UKC

Is anyone else dismayed when they buy something like a carabiner and it comes on that bit of plastic with a tome of information stapled to it that 99% are not going to read a word of?

I remember buying a load of slings and single krabs to make up some alpine draws and the amount of packaging thrown out was outrageous. 

Is there anything, in theory, stopping companies from having a single bit of card to hang it in the shop with a url/qr code to find the technical details if desired? I've noticed this kind of shift with some bike components and it would be great if a bit of pressure could push companies like DMM (who, from what I can tell, do have an environmental conscience) in the right direction. 

In reply to PaulJepson:

For something like a carabiner I believe so.  Climbing gear falls under the scope of the PPE regulations, and it's a requirement of the regs that any item of PPE is supplied with a set of instructions.

In reply to PaulJepson:

I have no idea on the legal position, but agree that it would be good to cut out that waste.

I suppose from a consumer point of view, one thing we can try to do is by packs instead of multiple individual items, even if that turns out to reduce choice a bit.

In reply to PaulJepson: how does your annual pile of climbing gear packaging compare to your annual pile of packaging for your breakfast foods?

In reply to kevin stephens:

How is me moaning about coco pops packaging on ukc going to bring about any meaningful change? 

Classic whataboutery. 

In reply to PaulJepson:

There could be ways around it if someone thought it worth the effort. A tag with a QR code that took you to the information. Hard copies at the shop available for those who want them. It would require a bit of effort and a change in the regs to allow it.

In reply to PaulJepson:

It's something we've brought on ourselves. If people didn't do stupid sh!t, and then try and blame the manufacturers for not telling them to not do stupid sh!t we wouldn't need that tome of, mainly useless, information. Most of that 99% you're not going to read is the manufactures arse covering obvious information about misusing their product, which is then copied in 101 different languages. 

The best (worst?) one I've got is the A5 size instruction manual for a electric angle grinder, 248 pages long, of which only 17 pages are relevant. Having that available as an easily downloadable pdf would seem a better way to go. 

In reply to PaulJepson:

No I don't think it is, and I don't think it's fair to label Kevin's reply as such. 

He's raised a very fair point - climbing gear is something bought infrequently, lasts for a long time and usually comes with a load of info due to the PPE regulations mentioned above.  The actual amount of packaging that comes with a carabiner in minimal (small piece of card and a cable tie, generally) as manufacturers want people to be able to interact and get a feel for the kit before they purchase it.

I don't think there a lot that can be reduced here, and climbing gear packaging probably makes up a immeasurably small % of landfill, whereas other things we consume (the disposable coffee cup my breakfast came in this morning, for example) ought to be a greater concern.  I don't think that's whataboutery at all, it's pragmatism. 

In reply to Iamgregp:

I don't know what krabs you buy but the ones from DMM for example come with a plastic tag and a massive block of paper data stapled to it. Yes gear is bought infrequently but when you consider a rack has at least 30 odd krabs on it, that is a lot of potentially unnecessary stuff. 

And yes there are a million ways we can try and improve our impact but just because one is less than the other doesn't mean it should be ignored. Especially since I'm not currently registered on a Kellogs discussion forum which may have members of the Kellogs team taking that feedback on board. 

Also, we are trapped with this situation. If I want to reduce my usage of coffee cup waste, I can use a reusable cup, because people pushed for that alternative. I can't use ppe made from home-spun hemp and whittled sticks, and nothing would change anywhere if there was no push for a better way.

In reply to PaulJepson:

As commented upthread, the inclusion of paperwork is a legal requirement of PPE. I'm guessing that a change in law would be required for them to provide it in digital format.

As for the plastic header cards...  POS (point of sale) material is all about giving the product shelf appeal, identifying (advertising) the brand and therefore hopefully increasing sales. Absolutely pointless for online sales but in a 'bricks and mortar' shop a krab with a paper sleeve of documents doesn't sell itself nearly as well as one dangling from a glossy hanger, and IME cardboard hangers quickly start to look tatty.

In reply to PaulJepson:

Not at all, I’m accusing you of tokenism and empty virtue signalling. Packaging waste is a very serious problem in terms of resource waste and environmental impact. By focussing on the very minimal impact of climbing gear packaging at the expense of the real problems you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem

In reply to kevin stephens:

I'm amazed you know so much about me and thank you for your contribution. How about you jog on and start a thread about cereal boxes? 

Surely making people not want to bother trying is more of a problem?

In reply to PaulJepson: It’s obvious that I was responding to your post, not what I don’t know about you as a person. However if you posted about the harm of food packaging, and over processed foods in general and persuaded a few UKCers to switch to more sustainable foods, eg bulk buy bags of porridge oats it would have more positive impact than losing the flimsy printed PPE sheets that come with each carabiner.

In reply to PaulJepson:

90% of my hardware is DMM, mostly bought in multipacks, have never thought that the amount of packaging that came with it was anything more than the bare minimum.   

Yes the booklet of info is annoying, but (as mentioned above) necessary.  But then that's made of paper which is a recyclable, regenerative & biodegradable material.  

In reply to PaulJepson:

Since you name them here, have you posed this question to DMM directly? If not, why not do so, and then tell us what the answer is?

In reply to PaulJepson:

At least the paper and plastic can be recycled.

It bugs me no end on the size/quantity of washing labels in clothes to cover 47 different languages...

Slightly off topic, but I was ordering something from Rab the other day. They are no longer sending most if not all of there jackets out without stuff sacks - the theory being environmental issues and people generally don't use the stuff sack anyway. 

The pro's and con's you can argue, but the theory is there. Well, it was until they sent out my item wrapped up a single use plastic bag. 

In reply to Andrew95:

I actually like the stuff sack with my Rab jacket - helps keep it clean in my bag. I'm really annoyed I seem to have lost the stuff sack that came with one of my ME jackets.

When my F-in-L bought a jacket without a stuff sack, he bought one of the tiny Exped ones to put it in!

North face have historically got around this by designing one of the pockets with a double-sided zip, to it can be turned inside out and used as a stuff sack - I've got a down jacket and a couple of pairs of shorts with this feature.

In reply to PaulJepson:

I used to work in a tiny climbing shop with limited display space. Every delivery we used to strip all the packaging off and recycle what we could, just displaying the product itself. Often a few hundred booklets. We kept a few copies of the instructions and offered them to purchasers. No one ever wanted them.

The only exceptions were for professional stuff, rope access or similar. 

In reply to deepsoup:

What I find funny about that is that it always says something like "don't use unless you are qualified to do so or have been taught by a qualified person". Then they show you how to use it, so now you can have a go without really know what you're doing. 

In reply to RBonney:

Good point.  If you go to B&Q and buy gas fittings, for example a replacement hose for a gas cooker - they're the only thing in the shop that come with no instructions whatsoever.

That first bit is optional for recreational climbing though. And even when people do know what they're doing in general terms, there's often information specific to the device that they need to know.

People who just don't have a clue are one thing, but I bet gear is more often misused by people who are experienced in general but don't fully understand a specific device and don't think they need to read the instructions.  (Not so much a carabiner or a sling, obvs, but maybe something like a belay device or an ascender - eg: the number of people who've come on here and recommended to others that they should use a Petzl Croll for top-rope solo over the years.)

In reply to Andrew95:

I don't think I've ever – in my life – stuffed any item back into its stuff sack.

That said, I hoard the things and use them until they literally go to bits. They're great for organising one's backpack! At the very least, the picnic and the coffee kit lives in one.

Why one would ever stuff their harness into a sack, I don't know, and the jacket goes into a dry-bag if the weather looks to turn damp or just naked into the backpack, otherwise. The most absurd sack I've owned must surely be the Edelrid one in which my via-ferrata kit was sold – why?? – but that's a perfect size for three or four days of nuts, dried fruit, snacks and provisions, experience has proved. (Edit: main meals not included. I'm not that stingy.)

In reply to Xharlie:

Many years ago, I retired my Arcteryx harness.  The tin it came in still lives in my kitchen cupboard, a handy place to keep cakes and biscuits.

In reply to PaulJepson:

If you want to see a shockingly awful amount of packaging and waste, come spend a day working with me in the AV industry. All the polystyrene, cardboard and plastic is insane. There are much more eco-friendly materials that could be used, but because no one uses them, the prices are too high...

At least with climbing gear, packaging is minimal, recyclable, and more and more companies are using recycled materials. 

Everyone could do a little more, but I personally think that as an industry, climbing is doing okay. However, as climbers we need to make sure we don't leave all our crap and detritus around the crags and mountains. Take only memories, leave only footprints as the saying goes...

In reply to LastBoyScout:

I don't think the plastic on tags, that I've seen, can be recycled ( I mean it is possible to recycle it but it won't be in any 'real world' operation)

In reply to PaulJepson:

it would be great if the packaging could be left in the store (trikkier re websales; PPE directive & all)

and bulk collected / returned to the supplier on a periodic basis.

instead of recycling: near direct 're-use' by the OEM's. [several logistical nightmares to overcome]

QR code to latest & most accurate PDF is a great idea - would like to see that.

:-j

In reply to alibrightman:

A good alternative to unnecessary packaging - go wildly overboard in the other direction and make the packaging pleasingly functional.

I keep my goggles in mine

In reply to flatlandrich:

I wonder if in this case it isn’t more a response to unscrupulous manufacturers selling stuff that isn’t remotely safe that means we require PPE to be sold with explicit information about what it is and isn’t designed and rated for. EBay is littered with unrated “super mega climbing mountain clip for walking and big climbs - perfect for massive mega climb”. 

In reply to PaulJepson:

Yes, I'd love to see less plastic packaging on everything. I was pleased to see that the guidebook that arrived by post this morning from Needlesports was packaged in brown paper.

In reply to alibrightman:

I love a good tin! They get passed around my friend and family with gifts of baked goods.

In reply to Stuart Williams:

I don't think so.  The regulations have been updated and revised since, but I think this bit pre-dates the internet.  (Or at least most people having ready access to the internet.)

So the suggested alternative of having a QR code for people to look up the instructions themselves was not a thing, and neither was the ability to buy some laughably inadequate dodgy gear online instead.  If a bricks and mortar shop had been selling the "super mega climbing mountain clip" back in the day, trading standards would have come down on them like a ton of the proverbial.

In reply to deepsoup:

EBay was just an example. Dodgy and unsafe products have been manufactured and sold for far longer than the internet has existed. The internet has just made it easier to sell them and made it more viable to sell knock offs of products with a relatively small audience. A reputable bricks and mortar store won’t be selling them, but markets and car boots were always notorious for dodgy merchandise. I don’t think that the regulations predating the internet suggests that they were intended to protect manufacturers against user stupidity rather than to protect the user against manufacturer negligence. 

I’ve just had a look at the information that comes with a DMM carabiner. Seems like a fairly brief and sensible description of the assumptions and conditions under which it is tested/rated. No daft “product will not protect against lion attacks” disclaimers that I could see. The only bit that seems a bit superfluous is the diagram of how to unscrew the locking mechanism, but that makes sense as a general requirement for a product category that includes much more complex kit. Nothing that suggests to me that the primary concern of the leaflet is user stupidity.

The QR code idea would be nice from a waste reduction perspective, but I can’t see that happening any time soon. Far too many people (of all ages) don’t know what one is or how to use one, and some won’t have internet access or a suitable device, so it’s not suitable for safety critical information on PPE.

In reply to Stuart Williams:

Merchandise with a relatively mass market yes, but I'd be very surprised if markets or car boots ever sold questionable climbing gear.  Way too niche a product to sell in any kind of volume in a marketplace with some limited footfall.

If people bought something dodgy to use for climbing and thought "that'll do", back in the day that was their decision.  Joe Brown started out climbing on sash cord that his mum had been using as a washing line before he nicked it - he didn't buy it from some bloke at the market who told him it was "A1 equipment for super mega mountain adventure".

The other thing about ebay (and Amazon) though is that you'll also find reputable companies on there supplying proper stuff.  It isn't like buying a rack of quickdraws out of the back of Delboy's van, when the cowboys are mingling with reputable suppliers in the exact same marketplace it's much easier to think you're buying something proper when you're not.

I don't think it was intended for either of those things, merely to ensure that the user* had access to the information they needed to make informed decisions about the kit and to be sure that they were using it correctly. (Information that is often, but not always, quite easy to look up on a manufacturer's website these days.)

*Since we're talking about PPE here - lets also note that PPE is equipment primarily meant to be used in the workplace and as such would most often be issued to employees by employers.  The person buying it would generally not be the end user, so having the instructions printed out and physically attached to the product was (and possibly remains) the most effective way to ensure that information reaches the end user - ie: frequently the person who most needs to see it.

I don't disagree with any of that, and am not at all under the impression that "the primary concern of the leaflet is user stupidity".

In reply to deepsoup:

Agreed. Hence my point that the internet made the sale of such niche products viable in a way they hadn’t previously been. There is often workwear and hardware stalls at markets, so it wouldn’t surprise me at all if you could pick up dodgy stuff in the broader category of PPE. Climbing gear is going to be a tiny subsection of the products covered by the relevant legislation.

That was the assertion made above by another poster that I was disputing. Apologies, you disagreed with me without saying that you thought the answer was something not yet suggested so I assumed you were agreeing with the poster above. 

I don’t have a particularly strong view on what I think the right answer is, your suggestion seems plausible. I just disagreed with the “health and safety gone mad” implication of the suggestion that it’s a response to stupidity and frivolous lawsuits.  

In reply to Stuart Williams:

Ah, I see - so it was!  Funny, I replied to your post without taking any notice of the post you were replying to in turn - yes, that assertion is so obviously wrong that I think I must have just mentally filtered it out..

I just thought it equally unlikely that the regulation requiring that leaflet is a response to unscrupulous manufacturers because of course it has absolutely no effect on them.  It's just one more thing to ignore completely along with all the other regs and standards.