up to ten times. A refurbished can is generally lighter than a bottle; it would reduce our transport cost enormously. This would reduce use of diesel fuel, damage to roads and emissions from millions of heavy transport journey miles. Picture 3 
Reusa-Can could replace many glass containers. Glass gorges enormous amounts of natural gas during production. It also uses light and heavy oil to provide energy for their processes. In the US glass container industry, its biggest section of the glass industry, used 83 British thermal Units (btu) trillion in gas energy in 1994. This is equivalent to 80% of all domestic energy used in the UK for one year. Click here to read Eia.gov Reusa-Can could halve the US energy usage in glass container production. Wine and other products are already packed in metal cans why not extend its use? Greater use of refurbished cans will reduce the transport cost of fuel and cause less damage to our roads. Reusing cans ten times or more will reduce production and transport energy cost by ten. It also reduces transport pollution emissions by ten. We have to change our way of living to suit what will be available in future. If all the products in the above picture were put in cans that could be refurbished, whatever its contents, it could be decanted into another container at home. It is ‘posh’ to put your wine into a decanter. Wine, jam and marmalade are already put into cans why not follow this example with many more products. In 1994 83 trillion British Thermal Units (Btu’s) of energy were used to make glass containers in America. Using Internet conversion tables this is equivalent to 24kWH billion. Since 1994 US production has increased. An average UK home uses 4,100kWH. Energy used to make US glass containers in 1994 would have supplied nearly 6 million UK homes for 12 months. Reusa-Can could replace up 50% of American glass containers. A can could be refurbished ten times therefore savings would increase ten times. We believe that Reusa-Can would save America an equivalent of all domestic energy used in all 25 million UK homes in twelve months if 50% of its glass containers were replaced by metal cans that could be refurbished. Only aluminium production requires more energy than glass. Glass is heavier to transport and glass manufacturers will face problems of energy supply in future years. A US Glass Manufacturing Industry Council report dated 2007 stated energy production was a major concern. Their energy prices had increased and soon natural gas production is expected to decrease, we are already seeing signs of reduced production. This recession may have eased energy supply problems and prices in 2009 but with resources becoming scarce and with world population increasing it will soon return. CO² emissions from glass production are enormous. Glass production releases many other harmful chemicals Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HFC), Perfluorocarbons (PFC) as well as CO². These gases have very high global warming coefficients. There is a recycling system of returning undamaged glass bottles to producers. This is an excellent scheme but does not overcome transport weight problems also bottles are more prone to damage than metal cans. Picture 4 
Reusa-Can Specification (Packaged in Europe)
Reusa-Can will not affect the excellent quality of this product *Companies have a right to present their products how they wish Reusa-Can would defend that right. This is just one example of how resources could be saved. The public also have a right to express their opinion about any company’s activity. reusa-can versus plastic containersPicture 5 
Would it upset you if your shampoo, liquid detergent, disinfectant, motor oil, anti-freeze etc were packaged in cans similar to this? Decanting its contents into a plastic bottle would only take a few seconds but environmental and energy savings are enormous. Many metal cans, when empty; weigh less than an empty plastic bottle this reduces transport weight saves fuel also wear and tear on our roads. A metal can could be refurbished up to ten times before having to be replaced with a new one. A tonne of shampoo bottles (15,384) uses 1.8 tonnes of oil. It takes 38,000 tonnes of prehistoric plant life millions of years to decompose into 1.8 tonnes of crude oil. It is then refined at great monetary and environmental cost to be turned into plastic pellets to make a plastic shampoo bottle. Having used the shampoo we throw the empty bottle into a landfill site to give off toxic fumes for hundreds of years. Surely there is a better use for our resources? Reusa-Can uses virtually no energy, no chemicals except for washing and there is no pollution. You may wash your hair "Because you're worth it" but it would be better if the shampoo were packaged in a refurbished can. 'Because the environment is worth it'. Click here: BBC oil crisis report The contents of a 400ml shampoo bottle will fit into a refurbished Heinz Baked Bean can. It does not alter the excellent quality of this product. Reusa-Can will help save resources and reduce global emissions. We have to change our way of life to suit the limited resources that will be available to us in future. Reusa-Can will not save the world but it will help us save resources and cut emissions. This ‘one shampoo bottle’ requires approximately 1.25 tonnes of prehistoric matter to decompose over millions of years into crude oil. It is then refined and processed into plastic pellets to make a plastic bottle. This bottle is likely to end up on a landfill site giving off CO² emissions for hundreds of years. Plastic is an essential form of packaging but is also a curse due to its high use of resources and pollution potential. We recycle about 5% of our plastic. A tonne of plastic thrown into a landfill site accounts for 38 tonnes of CO² gas emissions. This calculation is based on CO² emitted by energy used during production and from CO² released when it is a landfill. We have to use products more than once to save resources. A few years ago we bought motor oil in cans, we should re-introduce metal cans and refurbish them ten times. It is possible that some 5 litre plastic containers used up to 15% of the amount of oil inside the container to make the container. They are beautifully made containers but a majority still end up on a landfill site. Why not use a refurbished can and then transfer it into a used plastic container? The same could apply to disinfectants, detergents, shampoos and many other products. Plastic containers also use about 15,000kWH of energy, in other forms, per tonne to manufacture. Approximately 8%, 6.5 million barrels a day (mbpd), of all oil production is used to make plastic products. If 30% is used to make plastic containers that is 1,92mbpd. If we used refurbished cans for 50% of these products it would save 960,000 barrels of oil a day. With oil prices at $70 per barrel (8th August 2008) his is equivalent to $67.2million per day or $24.5 billion dollars (£16.35 billion) of oil savings per annum. Using refurbished cans ten times, over a period of 18 months, and cutting out 50% of plastic bottles would save $245 billion. We have to start to think up ways of using our resources in a more constructive manner. We should substitute plastic and glass containers for low cost metal cans and refurbish these along with the aluminium and steel food and beverage cans. Combining all four products (one tonne of each) total savings in oil alone would be over 100 barrels. Across the world this would be a significant saving reusa-can conclusionVince Cable MP Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader is a concerned ex-Shell Oil Executive (Oil Price Shock) and if he is concerned the public should be concerned as well. The oil consumption meter (Courtesy of Energy & Capital) in Part 1 of this report illustrates how much oil (1,000 barrels per second) is being used worldwide. There are 6.5 billion people on this planet in 2009. By 2030 there will be 9 billion, this clock should be going around 50% faster by then as oil production and consumption increases – it would be if we had sufficient oil. In reality it will be going around 50% slower than it is today because oil production will only be 50% of what it is today. We will only have enough oil for half our present population of 6.5 billion to maintain their present standard of living. That is enough for 3.25 billion people. How are the other 5.75 billion people that will on our planet going to survive? Are they going to live the ‘American Dream’ and produce more children using more resources even faster? We have to ask ourselves when does it stop? How is the world going to feed these people? Growing and distribution of food is hard now, it will be much harder in 21 years from now because there will not be sufficient oil to make fuel to produce food. We need to conserve oil and other resources wherever we can and live within our means. The government especially our Prime Minister should be listening. Politicians were irresponsible to have ignored warnings that tinplate nearly ran out to make food cans in 2008 (Crown Price Increases). Nothing will create more unrest than shoppers not being able to get food in shops and supermarkets. If people cannot feed their children or pets there will be civil unrest. Public opinion of politicians is at its lowest point at present; running short of food supplies may push public opinion over the top. At present, people are not thinking about where food comes from. There is plenty in supermarkets although prices are constantly increasing and will increase even more in the furture. Reusa-Can would like to try to reduce some of these prices. These constant food price increases do not seem to worry our Prime Minister and his Cabinet. After 2012, when oil is predicted to 'peak'; demand for oil may be as strong or stronger than it was in India and China in 2008. Russia may not be a reliable oil supplier (their oil will not last forever) and we are at the end of the EU oil line. Eastern and Middle Eastern countries are becoming rich we are not. We may not be able to get tinplate supplies or may not be able to afford to buy it; that is when problems will start. We were not prepared last time there were shortages of tinplate to make cans and it is unlikely we will be prepared next time. We could be if the government supported Reusa-Can but they have to act now! Thank you for reading about Reusa-Can. (Click here for petition) Sign it now and leave a comment. Gerry Evans Reusa-Can Ltd Gerry Evans designer of Reusa-Can was runner up in BBC’s Tomorrows World competition in 1987 for “Innovation and Production, also in water industry Hydro Awards in 1995 for 'Outstanding Achievement In The Field of Water Quality Improvement' sponsored by Norsk Hydro (UK) Ltd in association with The Royal Academy of Engineering. Those who knew me in the water industry, know that if I say I can do something it is not an idle promise. I can do it. Sign our petition and tell a friend!!
|
 |
 |
| "If we could refurbish 75% of cans presently in service in the UK once, it would save 3.75 million tonnes of CO2" |
|