.

Collect-a-Can has been conducting an expensive PR campaign for more than a decade. This alone should make you wonder! The motivation is to counter negative perceptions which might be generated by the following fact:
It is far more economical to recycle aluminium cans than steel cans.
Using recycled aluminium saves 95% of the energy cost compared to primary production. For steel, only 33% is saved. (And that's only if it hasn't rusted).

Free of the carbon dioxide taxes applied in other countries, South African companies, mainly SAB, continue to use steel cans, because they are fractionally cheaper. Iscor produces the steel, and Nampak makes the cans.
By the way, the cost of this ad appearing just once in a national newspaper, is equivalent to the material cost increase to produce over 300 000 340ml cans from aluminium instead of steel.

But don't you worry about all that! Just look this pretty picture of a nice giraffe...

Apart from the hypocrisy and blatant deceitfulness of this ad, something else is a mystery to me. What exactly is the original image trying to convey? That the cans are cut up into leaf shapes, before being dumped into the environment? Or that wild animals like eating steel, as long as it is disguied as a plant? Can anyone help with a suggestion as to what was going on in the minds of those who put this together?? (apart from the obvious: 'Oh my god I just sold my integrity!')

Any response from someone who was involved with this ad will be posted here!

Back to The African Potato

References:
http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/energy-cost/NS6Chart.html
http://www.natural-resources.org/minerals/generalforum/docs/pdfs/UNEP WSSD Sector Report - Aluminium.pdf