Amy’s a lifelong glasses-wearer, and I remember well when I eventually had to give up the belief that squinting at the chalkboard would somehow exercise my eyes and make them get better and I would have to get “vision-correcting lenses” as the driver’s license-ese puts it.
But I’m also an off-again, on-again contacts wearer, and I often go without lenses for lengthy periods of time (I keep an old pair of glasses in my car, for driving around, but I don’t need them for day-to-day life, otherwise).
I also flatter myself that I care about the environment. And I have to confess, popping open disposable contacts cases feels wasteful — even though the tiny little lenses are so flimsy and insubstantial, don’t they add up?
Thankfully, the environmentalist column at Slate has answered my question (well, not literally my question, but someone else who asked as equivalent question): Which is better for the environment, glasses or contacts?
Wearing daily disposables for a couple of years would contribute 22 times more greenhouse gas emissions than wearing a pair of glasses over that time. However, there are still frames and plastic bottles and cardboard boxes to consider, not to mention the production of all the raw materials.
The calculations and the column are worth reading, but the bottom line is — contacts are worse, but it’s still so small, it’s not really worth getting worked-up over. Plus, most of it is recyclable.
I still feel bad throwing contacts and cases out all the time. At least with old glasses, you can send them to third-world countries for re-use.
Grant Hamilton
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.