I feel that anything you buy and have to throw out because it is rendered useless is G A R B A G E!

I hate this product. I purchased one (sucked in by the blasting of the ads), and after the first use tossed the whole thing out.

Buckets? Hot water? Chemicals? Gee Bob, I use the sink as my pail (note that it is not rendered useless after 1 cleaning). Hot water, you bet! Oh but gosh, my electricity comes via hydro electric so no emissions there and once again, not rendered useless after 1 cleaning. Chemicals? Ok ya got me there, but Mr Clean lasts waaaaaaaaay longer then that crap in the bottles, oh and “Mr Green” no one ever mentioned those keen batteries needed to power the stupid thing.

Nope, you lose, your product is by nature designed to keep you guys fat on making the consumer buy garbage!

I’ll stick with my mpe and 2 hands, once again! not rendered useless after 1 use.

Companies like you and my most favorite Johnson & Johnson “A family company” (poising the earth for 40 years should be forced to shutdown.

All of these factors have to be taken into account when declaring something “green.”

the swiffer was the biggest one -

which means that all the research conducted by contiuum was back searched –

validating a product for the u.s market – and in this article back searching to make it green.

the danger of this is, if you want to believe its green, your research is going to come out that way.

It’s described and debunked at snopes.com:

http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/swiffer.asp

I’d be skeptical if the company alone made the claim that the product is safe for pets, but the WetJet solution has also been investigated by the ASPCA:

http://www.aspca.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16054&security=2220&news_iv_ctrl=1400

The pages above also describe the ingredients of the cleaning solution.

Full disclosure: I bought one of these today, and used it in my bathroom. I’m now using lots of extra energy running the ventilating fan, because the cleaning solution has a strong and long-lasting scent. Can something be done to convince the general population (or the marketers) that a “clean smell” doesn’t involve putting a time-release fragrance bomb in my house?

I happened upon this discussion while checking to see if the solution can be replaced with vinegar and water, or ammonia and water. It turns out that it can, if you have a strong enough wrench and are careful in removing and replacing the “permanently attached” bottle cap. I’ll also investigate reusable cleaning pads when the supply gives out. As noted by other commenters, it’s sometimes possible to use a non-green product in a green way.

One-use doesn’t mean “not green” if the thing being disposed of is an improvement over the other items which are one-time use.

Several commenters have said that a mop with soap and water is “greener” than a Swiffer pad. Perhaps it is. But remember that the soap/detergent and the water you use to mop with are “one-use” only resources in a case like this.

Now of course, I don’t know all the details about exactly what resources are consumed by the manufacture of a single Swiffer pad vs. the resources consumed in the manufacture of soap/detergent, or the resources involved in providing your water. If you live near a lake or the ocean, clearly it would be far “greener” to fill your mop bucket from those water sources, because there’s no reason at all to use potable water to mop your floor.

But in some of the most populous areas of the world, there isn’t enough water, PERIOD. Using water to mop floors in those parts of the world is likely to be more wasteful (in terms of localized resource costs) than using a piece of chemical-impregnated paper.

Ultimately, the point is: don’t become kneejerk in your quest for “greener” solutions. If you don’t like the product, of course you shouldn’t use it, but to attempt fact-based argument against something you don’t know much about is just lazy rationalization.

As an absurd but simple example–it’s more harmful to the environment to use one single styrofoam cup for your coffee for 30 days than to use 30 paper cups and throw them away each time. (NOTE: This example is acknowledged as absurd. Obviously, porcelain is a better alternative than either paper or styrofoam.)

Do any of the water-mop advocates fill their buckets in the local stream or pond? If not, why not?

2. There is a consumer products green certification in existence – Cradle to Cradle.

http://www.ourhouseworks.com

The products can be ordered online and sent directly to your home. They are manufactured in an environmentally conscious plant. They don’t even have floor drains as all waste is recycled.

Input the 4 digit code of “1408″ to receive a discount.

I have been using these for about two years and find them very safe & green, yet effective.

For the Wet Jet, which I really love on our hardwood and slate floors, I use old infant-size cloth prefold diapers. Same deal… wash and reuse, no fabric softener. They are really absorbent and they are easy to attach to the mop head with a pair of binder clips (at either end). My cloth diapers have been used on five babies so far and I use the ugliest stained ones on the floor… this is about the best recycling of cloth that would otherwise be thrown away that I can think of! :-)

Clearly personal circumstances will override our environmental sensibilities sometimes – I’m sure it’s great for people with back problems, and I can understand how the disposability is an asset in medical/veterinary circumstances. I wouldn’t condemn anyone for using this product – consumers have to weight up green issues just as much as producers. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. I certainly won’t.

(I’m really not sure I buy Mr Zaccai’s assertion that people spend more time cleaning the mop than they do the floor, either, but if they claim to have researched it, who am I to argue?)

Moreover, if you consider electricity for heating water, and washing and drying cloths, Swiffer is a hands down winner! Yeah!! And a design award for Mr. Zaiccai.