What's a better choice for use in a public project: Recycled Plastic Lumber or Certified Wood (Black Locust, etc.)?
I've been back and forth with representatives from manufacturers who produce recycled plastic lumber products, all who boast of RPL's superiority when compared to natural wood.
I've also been in contact with growers of certified wood products, all who claim the superiority of their products. The proponents of natural wood typically shoot down the credentials of RPL, pointing out the fact that RPL isn't 100% "clean". Certified wood such as Black Locust seems to be the most environmentally sensitive choice, but I'd like to hear from those with experience using RPL and natural, certified products.
Here's a direct quote from the representative of a company that sells wood from certified Black Locust -
"...if you believe the industry hype, then RPL is a wonderful environmentally benign product! Kind of like driving thru West Virginia and seeing big billboards claiming coal is a carbon neutral energy source…no, I’m not joking."
RPL typically has a 50 year life, which is why many are opting for it. The State of NJ is replacing all of it's major boarwalks with RPL. A long time ago, they did a big no no and utilized precious tropical hardwoods. I'm most interested outdoor use - site furniture, boardwalks, decking, etc.
Interesting debate. If using RPL means that we can use a material that safely recycles the crappy plastic that we are continuing to contribute to the waste stream, then I'm all for it. My Dad built a deck out of the stuff several years ago and it's holding up well. I'd say use it for outdoor applications, as long as there's no off-gassing, and whenever possible, and use certified wood indoors.
The problem, WonderK, is that RPL is downcycled, not recycled. Which means that the amount of virgin plastic (for products where consistent quality is more important) is not reduced.
I'm not saying it's an evil product, but using sustainably-harvested wood is a whole hell of a lot better for the environment, if that's a concern.
Other wrinkles: growing the tree for the wood helps pull carbon out of the air, but production of RPL helps keep those plastic shopping bags out of waterways and trees.
Can RPL itself be recycled? Or is that the end of its lifecycle?
765, unfortunately, no it doesn't keep plastic shopping bags out of anywhere.... If bags are downcycled into other products, it means that a new plastic bag is being made to replace that one that was just recycled.
There's a reason the three R's are, in order, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
This all relates back to the cradle to cradle argument... wouldn't it be great if somehow RPL could be made from a material in the first place that was itself recyclable into more RPL? i.e. when the current stock gets old, cracked and moldy after 50 or so years, it's ripped up, sent back to the company, reclaimed and reinstalled, thus saving tons of material?
RPL is so good that they will soon be making trees out of the stuff--
No splinters, no invasive roots to destroy sewers
Impervious to insects
no falling leaves
repaint for seasonal changes
easily moved for landscaping variety, parties, etc.
Oct 21, 08 11:25 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Recycled Plastic Lumber v.s. Certified Wood - better choice?
What's a better choice for use in a public project: Recycled Plastic Lumber or Certified Wood (Black Locust, etc.)?
I've been back and forth with representatives from manufacturers who produce recycled plastic lumber products, all who boast of RPL's superiority when compared to natural wood.
I've also been in contact with growers of certified wood products, all who claim the superiority of their products. The proponents of natural wood typically shoot down the credentials of RPL, pointing out the fact that RPL isn't 100% "clean". Certified wood such as Black Locust seems to be the most environmentally sensitive choice, but I'd like to hear from those with experience using RPL and natural, certified products.
Here's a direct quote from the representative of a company that sells wood from certified Black Locust -
"...if you believe the industry hype, then RPL is a wonderful environmentally benign product! Kind of like driving thru West Virginia and seeing big billboards claiming coal is a carbon neutral energy source…no, I’m not joking."
Interesting thought!
application? cert wood usuall for interiors. for decks, benches, RPL might be acceptable.
usually. ack...
Whould RPL last longer? That could be a selling point. Longer it lasts = more sustainable
recycled plastic lumber looks............like plastic
use ipe or teak
RPL typically has a 50 year life, which is why many are opting for it. The State of NJ is replacing all of it's major boarwalks with RPL. A long time ago, they did a big no no and utilized precious tropical hardwoods. I'm most interested outdoor use - site furniture, boardwalks, decking, etc.
you aint get splinters from RPL
The boardwalks in NJ that have been replaced with RPL are beautifully smooth and wonderful to walk on barefoot, even 5 years after it was installed.
And RPL can get super moldy, super fast, regardless of what manufacturers say.
Let's replace everything with plastic facsimiles with no long-term testing! Yay!
50 year life? Maybe so, but the product's not old enough for anybody to know. Wood can last a thousand years. Or five. Same with everything.
Interesting debate. If using RPL means that we can use a material that safely recycles the crappy plastic that we are continuing to contribute to the waste stream, then I'm all for it. My Dad built a deck out of the stuff several years ago and it's holding up well. I'd say use it for outdoor applications, as long as there's no off-gassing, and whenever possible, and use certified wood indoors.
The problem, WonderK, is that RPL is downcycled, not recycled. Which means that the amount of virgin plastic (for products where consistent quality is more important) is not reduced.
I'm not saying it's an evil product, but using sustainably-harvested wood is a whole hell of a lot better for the environment, if that's a concern.
why make plastic when we can use wood.........
Other wrinkles: growing the tree for the wood helps pull carbon out of the air, but production of RPL helps keep those plastic shopping bags out of waterways and trees.
Can RPL itself be recycled? Or is that the end of its lifecycle?
stop making plastic shopping bags then
curious how many people throw away their sandwich bags after they eat their pb and j sandwich......
765, unfortunately, no it doesn't keep plastic shopping bags out of anywhere.... If bags are downcycled into other products, it means that a new plastic bag is being made to replace that one that was just recycled.
There's a reason the three R's are, in order, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
;)
This all relates back to the cradle to cradle argument... wouldn't it be great if somehow RPL could be made from a material in the first place that was itself recyclable into more RPL? i.e. when the current stock gets old, cracked and moldy after 50 or so years, it's ripped up, sent back to the company, reclaimed and reinstalled, thus saving tons of material?
RPL is so good that they will soon be making trees out of the stuff--
No splinters, no invasive roots to destroy sewers
Impervious to insects
no falling leaves
repaint for seasonal changes
easily moved for landscaping variety, parties, etc.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.