Glen Rock, NJ – Members of the Glen Rock Environmental Commission and the Glen Rock Green Team recently attended a private tour of TerraCycle in Trenton, a company that specializes in recycling hard-to-recycle materials.   GREC Commissioner Dr. Candace Lynch hopes to bring the first “Zero Waste Box Program” to the recycling facility in town this spring. The box, funded by a BCUA grant, will be specifically to recycle plastic bottle caps. Currently, residents can recycle bottle caps that are 2” in diameter or larger. This program will cover every sized cap.   The tour included a glimpse into projects past, present, and future.   “Their mission was so inspiring - “the idea of zero waste," council member Teresa Gilbreath said.   Glen Rock members of GREC and Green Team also got a chance to learn about the “Loop” program, based on moving away from single-use packaging by introducing reusable, refillable containers.   To learn more about the Glen Rock Environmental Commission and the Green Team you can email grec@glenrocknj.net. Both have monthly meetings at Borough Hall throughout the year.

SCOTTSDALE, AZ.,  – Dyper and TerraCycle have teamed up to offer a compostable diaper. The diaper subscription service will now allow users to return soiled diapers for composting.   Though composting Dyper diapers at home has always been possible, the TerraCycle partnership allows users to skip the DIY and help ensure that their used diapers don’t add to the more than 20 billion diapers filling landfills in the U.S. yearly. “It wasn’t easy to develop the most fully compostable diaper ever created,” said Sergio Radovcic, CEO of Dyper.   “But we are thrilled that our partnership with TerraCycle will make it easy for families to keep their used diapers out of landfills.”   Dyper subscribers that opt-in to the REDYPER program are provided with bags and a specially designed box engineered to the strictest United Nations Haz Mat shipping standards.   When the box is full, subscribers can download a prepaid shipping label from the Dyper Composting Program page found on the TerraCycle website for easy return of their soiled diapers for composting. The waste composted through this program will be used in specialized applications, such as for vegetation in highway medians. “As the first of its kind initiative, the REDYPER Program offers consumers a unique opportunity to responsibly dispose of their soiled diapers, as well as minimize their environmental impact by composting them through TerraCycle,” said Tom Szaky, founder and CEO of TerraCycle.   “We are pleased to partner with Dyper to drive awareness of this ground-breaking program.”   Along with being compostable under the right conditions, Dyper’s product is made from responsibly-sourced bamboo and free of chlorine, latex, alcohol, perfumes, lotions, PVC, TBT, or Phthalates. The entire diaper journey is counterbalanced through carbon offsets purchased by Dyper on behalf of subscribers.  

The 10th annual Beauty Shortlist & Wellbeing Awards saw a record number of brands from 43 countries competing with innovative ethical, vegan, fair-trade, sustainable, organic and wild-crafted inspiration.

Beauty: Main Brand Category Winners

• BEST NATURAL BRAND–UNITED KINGDOM:
• Elemental Herbology
• BEST NATURAL BRAND–IN­TERNATIONAL:
• Madara (Latvia)
• Irene Forte (Italy)
• BEST NATURAL BRAND–AU­STRALIA:
• Skin Juice
• BEST NATURAL BRAND–UNITED STATES:
• Bluh Alchemy
• BEST NATURAL BRAND–CANADA:
• OKOKO Cosmetiques
• BEST NATURAL BRAND–SC­ANDINAVIA:
• Sakhi Copenhagen
• BEST VALUE SKINCARE BRAND:
• Tropic Skincare
• True Skincare
• BEST WILDCRAFTED BEAUTY BRAND:
• Wildcrafted Organics
• BEST ZERO WASTE BEAUTY PRODUCT:
• Neal’s Yard Remedies Wild Rose Beauty Balm
• BEST ZERO WASTE BEAUTY BRAND:
• Dr Jackson’s
• BEST PLASTIC-FREE BRAND:
• Dr Jackson’s
• BEST ARGAN BRAND:
• Kahina Giving Beauty
• BEST BEAUTY BRAND–PA­CKAGING INNOVATION/RECYCLING AWARD:
• REN Skincare for its partnership with TerraCycle and 100% recycled bottle made with 20% ocean plastic, and for its returnable, refillable glass bottle initiative with Loop
• BEST MAKEUP BRAND–SU­STAINABLE PACKAGING AWARD:
• Elate Cosmetics (Canada)
• BEST MULTI-TASKING ECO PRODUCT:
• Neal’s Yard Remedies Wild Rose Beauty Balm (multipu­rpose–face, cleanser, overnight mask, cuticles, skin irritations, etc)
• OKOKO Cosmetiques Sublime Balm (moisturizer, night balm, eye balm, cleanser)
• Kindred Skincare Intense Moisture (an ultra-nourishing balm/cream for wrinkles, rosacea, scarring, dark spots, burns, bug bites)
• PRAZ Naturals All In One Oil Black Seed Oil Moisturiser (hands and hair, with Nigella sativa/black seed oil)
• QET Botanicals Lavish Serum Salve (multipu­rpose–face, hands, dry patches, overnight mask and more)
• BEST CBD BEAUTY PRODUCT:
• Code of Harmony Oil Cleanser War Paint Remover
• BEST CBD BRAND:
• Love Hemp (UK) BLNCD CBD (USA)
• BEST CRYSTAL BEAUTY PRODUCT: 
• Valeur Absolue Parfum Joie-Eclat Essentie­lle–Tangerine & Vetiver with Citrine
• BEST AYURVEDIC BEAUTY BRAND:
• Samaya Ayurveda
• BEST ANTI-POLLUTION PRODUCT:
• A.Florence Skincare Super Serum–Anti-Pollution Fluid
• BEST HEV/BLUE LIGHT & SPF PROTECTION PRODUCT PHYT’SOLAIRE:
• Fluide Protecteur High Protection SPF50
• BEST SPA BRAND:
• Gaia Skincare/Gaia Spa
• BEST NEW SKINCARE LAUNCH 2019/20 (BRAND):
• Codex Beauty–Bia Range
• BEST NEW SKINCARE LAUNCH 2019/20 (PRODUCT):
• Aurelia Skincare Overnight Recovery Mask
• Dafna’s Skincare Purify Cleanser
• Eco by Sonya Super Fruit Toner
• Jane Scrivner Morning Barrier Balm
• M Picaut Swedish Skincare Amethyst Obsession Probiotic Balancing Cream
• Naya Cacay Oil + A
• NEOM Organics Great Day Glow Face Wash
• Murad Replenishing Multi Acid Peel
• Murad InvisiScar Resurfacing Treatment
• Rosalena Cleanse & Be Nourishing Cleansing Balm
• BEST SKIN CARE BRAND (Age 30+):
• Tropic Skincare
• BEST (DAY) SKIN CARE PRODUCT (Age 30+):
• Skin Juice Bio Juice Hydrating Skin Drink
• BEST SERUM (Age 30+):
• Wildcrafted Organics Bakuchiol Cell Regenerating Serum
• Naya Everyday Glow Serum

NEW LAUNCH 2019/2020 WINNERS

THE AGE TARGETED CATEGORIES

Subaru WinterFest is a one-of-a-kind concert and mountain lifestyle tour where skiers, snowboarders, friends and families come together to share their love for all things winter. Sierra-at-Tahoe will host the event on March 14 and 15 and Boreal Mountain will be the host from March 20 to 22.   There will be live music by national artists. Enjoy giveaways and test the latest gear from Nordica, Lib Tech, Thule and more. Relax and enjoy free s’mores, snacks and a cup of coffee. KleanKanteen, Terracycle and Leave No Trace will be there to support #DontFeedTheLandfills and share environmental practices.   Experience Super Chewer Outpost by BARK for giveaways while supplies last and guided training sessions. Plus, learn how you can help Subaru and the National Ski Patrol support avalanche rescue dogs. Subaru owners get VIP parking and a special gift while supplies last. | sierraattahoe.com, rideboreal.com

While traditional cigarettes have been alarming environmental and health activists for many years, e-cigarettes and vapes are part of a new category of concern.  E-cigarettes and their adjacent pods are environmental and electronic waste.   Because they are made of plastic, these items break down into smaller plastics and pollute the environment. Nick Mallos, senior director of the Trash Free Seas program at Ocean Conservancy, told ABC News that alongside cigarette trash on beaches, e-cigarette products are also starting to show, “Our hypothesis would be that — as we see this shift to e-cigarettes and cartridges that in the coming years — we unfortunately expect to see more and more of these products on the beaches, unless some intervention is made.”   Because e-cigarettes are still new, limited data exists compared to other tobacco products. Scientists are worried about the nicotine residue, liquid and flavoring in the devices, as well as the devices themselves. Battery-powered e-cigarettes are also a problem because they pose fire risks at waste and recycling facilities. But a significant number of adults still use the products, which means an excess of plastic in the environment. 6.7 million adults said they used electronic tobacco products in 2017. Five million high school students said they had used them, too.   Manufacturers do not include recycling or waste information for e-cigarettes and recycling company TerraCycle said that a recycling program targeting the products has been less than successful.   Heidi Sanborn, executive director of the National Stewardship Action Council, has been working on a bill in Calfornia to increase recycling rates of e-cigarettes. A spokesperson for popular e-cigarette Juul said the company is increasing their recycling and takeback programs and tells customers to dispose of cartridges properly.   According to Sanborn, ” That has to get back up to the front end. We’ve got to turn the spigot off. They need to be designing things that are more durable, repairable and reusable. And then, if you can’t do any of those things anymore, there has to be a plan for end of life. We can’t continue to do make, waste, dispose, make waste, dispose. There’s only one planet.”   There are products you may be using or habits you may have that contribute to plastic pollution. Learn more about how the use of Teabags, Cotton Swabs, Laundry, Contact Lenses, Glitter and Sheet Maskspollute our oceans so you can make more informed decisions going forward. There are also numerous simple actions and switches that can help cut plastic out of our lives including, making your own cosmetics, shampoo, toothpaste, soap, household cleaners, using mason jars, reusable bags/bottles/straws, and avoiding microbeads!   For more Animal, Earth, Life, Vegan Food, Health, and Recipe content published daily, subscribe to the One Green Planet Newsletter! Also, don’t forget to download the Food Monster App on iTunes — with over 15,000 delicious recipes it is the largest meatless, vegan and allergy-friendly recipe resource to help reduce your environmental footprint, save animals and get healthy!   Lastly, being publicly-funded gives us a greater chance to continue providing you with high quality content. Please consider supporting us by donating!  

Take, make, use, dispose. For decades, this has been the standard approach to production and consumption. Companies take raw materials and transform them into products, which are purchased by consumers, who ultimately toss them out, creating waste. But as warnings about climate change and environmental degradation grow ever louder, people are starting to challenge the sustainability of this model. Many business leaders and governments — including China, Japan, and the U.K.—argue that we should ditch this linear system in favor of a so-called circular economy of take, make, use, reuse, and reuse again and again.

What’s wrong with the linear economy?

It often leads to a system that is inefficient, costly, and depletes natural resources. The mining of commodities from gold to coal can spoil ecosystems and disrupt nearby communities. Making steel from ore requires a large amount of energy, which produces Earth-warming carbon dioxide. A byproduct of the linear model is material waste, which takes up space and may include contaminants. Trash ends up in undesirable places. The so-called Great Pacific Garbage Patch is only the most well-known example of global-scale plastic pollution. Yet products like steel and plastic can be reused, refurbished and recycled to capture untapped value. A totally circular economy—with no waste and no new materials at all—is likely impossible to achieve, but squeezing the maximum waste out of the system could curtail use of new resources.

Sounds like recycling. How’s it different?

The two ideas are connected, but they’re not the same. The phrase “circular economy” pops up in the work of a few resource economists dating back at least to the 1980s. Its use in recent years has come to connote an approach that’s more systemic and ambitious than recycling. For example, to maintain quality, plastic bottle makers need to blend recycled plastic with virgin material. Instead, a truly circular economy would involve no new material inputs at all, reducing emissions, waste, and eventually costs. Some industries are already coming close to this—almost all of a car can be reclaimed, for example. But some have far to go—97% of the materials used to make clothing are brand new, and 73% of these products are incinerated or put into a landfill. This isn’t a totally new idea—the slogan “make do and mend” was popularized during World War II to encourage as little waste as possible.

Is anyone skeptical?

Yes. Making a production cycle fully self-sufficient is virtually impossible. Some new input will always be necessary, and some waste will always be created. Recycling paper over and over, for example, produces paper of increasingly low quality. Also, building a circular economy can entail high upfront costs, requiring investment to redesign products and switch to recycled materials. The U.K. estimates the cost of shifting to a circular economy to be about 3% of gross domestic product. The expense can feed concerns that companies will go for quick fixes rather longer-term sustainable practices.

What is feasible?

A more circular supply chain. This can mean changing to recycled materials, extending the life-cycle of a product and improving recovery at the end of its life. New Jersey-based TerraCycle has launched the “Loop” initiative, a collaboration with household names such as Nestle to provide common products—ice-cream for example—in packaging that can be returned and refilled. There is a multinational push by General Motors, BMW, and Toyota to create an aftermarket for used electric car batteries, which can be used for chilling beer at 7-Eleven convenience stores in Japan or banking solar energy in Cameroon. And New York startup Rent the Runway offers designer dress hire for events like weddings and galas, allowing clients to dodge one-wear purchases, while earning the company a $1 billion valuation.

What are governments doing?

They’re trying to push consumers and producers toward a more circular economy. The German government offers grants to design products that have a lower environmental impact or are cheap to repair. In Chile, the government said it will aim to make all plastic reusable. The Netherlands is investing $40 million in a special fund that will start financing deforestation-free agriculture, to be matched by a donation from Rabobank Group. The European Commission has a circular economy action plan, which includes transforming the way plastic products are produced and recycled. It’s also part of China’s five-year plan.  

If you want to feel like Kevin O’Leary and the gang from Shark Tank, you no longer have to be an accredited investor thanks to equity crowdfunding.   Source: Shutterstock   Today, anyone can seed startup ventures in hyper-growth industries and build a portfolio of privately traded companies. But just because you can invest in a private business doesn’t mean you ought to.   Before you put your money on the line, make sure you’re aware of what equity crowdfunding is, what types of offerings are available and, most importantly, what amount of risk you are willing to accept.  

Equity Crowdfunding Types

  Crowdfunding, as it’s known, began with the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act. President Barrack Obama’s legislation allows startups to raise money through two key regulations: Regulation crowdfunding and Regulation A+.   The differences between the two are stark. So they can be overwhelming for investors just warming up to the notion of investing via the crowd.   Because of these key fundamental differences, there are numerous implications to you as an investor. These differences also matter to the entrepreneurs looking to raise money. That’s why the lineup of companies on Regulation A+ markets is different from the companies raising money through regulation crowdfunding.   What they have in common, however, is that both are classified within equity crowdfunding, which means:  

1. Anyone (meeting certain demographic requirements) can invest in their offerings.
2. Investments are backed through the sale of securities (equity, debt, revenue share and convertible notes), rather than perks a la Kickstarter.
3. Terms of the raise are set by the entrepreneurs.
4.  Reasonable expectation of liquidity. Crowd investors can sell their shares through crowdfunding “portals” at any time they please.

  InvestorPlace markets analyst Luke Lango already discussed the fundamental shortcomings of regulation crowdfunding, so let’s talk about Regulation A+. Specifically, let’s examine what it is, what it means for you and if you should invest in these offerings.  

What Is Regulation A+?

  Regulation A+, or “Reg A+,” differs from regulation crowdfunding in a number of ways. These include how much money can be raised through equity crowdfunding, state-by-state provisions, the amount of Securities and Exchange Commission coordination required before the offering and the visibility into company financials.   For entrepreneurs looking to test the waters of a capital raise, a regulation crowdfunding offering may be their best bet. Regulation crowdfunding offerings max out at $1.07 million per year. That’s hardly ideal for the next Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) or Google (NASDAQ:GOOG, NASDAQ:GOOGL). But it can work for firms that need to gauge the market’s appetite for investment.   Businesses that go through Reg A+ are able to raise up to $50 million per year. While that figure is far from mind-boggling, it’s not inconsequential. A $50 million raise, depending on the valuation multiple, puts these businesses in roughly micro- to small-cap territory. The idea is that Reg A+ offerings attract capital from accredited investors and brand loyalists.   Now, I said “up to $50 million” because the amount of money raised through Reg A+ depends on the tier. Tier I offerings max out at $20 million per year and “blue sky” laws bind them. For example, a private company raising money via Tier I must comply with each individual state’s (and territory’s) laws. This not only slows down transaction speeds, but it’s wildly expensive and generally too expansive for most companies to consider.   Reg A+ Tier II offerings, however, have no such restrictions. Instead they are bound by a “coordinated review” process conducted by states, which is far less restrictive. Tier II offerings also max individuals out at 10% of their net income or 10% of their net worth (whichever is greater).  

The ‘Mini IPO’

  Unlike regulation crowdfunding, Reg A+ can function as an initial public offering (IPO), or a “mini IPO.”   To this end, the SEC steps in to audit company financials and approve the offering. The costs are smaller than traditional IPOs, however, and the ongoing reporting is less burdensome for the company.   Like IPOs, Reg A+ offerings are mainly liquidity events. But early investors do not experience lock-up expiration periods. While the possibility of secondary markets exists (since Reg A+ crowdfunded securities are freely transferable), there aren’t many avenues for trading to occur yet. That means much of the liquidity premium is future-based.   To take advantage of this, crowd investors need access to what are essentially “venture exchanges.” But companies able to stomach more intrusive financial reporting (and higher costs) can list their Reg A+ offerings on national stock market exchanges or over-the-counter (OTC) markets. Where equity crowd investing really could shine, though, is in democratizing the startup/scaleup investing process.   If you wanted to buy into Uber (NYSE:UBER), you had to wait until it went public. By that time, everyday investors were too late. Institutional investors, insiders and venture capitalists long made all of the early gains to make. Crowdfunding (especially the higher-capped Reg A+) provides everyday investors the ability to vote on businesses, technologies and industries they believe in.   Like Kickstarter and Indiegogo, Reg A+ crowd investors are fans who believe in the vision of the entrepreneur. But unlike perk-based crowdfunding sites, Reg A+ offerings provide real, transferable equity in a company. You’re not just funding a company to secure a place in their consumer line.  

Startups to Invest In

  One entrepreneur has staked his reputation on the success of equity crowdfunding through Reg A+ offerings. His name is Howard Marks, co-founder of Activision (NASDAQ:ATVI) and the former founder/CEO of Acclaim Games. Marks is now involved in a new venture — StartEngine — whose future is dependent on the viability of equity crowdfunding.   Marks’ equity crowdfunding platform bills itself as a portal for everyday investors and accredited investors alike to learn about new capital raise opportunities and to invest in their offerings. To date, StartEngine has hosted 300-plus offerings on its site, which have raised more than $100 million from the 200,000-plus users on its platform. On average, users typically invest a minimum of $500.   On the site investors find companies such as TerraCycle, an already successful business with more than $20 million in annual sales and blue-chip clients in Walmart (NYSE:WMT) and Amazon. In the same breath, you may stumble upon offerings like that of Knightscope — a crime-fighting fully autonomous security robotics company.   StartEngine’s own Reg A+ offering is worth looking at as a lens into crowdfunding at large. As of this writing, StartEngine’s current Reg A+ offering has raised $6.66 million from 5,685 investors, approaching its raise cap of $9 million. The funding round values the company at $119 million with a $7.50 per-share price.   However, while it’s a reasonable lens to look through, the success of StartEngine’s offering doesn’t necessarily translate to the success of the Reg A+ equity crowdfunding market.  

Marketing the Company Vision

  Before crowdfunding, entrepreneurs who sought investment could only pitch venture capitalists. Today they can involve their marketing and communications department in their offerings. StartEngine has the benefit of being able to feature its offering in the prime real estate of its homepage (or any other pages on its site that generate traffic).   This means that the difference between a successful capital raise from equity crowd investors hinges on the ability of the company to be able to not only sell everyday investors on their idea, but to reach them.   The best example of this is High Times, which has launched an intensive marketing campaign to reach potential investors. Right now, you can invest in High Times for a minimum of $99, which nets you nine shares in the company ($11 per share). As of this writing, more than 23,000 people have invested in the company and High Times has been cleared to list on public markets (under ticker symbol “HITM”) after its Reg A+ offering.   But successfully marketing to brand enthusiasts is one thing, and making good on the promises of a return on investment is another. Associate Professor of Management and Entrepreneurship, Brent Goldfarb, at the University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business, has his own reservations about the sorts of companies found on equity crowdfunding sites:   “Crowdfunded companies are very high risk, and, as is the case with most entrepreneurial ventures, are more likely than not to fail. Hence, as such, companies in aggregate should only comprise a small percentage of their investments. This thinking sits behind the SEC’s crowdfunding rules, as well as the rules that determine which investors qualify as accredited. In general, investors who invest broadly in the public markets by buying index-based securities will outperform investors who invest in startups, including crowdfunded startups. Admittedly, investing in startups on crowdfunding platforms or otherwise is more fun.”   High Times is a very troubled company whose road to profitability is unclear. The company is in debt up to its eyeballs (with a $105.2 million deficit blotching its balance sheet), and most professional and accredited investors wouldn’t touch it. So High Times tapped into the thousands of cannabis enthusiasts and brand loyalists whose knowledge of valuation and future cash flows is limited.  

Bottom Line on Reg A+ Offerings

  Equity crowdfunding has a lot of potential. Plenty of companies like StartEngine and MicroVentures are contributing to the democratization of private investing. Its viability as a platform for serious investors is still unknown, though.   William Cong, Associate Professor of Finance at Cornell’s Johnson Graduate School of Management, spoke to me about equity crowdfunding, saying “individuals typically do not have the skill/ability to pick the right funds to invest in or to pick the right projects to invest in.” Cong expands on this by saying that “individuals in aggregate can provide useful information to an entrepreneur or firm executives, and can provide effective monitoring. The key is to have the infrastructure to coordinate the individual investors. Crowdfunding mechanisms such as Kickstarter or Lending Club or ICOs are such examples.”   For less-experienced investors, it’s hard to tell the difference between a TerraCycle and a Knightscope. The users who are currently looking for the next Amazon will need strong guidance, as they currently mostly have the marketing arm of the companies behind the offering to sell them on the future of the business.   It’s worth keeping an eye on the development of equity crowdfunding, especially Reg A+ offerings, over the next few years. And there are interesting things happening in the world of real estate crowdfunding. As crowdfunding evolves, it could prove to be a legitimate means of raising capital … or it could turn out to be a playground of marketers looking for a quick cash-grab from loyalists. Time will tell.   John Kilhefner is the managing editor of InvestorPlace.com. As of this writing, Kilhefner did not hold a position in any of the aforementioned companies. If you have questions about the site or suggestions about our content, email us at editor@investorplace.com.

No fim de janeiro participamos ao lado de nosso ex presidente Marcelo Silva da gravação do episódio do Cabeça de Lab sobre as novidades da NRF 2020 que aconteceu no início do ano em NY.

Cerca de 40% de todo o resíduo sólido urbano é despejado em locais inadequados no Brasil. Isso representa mais de 80 mil toneladas de material em locais com potencial de poluição ambiental (Abrelpe). A preocupação com os resíduos apareceu de maneira clara nos projetos inscritos na 37ª edição do Prêmio ECO. Para além daqueles que estão transformando lixo em matéria-prima, encontramos também a responsabilidade daqueles com os recursos naturais, como uso responsável de água e proteção do solo.

How one company is working to eliminate the very idea of waste   Since 2001, where most of us have seen trash, Tom Szaky has seen potential. From cigarette butts to coffee capsules, Tom set out to recycle the hard-to-recycle products we use. His company, TerraCycle, offers everything from free recycling programs to industrial waste solutions. “But we can’t recycle our way out of the waste crisis,” Eric Rosen, publicist for TerraCycle said. “And [Tom] is the first to say if TerraCycle didn’t exist — or couldn’t exist — he’d be thrilled.” In other words, he would love to see a world where we produced zero waste to begin with. That’s where TerraCycle’s latest venture, Loop, comes in. “The next thing to do was to attack waste at the root cause,” Eric said. “If the economics are good, we can recycle virtually anything. But that’s not going to solve the problem.”   “The next step was to create a circular economy where there’s virtually no waste.” Loop was announced at the World Economic Forum in January 2019, proposing a new model of consumption whereby people can get their favorite home goods, cosmetics, and food products through a sustainable, circular system of pick-up and drop-off using reusable containers. It took off from there. “We immediately had thousands upon thousands of people who went to the website and were waitlisted,” Eric said. “So we knew right away that there was a clamoring for this. And we’ve continued to see that as we grow.” The company launched its pilot program that summer, beginning in Paris on May 14 and New York the following week. “We launched in a handful of states as a pilot,” Eric said. “We could not keep up with the number of requests coming in, like ‘When are you coming to our state?’ Certainly, the waste crisis, sustainability, and climate change are in the news, so people are well aware. There’s a sense now that they want to do something about it.” Loop already has a cleaning facility in Pennsylvania and a warehouse in New Jersey, which made New York a logical place to start. As the company scales, it selects cities within a 24-hour delivery range of both a cleaning facility and a warehouse, particularly for the frozen goods it provides. “We’ll add warehouses and cleaning facilities as we go, but that’s how the places were chosen,” Eric added. Loop will launch in the UK at the end of March, Toronto in June, and Japan towards the end of the year. Next will be Australia in 2021.       Customers receive their orders in a reusable tote and request a pick-up once items are empty. They’re then cleaned and refilled. Photos: Loop   The price of a Loop good is comparable to a regular one, plus a deposit for the packaging. Since it’s reusable, it becomes valuable. Take shampoo, for example. Before, you bought shampoo for its contents; once the bottle was empty, you would toss it. “In this instance, now the company owns the package and the package is an asset,” Eric said. “Customers put a deposit down on each pack. When that pack comes back, the deposit is returned to the consumer.” This deposit essentially sits in an account. You can opt to let it remain there as you continue to buy products through Loop; or, once you’re done, you can request the deposit back.   The brand owns the package, so they want that package back. This inherently makes the process a circular one, removing waste from the equation. While Loop is currently e-commerce only, “we will be in-store at some point in 2020 in the United States,” Eric explained. With retail partners like Kroger and Walgreens stateside, Carrefour in Paris and Loblaws in Canada, you might find a Loop aisle at a grocer near you. “The process will work virtually the same,” Eric said. “You’ll be able to bring your shipping tote into the store, where there will be an aisle with all the Loop products and packaging.” You shop, pay for the product, and bring it home, as you would any other pet food or ice cream pint. Then, as soon as you finish the pack, you bring it back. That store would then send it back to Loop to be cleaned, sanitized, refilled, and shipped back out to another consumer. In many ways, Loop seems like the future. But it draws on our current thinking and behavior — and a model that dates back to the 1950s. “When you finish your normal plastic shampoo, consumers are pretty accustomed at this point to dropping it in the blue bin. Now, as opposed to dropping that in that bin, you just drop it back into shipping tote.”   “We don’t want to change behavior. That becomes a much harder proposition.” Loop isn’t the first to discover the effectiveness of the pick-up/drop-off model. Remember the milkman? “We were seeing that model up until the 1950s when all of a sudden we turned to all of this disposable packaging for convenience. Obviously we’ve created so much waste that it’s no longer effective.   “The idea behind Loop is exactly that: it’s the milkman model where the brand owns the pack and we come collect it, sanitize it, and fill it again.” But instead of homogenous glass bottles, companies are investing in containers you want to show off. “One of the things we’re finding is that people appreciate and want these packs because they’re so pretty. Like the Pantene bottles: people want to leave them on a counter.” Loop has very specific specs companies need to adhere to when creating packaging. Aesthetics is “not a requirement, but it certainly is playing a role in how these are being designed.” Most importantly, they need to be durable, cleanable, and circular (by having an end-of-life solution). “It’s not necessarily material,” Eric said. “Plastic is not necessarily the demon, it’s the single-use that’s the problem. So these packs have to be durable.” “Häagen-Dazs, which has made an absolutely beautiful pack, had a whole R&D team develop it. We have designers at Loop who can help develop the packaging, but, depending on the size of the company, some are big enough to do it on their own.” Just how durable these containers are varies from company to company. “Obviously these containers are going to get banged up,” Eric said. “And it’s up to the company to determine when they want to take them out of circulation. When that time comes, the containers themselves are recyclable. They’ll be turned back into themselves by TerraCycle.” Eric said the company is working on a public-facing Life-Cycle Assessment, which will highlight the environmental benefits of these containers—transportation costs included—as opposed to single-use packaging that most often ends up in landfills. Ultimately, the dream would be to have a whole store filled with reusable product containers. “We would create an entirely circular economy,” he said. “There would be absolutely no waste. That is the ultimate goal.” TerraCycle’s next project with this goal in mind? ReDyper, a partnership in which parents send in soiled Dyper diapers to TerraCycle’s facility for composting. It was announced this week.