Hi folks.

As you've likely heard us say before, when it comes to protecting our environment, every action counts. This weekend, you'll begin to notice flight attendants serving soft drinks and keeping the can, as we work with our catering vendors to increase the volume of cans and plastic bottles that we recycle.

Why keep the can? Because we are better able to ensure it is recycled if it never leaves our hands, versus trying to separate cans from the rest of the trash later. (As you well know, it can get a little hectic for our flight attendants when they are collecting trash at the end of your flight!)

Of course, if you're like United PR, you want to drink the entire can (love that Diet Sierra Mist!). And of course, you're more than welcome to it. Just ask!

Love to get your feedback here, and thanks as always for your business.

United PR

If this is truly an attempt at improving how much of the onboard trash is being recycled at United I'll give it two ^. Let's hope it improves United's dismal ranking compared to other airlines' recycling efforts.

Sounds like another step to align with Continental.

The last time I was on a CO flight, the flight attendant said "please, please ask me for the can! When I have to keep all my empties in the cart, I can never find the full ones."

The second-to-last-time I was on a CO flight, the flight attendant handed me an empty Coke can and asked me to stow it in my seat back pocket until she had a chance to come back and pick it up.

Glad to hear United is keeping the "you're welcome to keep the can, just ask" approach -- note that in practice this will mean that passengers should probably ask

Was this a sponsored comment?

If this policy leads to less use of lavs, they can then lower the water carried in the tanks, reducing aircraft weight and thus burning less fuel.

I just hope the FAs are going to inform passengers that they can have the full can if they want (or a refill, etc). Otherwise this may just come across as another cost cutting measure - and if it isn't - then there's no reason to potentially upset passengers who could interpret this the wrong way. Just my 2 cents...

Who are these people and can we please stop caring about them? If someone can't bring themselves to ask a simple question such as: can I have another cup of soda or can I have the can? Then frankly that's their issue, if someone is so meek they can't ask an FA a simple question they are probably "upset" at lots of people/companies.

Thanks UnitedPR for the heads up. I don't suppose you have any other more pertinent announcements that might be of interest to this board?

I'm laughing at the concept of making sure a few cans are recycled while traveling across the United States on a piece of metal filled with jet fuel. LOL! "The emperor has no clothes!"

I don't like the cup / ice. So I'll let you keep that for recycling purposes. But if I still want the can, I can get it? This is just the default policy, right? Old habits die hard, and I like drinking out of the can .

This reminds me of the first onboard scene in "Up in the Air"

Well, in this way, I guess United aircrafts can carry less cans of beverage and save not only the cost of drink, but also the fuel.

As said, Remember to Ask if you'd like to have the can.

I know that each recycling facility differs on the policy, but is there any reason why the cans themselves can't be crushed?

Has UA given any thought to using biodegradable cups and other items so they could possibly compost the garbage? I know, that's considerably higher cost... what can I say, I'm a Seattle recycler.

Diet Sierra Mist? I thought Sprite Zero was the non-caffeinated diet drink on UA flights.

Let's say a CRJ with 44 people on it is going 1000 miles and they use 6000 lbs of fuel. That is about 1000 gallons. Let's assume that maybe 30 of them would have driven in separate cars (some are couples, most are singles, a couple of families are onboard.) That is only using 33 gallons of fuel per person. A car ride would use more than the 33 gallons of fuel for most cars. These numbers aren't 100% accurate, but they are well within the realm of realistic. The plane isn't that fuel inefficient compared to a car, and in many cases, it is far more fuel efficient. To make it seem like the plane is just a toxic nightmare to the environment is a huge stretch. With capacity down, load factors high, and using the "right sized" equipment for the given demand, airlines aren't just wasting massive quantities of fuel per passenger, they just do it on a larger scale than your car. Those numbers can be scaled up for bigger planes and longer distances too. Don't kid yourself by implying that airlines are terrible for the environment...they aren't good, but they are surely better than an individual driving, and that is the alternative for many who don't bus, train, or carpool.

Like the press release says, every action counts. People can choose to be green, or not to be green and the choices are relative. I mean Al Gore, Mr. Green has been accused of being terrible at times, using private jets and having a huge house with massive CRT's (as well as being on the BoD of Apple Computer.) Little things do add up, especially when it does done to scale.

If one wants to point an accusing finger, look at BA that has routinely flown empty planes back and forth (not for repositioning) across the pond, just to utilize their slots as lack of use could trigger a loss of them to another entrant. One of the (2) airlines that flew the SST, a fuel hog in the worst way? BA. Now that I think about it, BP is polluting the water around LA. Common denominator, the 1sty word in both is "British"...coincidence, or conspiracy?

People who choose to be green use communications, such as videoconferencing, to replace transportation, such as air travel. That will save a lot more energy than keeping soft drink cans, but I doubt it is something that an airline would be proposing!