upworthy

garbage

This is the exact same sculpture, just viewed from different angles.

They say one man's trash is another man's treasure, but happens when whole lot of people's trash becomes one man's art? In the case of Tom Deininger's sculptures, you not only get a miraculous viewing experience but also an opportunity to reflect on the natural world and the impact of human overconsumption.

If you look at one of Deininger's sculptures head on, you might see a beautiful cardinal, a lifelike trout, or an unblinking owl staring straight at you. But as you move to one side or another, the illusion quickly disappears, morphing into an increasingly random-looking 3-D conglomeration of toys, action figures, straws, plastic mesh and other discarded human waste that can't possibly be what's forming that realistic animal. Keep walking around it, and you'll eventually come back to your original perspective, but with a whole new appreciation for the stunning creature before you—and the artist who created it.

Check it out:

@theartrevival

Trash Art by Thomas Deininger #thomasdeininger #contemporaryart #textileart

What an artist expresses in their art isn't always what an observer takes away from it—that's part of the fun of art—but sometimes a medium and a message mesh so well that the effect is profound and palpable. Deininger's creations are part beauty and part statement, as the best art tends to be, and the statement in these sculptures is clear: We're throwing away a whole lot of plastic junk that can't break down and it's impacting the natural world.

The Rhode Island-based artist told Yahoo! News that he got the idea for creating sculptures out of trash when he saw plastic waste washing ashore on a trip to the South Pacific. He said the act of making his art helps quell some of the "gut sickness" he feels when he observes the destruction of the environment.

“I don’t think we’re alarmed enough," he said. "Everyone's not alarmed enough, enough of the time, is my fear. We should all be petrified and willing to do whatever it takes,”

- YouTubeyoutu.be

But there's even more behind Deininger's sculptures. After all, he could just make a realistic animal from all angles and call it a day. There's a purpose to making them abstract from all angles but one.

"The goal is to make an interesting, completely abstract sculpture that also contains provocative, subversive, or humorous elements (by manipulation of the various action figures) that from one very particular vantage point resolves into a convincing image of a creature," he told Jejune magazine. "The whole thing is really a meditation on perspective and illusion and the fragility of our world view in any given emotional state. The practice is also about order in chaos."

"Ideally the viewer falls for the 'trick' then as the illusion falls apart and they become disoriented for a few seconds that inspires curiosity, wonder or harmless vulnerability," he added. "This would then give way to a kind of repulsion or soft despair when one considers the implications of the materials… this could then be broken by a little comic relief, social narrative or nostalgia smashing. So in short, a range of emotions. Some good some not so good, but perhaps necessary."

“There is a confidence that we understand our world,” he told the Provincetown Independent, but he wants that confidence to turn to unease as viewers experience the full perspective of the sculpture. “What we thought we knew comes apart.”

People often ask Deininger if his sculptures are for sale. According to Yahoo! News, they are, if you have $12,000 to $50,000 to spend. Honestly, with the amount of time it must take to create one of these pieces and seeing how much other art pieces go for, that doesn't seem outrageous.

Oh, and it's not just animals that Deininger creates out of trash. Check out this masterpiece of another masterpiece:

@tomdeininger

I faithfully analyzed every stroke of paint and found a plastic equivalent. The honor was all mine. #vincentvangogh #tiktokart #abstractart #fyp

Absolutely unbelievable. You can follow Tom Deininger on Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.

Heroes

Sweden has a weird but awesome problem: They're running out of trash.

Garbage is a perennial problem, but Sweden's found a way to put their garbage to work.

I'm always a little surprised by how quickly my trash can fills up.

Unfortunately, this is a common situation. According to Duke University's Center for Sustainability & Commerce, the average American creates 4.3 pounds of waste a day. Nationwide, that's 220 million tons of trash per year! And about 55% of that ends up in landfills.

Photo by Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images.


Landfills can be a problem, too: Contaminants can leach into groundwater, and landfills produce about 22% of our methane emissions (methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change), according to the Duke center. Granted, newer ones are much better and come with things like liners and gas collectors, but we're still filling them up pretty quickly.

Sweden doesn't have this problem, though.

The Swedes figured out something important: You don't have to dump trash in a landfill. You can put that garbage to work instead.

Inside a waste-to-energy plant in Sweden. Photo by Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty Images.

Sweden built 32 waste-to-energy plants that burn garbage, providing heat and electricity to surrounding towns. According to the Swedish government, the plants heat about 810,000 homes and provide electricity to 250,000 more. That must be nice, considering Sweden can get pretty chilly during the winter.

But at the same time, Sweden's also really good at keeping things out of the trash in the first place. They just straight-up recycle about half their stuff. There are special trucks that pick up used electronics, and even the stuff sent to the plants get sorted first.

A recycling center in Sweden. Photo by Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty Images.

All of this has led to a funny problem: Right now, Sweden doesn't have enough trash.

They're actually importing trash from other countries — about 800,000 tons of it in 2014. And the other countries are paying Sweden to take the garbage off their hands, so ... win-win.

It's not piles of money, but it might be just as good. Photo by Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty Images.

Of course, there's some nuance here. The waste plants are burning stuff, after all, so it does produce some carbon dioxide and pollution, but the plants are designed to minimize this. There's also the argument that we should be focusing more on reducing our consumption in the first place instead of trying to deal with the collateral.

There could be some point in the future where nobody has trash to burn. Still, Sweden says they've got that version of the future covered: They'll switch to biofuels.

So there are still potential snags, but this is a problem that would be kind of great for every country to have.

By the way, America hasn't exactly been slouching when it comes to waste-to-energy plants, which is good news. As of 2014, we had 84 of them, according to the Energy Recovery Council. We're 33 times larger than Sweden, and we only recycle about a third of our garbage (compared to Sweden's about half), so maybe we shouldn't get cocky just yet. But still, we're on our way.

Garbage is a serious problem, and there isn't always going to be an easy solution.

But programs like this show how a little smart thinking can put our problems to work.

Good news for fans of foggy, damp British beaches!

A beautiful day on the beach in Hastings, Sussex. Photo by Peter Trimming/geograph.org.uk.

Thanks to the efforts of local policymakers and environmental activists, it appears those beaches are a lot less plastic-baggy then they were just five years ago.


In 2011, Wales became the first country in the United Kingdom to require customers at supermarkets and retail stores who want a single-use plastic bag to pay a 5-pence surcharge.

Basically, anyone who wanted to take their items home in a plastic bag had to pay about 5 cents per bag.

An old Sainsbury's bag. Photo by Mark Tristan/Flickr.

Northern Ireland, Scotland, and England followed suit just a few years later. Fast-forward to 2016, and it turns out the new rules have actually been making a noticeable difference, at least in terms of how many of the unsightly, bird-intestine-cloggers wash up on shore, according to a BBC report:

"The number of plastic carrier bags found on UK beaches has dropped by almost half, the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) has said.

The charity's Great British Beach Clean report found just under seven bags per 100 metres of coastline cleaned.

That is a 40% drop from the average 11 bags found in 2015 and is the lowest number in 10 years."



The study wasn't all good news — it also found an increase in plastic bottles and balloon-related litter, and plastic bag trash increased slightly in some regions of England — but overall, the trend seems to be heading in a positive direction.

This is good news for hey-maybe-using-so-much-plastic-just-one-time-is-not-so-good advocates in the United States, who have already won a few key victories in recent years.

A Ralph's supermarket in Hollywood, California. Photo by Yebo420/Wikimedia Commons.

Plastic trash has a nasty habit of poisoning birds, sneaking into the food chain, and winding up in places like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, where it hangs out for hundreds of years, breaking down bit by bit without truly biodegrading. As a result, U.S. states and cities have fought back against our propensity to dispense them willy-nilly.

California banned single-use plastic bags at large retailers in 2014 (a ballot measure affirming the ban was approved this year). Though the prohibition measures are fairly new and the effects are difficult to study comprehensively, data on similar measures is largely encouraging.

Cities like Seattle; Austin, Texas; and Cambridge, Massachusetts, have approved similar bans, while New York City and Washington, D.C., have passed surcharge ordinances similar to those in the U.K.

While plastic bag taxes and bans can seem like a small thing, they can help limit fossil fuel use and promote the health and welfare of marine life, two steps that are crucial for creating a less litter-filled planet.

A bag on the beach at Red Wharf Bay in Wales. Photo by John S. Turner/geograph.org.uk.

A plastic bag surcharge may not be the Paris Agreement, but the fact that data is starting to show that incentivizing customers to reuse shopping bags can be effective environmental policy is good news.

What's better? It's the kind of effective environmental policy supported by data you can see right in front of your face every time you lay out on the beach for a tan.

In the grand scheme of saving the planet, less cluttered beaches are a little thing.

But if it's going to take a sea change to save our planet, it can't hurt to start by cleaning the beach.

True
Ad Council - Save The Food

I'm Heather. I'm a single woman living alone, and just like you, sometimes I buy too much food.

For the longest time, I didn't think much of it. I'd get overeager at the grocery store and come home with more food than I could eat or preserve. When some of it went bad, as food inevitably does, I threw it out.

Then I started learning more about climate change, pollution, and food waste. I discovered that my dirty little secret of throwing away food wasn't mine at all. Lots of us do it, and that's adding up in massive ways.


According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Americans wasted 133 billion pounds and $161 billion worth of food in 2010 — about 30% of the national food supply.

That kind of waste affects many aspects of American life. 40% of all food in America never gets eaten, and the average American family of four loses $1,500 a year on wasted food, with each individual throwing away over 24 pounds of food per month. Food going to landfills could be provided to some of the millions of Americans with food insecurity; instead, along with yard waste, it accounts for 27% of waste products sent to city landfills. As it rots there, it creates methane, a dangerous driver of climate change.

You deserved better, food. Image via iStock.

I felt guilty but inspired. It was time to try and shrink my food footprint.

Over the last few months, I've become a lot more conscious of the amount of food I buy. I'm making weekly meal plans to ensure I'm not buying things I won't need. I've also started composting — and made many new fruit fly friends in the process.

But I knew I could do more. What about the bits of food that come with produce and meat I buy that inevitably end up in the compost or garbage? Shouldn't I be finding a use for them, too? According to this video from Save the Food, a campaign by the Ad Council and the Natural Resources Defense Council to encourage Americans to reduce food waste in the U.S., that answer was definitely yes:

I decided to challenge myself. I'd cook a full meal of recipes based around the scraps of food I usually toss in the compost or the garbage. I'd try to use even the bits of food I wouldn't usually even consider food. I’d document my progress, feast on the fruits of my labor, and bring you, dear reader, along for the trip. Are you ready? Let’s ride.

Indeed it must. Image via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

The soup course: Meat bones are the new black — er, broth.

If I were the good hipster my Tinder profile says I am, I’d be consuming bone broth regularly for its collagen-loving, immune-boosting health benefits. Plus, it’s a great way to get more use out of bones after a meal.

Image via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

These bones were left over from a rib dinner a few weeks ago — I stored them in the freezer in anticipation of this meal. After I thawed them out, they spent the night in a stock pot on low heat. In the morning I added some spices, celery, and onion and let it continue simmering. My apartment smelled amazing, and my cat was very confused.

Unfortunately, I forgot just how much of my broth I needed for my main course, and after it simmered down, I only had a tiny bowl's worth left for this course. Nonetheless, it was lovely, and I felt like a giant drinking it. If you want to try making a broth of your own from scratch, here's a tasty recipe for homemade chicken stock.

Spoon for scale! Image via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

Food saved/reused: half pound of beef bones.

The salad course: Beet greens are also a food!

Before this meal, I’ve never intentionally or willingly eaten a beet green. Not because I didn’t want to but because I didn’t know I could. Turns out, I should have been doing this for a long time because beet greens have lots of vitamins and minerals — and they're pretty tasty too!

GIF via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

Important note: If you’re going to eat beet greens, be sure to cook them first as they are surprisingly bitter in the raw. Some recipes recommend blanching, but I just gave them a quick sauté in olive oil, crushed garlic, and red pepper flakes for a warm green salad. It was absolutely delicious — like a denser, heavier version of cooked spinach. I'm already looking forward to having it again.

Food saved: one-quarter pound of beet greens.

The main course: Shrivel-y tubers still taste fantastic when cooked in a hearty stew.

I’ve only recently learned that my fridge drawers have special functions for keeping food at its utmost freshness. I’ve also started to embrace that not every perishable food needs to immediately go to the fridge. Unfortunately for a few sweet potatoes and a forgotten yam, those realizations came a little too late.

Fear not, squishy veggies: You shall rise again! Image via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

I looked online and found that these tough tubers, despite their depleted moisture content, were still perfectly safe to eat. Chopped up to supplement a big hearty beef stew, you’d hardly guess that they used to be the veggie equivalent of a fashion "don’t." (Another great way to use up vegetable scraps is to turn them into delicious veggie broth.)

This beef stew was a great solution for helping to empty my larder. To my thirsty tubers, I added some neglected celery and some heirloom carrots that had gone a wee bit rubbery with age. Once they were cooked up with some well-browned beef, most of my stock, and some spices, they helped make a delicious winter stew. Even though it took forever to cook (wherefore art thou, slow cooker?), it was rich, savory, and filling.

My inner hobbit was impressed with my culinary expertise. GIF via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

Food saved: 1 pound of slightly shriveled yams, sweet potatoes, and carrots plus some orphan celery stalks and the beef stock from the soup course.

The dessert course: Ambrosia apples a la floor, then a la crumble.

Ambrosia apples are my candy; I would happily trade them for chocolate almost any day. So, when I brought home my bag of perfectly-selected ambrosias — and promptly spilled them all over the floor, I was pretty gutted. My gorgeous apples were very bruised with lots of soft spots. I needed to do something with them right away.

Fortunately, I had some almond flour and gluten-free oats in my pantry. Now, instead of an afternoon snack, my beloved ambrosia apples became the showpiece of a rare special dessert — a naturally-sweet gluten-free apple crumble.

This crumble was, dare I say, ambrosia. Image via Heather Libby/Upworthy.

I’d originally planned on serving my crumble with some non-dairy "ice cream" made from pureed frozen bananas, but the ones in my pantry absolutely refused to go bad on time for this article. That said, if you have some less-than-impressive bananas in your pantry or on your counter, I strongly recommend you try the false ice cream on your own. It’s one ingredient, takes seconds to make, and will make any lactose intolerant person weep tears of non-dairy joy.

Food saved: three-quarters pound of life-changingly delicious ambrosia apples.

While a four-course meal isn't feasible every day, I know that some of the tricks I learned will become a regular part of my cooking routine.

Even though this challenge took quite a while — including prep and cleaning, about three hours — I was having so much fun that it kind of sped by. I watched old episodes of "Scandal" and "Last Week Tonight" while I chopped produce; my cats, Fezzik and Rupert, stayed off the counter for the entire evening; and I got to enjoy a really satisfying home-cooked meal that left me with plenty of freezable leftovers for future meals.

Even better, I helped keep about two and half pounds of food I would have considered scraps out of the landfill and compost.

Would I do this again? Absolutely. Should you do it, too? In the spirit of reuse, I'll say again: Absolutely.