Just as equal to green objectives, we value the objective for S-CUP to actually be adopted. No use in succeeding in the former only to languish in the ideas cabinet with the latter.
As touched on in the submission questions above, we would like to make our initial approach through organized channels such as a food chain-- this can meet the volume production needed to keep cost per piece down (a very important factor to encourage S-CUP adoption) and the potential to systematically cascade it to other establishments. Once they realize costing isn't significantly different from their current materials and doesn't disrupt their current workflow in any way, this could increase the chances of adopting the S-CUP.
When smaller/micro businesses see its successful adoption, they will be encouraged (or maybe eventually legally required) to follow suit and follow a “No (Separate) Plastic Straw” policy. And if the local or national government seeks to implement such a policy citywide/countrywide after appreciating its impact in the reduction of unrecycled plastics, that would be amazing.
Hi, Irina. Thanks! That took some time and revisions, but we're pleased with the result.
As much as possible, we would like to refrain from difficult/permanent attachments (i.e. cup-cover, bottle-cap) because it could be problematic during the sorting phase of recycling centers, especially when they're made of different plastic types. Although we will encourage adopters to use the same type for the entire S-CUP, we make room for the possibility that adopters may prefer combinations for costing purposes-- at least the integrated straw component is uniform with bigger pieces such as the cover and cup respectively. They will be easily attached and removed as per regular cup+cover.
They can be made using HIPS, PET or PP, which are the popular choices of food establishments, and widely accepted plastic types by recycling centers.