Under the category of DUH, would these be considered
unbleached?

http://tinyurl.com/bypct5w

Just want to be sure before I continue tossing them into
my compost bin.

nancy

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:08:02 -0500, Nancy Young <replyto@inemail>
wrote:

>Under the category of DUH, would these be considered
>unbleached?
>
>http://tinyurl.com/bypct5w
>
>Just want to be sure before I continue tossing them into
>my compost bin.
>
>nancy


Go for it. No problem. This is one of the many sites online that says
this type of filter is all right to compost.

http://www.greenyour.com/lifestyle/f...coffee-filters
Unbleached or oxygen-bleached filters can be composted along with
coffee grounds and used for gardening purposes.

Boron

On 1/13/2013 12:21 PM, Boron Elgar wrote:> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:08:02
-0500, Nancy Young <replyto@inemail>
> wrote:
>
>> Under the category of DUH, would these be considered
>> unbleached?
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/bypct5w
>>
>> Just want to be sure before I continue tossing them into
>> my compost bin.

> Go for it. No problem. This is one of the many sites online that says
> this type of filter is all right to compost.
>
>
http://www.greenyour.com/lifestyle/f...coffee-filters
> Unbleached or oxygen-bleached filters can be composted along with
> coffee grounds and used for gardening purposes.

Yikes, I knew you'd be better off buying unbleached filters, but
that link makes me think they shouldn't even sell bleached.
Dioxin.

Thanks very much for the link, very informative. I'll be keeping
a (coffee!) can to collect the grounds/filters.

nancy

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:41:11 -0500, James Silverton
> wrote:



>Could you say why you did not like front loaders? I may well be in the
>market for a washing machine and have been inclined to the front loaders.

I hang out on alt.home.repair Very often people are asking questions
about their poor functioning front loaders. They are efficient and
use little water, but they seem to be repair prone. I don't see any
real advantage considering the added cost and potential problems.
Early models had serous problems, but they seem to have gotten better.
I don't know about the new HE models or tub type.

On 1/13/13 1:41 PM, James Silverton wrote:

>> I have a new, non agitator top loader and it along with HE detergent,
>> does a great job of cleaning.
>
> Could you say why you did not like front loaders? I may well be in the
> market for a washing machine and have been inclined to the front loaders.

We too have had a Kenmore Elite top loader without a center column for
about six years, and it does a great job. But I'm probably going to buy
new for the new house in FL later this month.

Front-loaders are all the rage, because they're more efficient in terms
of water use, and they supposedly clean more effectively. The downsides
are that if something goes wrong (say, a pump failure) you can't open
the door with all that water poised to escape; and you have to take
great care to avoid mold growth in the door seals, where water collects
after every load.

And raising the front-loaders on 12-16" bases for easier access is
unattractive to us, because we like to use the top area for folding.

Still undecided, so I'll be watching this sub-thread with interest...

-- Larry

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:08:02 -0500, Nancy Young <replyto@inemail>
wrote:

> Under the category of DUH, would these be considered
> unbleached?
>
> http://tinyurl.com/bypct5w
>
> Just want to be sure before I continue tossing them into
> my compost bin.
>
I Googled "is oxygen cleansed the same as unbleached?" and came up
with this Amazon review from: Rockline #4 Cone Coffee Filters - Oxygen
Cleansed- 400 Count

OK so for those health conscious individuals, they would probably
prefer the brown one or unbleached filters. Because of the chemicals
used in the bleaching process, bad for the health. This one is oxygen
bleached (not the oxy bleach you find in detergent but literally using
oxygen to bleach these filters), they would still use chemicals to
bleach this white completely but not as much since oxygen had done
most of the job. But still, the kind of bleach factories used to
bleach paper these days are not the same stuff they used before EPA &
the rest of the world wised up to the harmful effect the waste
products did to the water (ergo fishes & other seafoods we eat). And
yes they're still bad for your health since they're chemicals not
meant to be ingested but not toxic & most of the chemicals would be in
the pulp and the actual paper would contain only trace amounts that
it's negligible. And even if you eat the filters 3x a day, it would
probably take several lifetimes before it will kill you, LOL!

Then I Googled "can I compost oxygen cleansed coffee filters"
http://www.air-n-water.com/coffee-fi...nformation.htm
further down was
http://www.gardenguides.com/90562-co...e-filters.html
which makes it look like it doesn't matter if you use bleached or
unbleached, just compost away.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:01:57 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> But it is not like chlorinated bleach. Bleaching is a process that
> can use various chemicals and methods to remove color and stains. Most
> of us are familiar with laundry bleach which is sodium hypochlorite.
> There are other methods. I'd go ahead and compost them.

One site I found said all the "better white" coffee filters are oxygen
bleached.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 1/13/2013 2:10 PM, pltrgyst wrote:
> On 1/13/13 1:41 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>
>>> I have a new, non agitator top loader and it along with HE detergent,
>>> does a great job of cleaning.
>>
>> Could you say why you did not like front loaders? I may well be in the
>> market for a washing machine and have been inclined to the front
>> loaders.
>
> We too have had a Kenmore Elite top loader without a center column for
> about six years, and it does a great job. But I'm probably going to
> buy new for the new house in FL later this month.
>
> Front-loaders are all the rage, because they're more efficient in
> terms of water use, and they supposedly clean more effectively. The
> downsides are that if something goes wrong (say, a pump failure) you
> can't open the door with all that water poised to escape; and you have
> to take great care to avoid mold growth in the door seals, where water
> collects after every load.
>
> And raising the front-loaders on 12-16" bases for easier access is
> unattractive to us, because we like to use the top area for folding.
>
> Still undecided, so I'll be watching this sub-thread with interest...
>
> -- Larry
>
There have been some interesting disadvantages of front loaders posted
but I wonder why Laundromats and most Europeans seem to like them?

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.

On 13/01/2013 1:41 PM, James Silverton wrote:

>> I read a lot and decided against front loading and I'm really glad I did.
>>
>> Susan
> Could you say why you did not like front loaders? I may well be in the
> market for a washing machine and have been inclined to the front loaders.


I bought a front loader a couple years ago and have had not problems
with it. I live in the country and water is in short supply in the
summer, and the front loaders use a lot less water. They also use less
detergent. I get my laundry detergent from Melaleuca and only need to
order more ever 6-7 months. It seems to last forever.

My only issue was the funky smell but I about twice a year I put two
cups of vinegar in it and run a hot water cycle and that freshens it up
for months.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:55:05 -0500, James Silverton
> wrote:



>>
>There have been some interesting disadvantages of front loaders posted
>but I wonder why Laundromats and most Europeans seem to like them?

The ones in the laundromats are better built. I've seen used Speed
Queen and Huebsch washers going for $3000. Doubt many homeowners
would pay the price for a new one.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:44:07 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:55:05 -0500, James Silverton
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>There have been some interesting disadvantages of front loaders posted
>>but I wonder why Laundromats and most Europeans seem to like them?
>
>The ones in the laundromats are better built. I've seen used Speed
>Queen and Huebsch washers going for $3000. Doubt many homeowners
>would pay the price for a new one.

After posting, I found the prices.
http://www.cheaplaundryequipment.com/commercial-washers

Some go for $12,000. The $900 Kenmore can't come close on durability.

On 1/13/2013 2:22 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:08:02 -0500, Nancy Young <replyto@inemail>
> wrote:

>> Just want to be sure before I continue tossing them into
>> my compost bin.
>>
> I Googled "is oxygen cleansed the same as unbleached?" and came up
> with this Amazon review from: Rockline #4 Cone Coffee Filters - Oxygen
> Cleansed- 400 Count
>
> OK so for those health conscious individuals, they would probably
> prefer the brown one or unbleached filters. Because of the chemicals
> used in the bleaching process, bad for the health. This one is oxygen
> bleached (not the oxy bleach you find in detergent but literally using
> oxygen to bleach these filters), they would still use chemicals to
> bleach this white completely but not as much since oxygen had done
> most of the job. But still, the kind of bleach factories used to
> bleach paper these days are not the same stuff they used before EPA &
> the rest of the world wised up to the harmful effect the waste
> products did to the water

Interesting.

> (ergo fishes & other seafoods we eat). And
> yes they're still bad for your health since they're chemicals not
> meant to be ingested but not toxic & most of the chemicals would be in
> the pulp and the actual paper would contain only trace amounts that
> it's negligible. And even if you eat the filters 3x a day, it would
> probably take several lifetimes before it will kill you, LOL!

Yeah, I thought never mind putting them into the compost, what
about drinking coffee right out of a bleached filter! Doesn't
seem like a good idea.
>
> Then I Googled "can I compost oxygen cleansed coffee filters"
> http://www.air-n-water.com/coffee-fi...nformation.htm
> further down was
> http://www.gardenguides.com/90562-co...e-filters.html
> which makes it look like it doesn't matter if you use bleached or
> unbleached, just compost away.

Thanks very much.

nancy

On 1/13/2013 9:10 AM, pltrgyst wrote:
> On 1/13/13 1:41 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>
>>> I have a new, non agitator top loader and it along with HE detergent,
>>> does a great job of cleaning.
>>
>> Could you say why you did not like front loaders? I may well be in the
>> market for a washing machine and have been inclined to the front loaders.
>
> We too have had a Kenmore Elite top loader without a center column for
> about six years, and it does a great job. But I'm probably going to buy
> new for the new house in FL later this month.
>
> Front-loaders are all the rage, because they're more efficient in terms
> of water use, and they supposedly clean more effectively. The downsides
> are that if something goes wrong (say, a pump failure) you can't open
> the door with all that water poised to escape; and you have to take
> great care to avoid mold growth in the door seals, where water collects
> after every load.
>
> And raising the front-loaders on 12-16" bases for easier access is
> unattractive to us, because we like to use the top area for folding.
>
> Still undecided, so I'll be watching this sub-thread with interest...
>
> -- Larry
>

I have a Korean front loading machines and you don't see any liquid
water when it's running so you would be able to open the door if it
stops in mid-cycle. I used to have an old front loader and you'd see the
water go up quite a ways. It was fascinating to watch. The new ones are
boring and you don't see much splashing action. My machine also has a
flat pancake motor that's directly connected to the tub. It's a neat thing.