Category Archives: Green Marketing

Looking Beyond the Borders for Plastic Pollution Solutions

Plastics rock!  In a brief moment, if you focus on the role of plastic in our lives, it’s incredible all the applications we use it to our benefit.  Unfortunately, the end-of-life for most plastic is hundreds of years away, if not longer, a fundamental problem.   Over the course of the last few years I’ve had the privilege of playing a role in the Sustainability efforts of numerous producers of plastic.   I’ve heard about their attempts at previous technologies, their struggles of processing and performance, the regulatory quagmire they face, what they’re trying to hang their hat on now and everything under the sun and including the sun.

During this time, I’ve also been privy to some remarkable advancement in technologies and I’m amazed at the innovations that are available today as well as what is on the horizon.  It’s that focus on what tomorrow brings that truly provides a synergistic sustainable solution for a company.  It’s about implementing a solution that understands that plastic, and the issue of plastic waste, is not an island unto itself.  We must look beyond the borders to see the true possibilities, the interaction of multiple elements and cooperative action.  It’s why ENSO applauds the efforts and recent announcement by NatureWorks, for recognizing the possibilities beyond its current technology.   The silver bullet may not exist today, but with concerted efforts, we can move closer and closer to the goal.  The value proposition of methane capturing is far beyond any of its counterparts and it is increasingly being recognized as a more logical and fundamentally sound platform to adopt.

Methane, despite the perceived negative connotations, is one of our most inexpensive and cleanest energy resources.  This naturally produced gas can be used either in combustion engines or for conversion to electricity.  To include the possibility of harnessing methane for plastic production would be a huge game changer.  It is why current technologies such as ENSO RESTORE®, which proves to accelerate the natural biodegradation process in landfill environments, are being sought after.  Many initiatives being touted today are simply incapable of proportionally meeting the increased production rate of plastic.  What may appear to be “green” in theory essentially remains inadequate at meeting the greater objective of a cleaner planet.  It is why ENSO RESTORE® provides a significantly more dynamic solution to stand behind when it comes to adopting technologies that support sustainability goals.  Beyond bans and regulations, the objective is to provide a clear end-of-life solution in any plastic application (PET, HDPE, LDPE, PE, PP, EVA, PS, nitrile, rubber or latex); otherwise, we’re merely offering lip service in addressing the plastic waste in our environment.

 

The Truth Shall Set You Free

We produce well over 200 billion pounds of plastic each year.  This is a well-documented environmental issue of grim proportions; plastic is literally trashing our planet.  Brands, manufactures and consumers are fully aware and the search for solutions is in full swing.  Fortunately, our awareness has spurred incredible technological advances to address this problem, some better than others.

As a brand, being environmentally accountable is a trait that serves well in the marketplace.  It’s a hallmark that projects the greater good.  But in a Cass Sunstein meets George Orwell world,  where the FTC, EPA, FDA, IRS, (insert acronym),  are watching your every move and new terms such as Extended Producer Responsibility emerge, it can be paralyzing to make that technological decision.  You want to choose something that is justifiable, reliable and proven.

In a small microcosm of the larger issue, we catch a glimpse of the efforts and problems we face.  In a recent article Coffee Makers wrestling with recyclability of single-serve pods,  TerraCycle is boasting about recovering 25 million coffee capsules over the last couple years, but has essentially found no use for them.  Are we to understand that companies are paying TerraCycle to collect and store these things in some warehouse?  Add to this, according to the article, 41 million adults drink a coffee made in a single-cup brewer every day.  So in a two year effort, TerraCycle could not recover a single days’ worth of coffee capsules?  Clearly, the Customary Disposal Method for this application is the garbage, in other words, the Landfill.   Let’s not jump on a bandwagon for the sake of waiving a green flag, the overall effect is useless.

Here’s one, California is now floating a new Bill to put the burden on companies to find solutions for plastic waste in our waterways.  The same State that bans the claim of biodegradable materials (and has sued companies legitimately making those claims), is now requiring brands and manufacturers to seek out and implement biodegradable solutions?? Are they expecting producers to put their necks on the line in search for innovation? Good luck taking that bait!

Unfortunately, the principle concern of environmental safety is being contaminated with agendas that have not proven capable of long term sustainability.  There is a tendency to gravitate towards colorful Green language instead of clear, black and white solutions.  Today, we have the capability to address plastic pollution on an incredible scale, without contamination.  Unfortunately, too many producers are paralyzed with uncertainty or are turning to the least point of resistance.

A perfect example is the less than bold stand that one of the largest producers of bottled water took, “Lightweighting”.  Holy crap! That’s it?  Reduce your costs and provide a rigid bag for a bottle?  C’mon…the “commitment to minimizing the environmental impact” is lackluster., considering 50 billion plastic water bottles end up in U.S. landfills each year.

Here’s my humble opinion.  Within a generation, we have witnessed the birth of the plastic EVERYTHING.  We began filling-up our Landfills with EVERYTHING and noticed NOTHING was reprocessing back into nature.   The raging river of plastic is pouring onto our planet and we place the majority of this material in Landfills.   There is a biodegradation process in Landfills that is beaming with potential and we have the proven ability to produce, capture and harness one of the most inexpensive and cleanest energy resources and fundamentally address our plastic pollution problem.

Recycling is an industry I support, but the numbers don’t lie and the goal is not to prop-up one particular industry, it’s to clean our planet.  We need to stop kidding ourselves and start dealing with reality.  I also understand Sourcing from renewable resources, but harvesting Corn for plastic in order to claim “Compostable” is absolutely wrong.  I’ve lived in many places over the years and I have yet to find my local Industrial Composting facility.  But if I did, I would respectfully not bring them my plastic waste.  Let’s face it, you can claim it, but it’s not going there and where it is going, this technology does nothing.   For those adding metal into the equation, this technology is borderline criminal.  That probably explains the parasitic tendencies of this technology in underdeveloped countries.  Both of these technologies have an adverse effect on our Food Source/Supply, which alone is highly irresponsible.

When making the decision on how to be accountable for your Plastic Footprint, know what is out there, get the full story and get the proof that it performs as claimed.  If you stand in the light of truth, you will be safe.  70% is greater than 30%, 2+2=4, what’s right is right.

The great recycling hoax.

Manufacturers Beware!

Have you ever thought about where your plastic garbage goes?

Shopping for items packaged in plastic may end up costing you more in the long run; that is, if you discard the packaging incorrectly. The same could be true for plastic manufacturers if California passes their latest bill (Assembly Bill 521) on “extended producer responsibility”.

Right now; in San Francisco, California it is against the law to not recycle your trash.  That’s right…you; as a law abiding citizen must separate all of your garbage, recyclables, and compostable items.  To ensure that all citizens are complying with this law, trash auditors check garbage bins the night before it is scheduled for pickup. If you do not comply after several warnings, the non-complying residents will receive fines and/or have to take educational classes on recycling.

Taking this a step further, California is now working towards making plastic manufacturers responsible for the end of life of their product; ultimately, charging hefty fines for material that is not disposed of properly.  (This, after recently making the word biodegradable illegal on labeling)

So who is responsible for all of this plastic pollution that is littering our oceans and filling our landfills? Is it the consumer?  Is it the plastic manufacturer? Is it the recycling industry? (Who happens to discard more plastic than it recycles.) California may think they are doing the right thing by penalizing those who are in the path of plastic – from beginning to end – but they’re not supporting or encouraging better solutions…so who’s fault is it, really?

Despite whose responsibility this may be; it leads to a very important question…”Why are we not producing plastic that is biodegradable or even marine degradable? And, (ok, two questions) if there is a solution, why, as consumers and manufacturers, are we not jumping on that solution?”

I think that if there is a solution to this plastic pollution problem and a plastic manufacturer is using a product that is proven to be biodegradable and/or marine degradable, they are showing their end-of-life responsibility and it should be encouraged and rewarded amongst those companies; as well as, consumers who use such a product.

Does such a product exist?

Yes!

ENSO Plastics has created an additive, that when added to the plastic manufacturing process will cause the plastic to become biodegradable; as well as, marine degradable. There are two customizable blends that offer many options to manufacturers – ENSO RESTORE and ENSO RENEW.

This is the solution California needs to recognize, before they start penalizing all of their citizens and plastic manufacturers. California may want to make the people responsible, but I think the state needs to be responsible by allowing new technology and better options for their residents and local commerce.

Wake up California! The solution is staring you in the face!

 

Can I Claim Biodegradable or Compostable?

There has been a bit of lingering confusion by some regarding the recent updates to the FTC Green Guidelines about marketing products with the terms “biodegradable” and/or “compostable”.  We hope to clear up any remaining confusion that might be out there in this blog.

We feel that the recently updated FTC Green Guidelines have really cleared up the past confusing and often ambiguous guidelines regarding marketing claims of biodegradable and compostable.  The FTC in their updated green guidelines have provided clear explanations and examples of appropriate marketing claims that would eliminate confusion among “green” type of claims being made in the market today.  Claims such as ‘biodegradable’, ‘compostable’ and even ‘recyclable’ have been addressed in the updated FTC Green Guidelines and should eliminate any and all confusion that lingered from earlier guidelines.

So can a company make the claim of “biodegradable?”

The answer is yes!  There are two ways to do so:

A company can claim biodegradable if that material biodegrades with a one year timeframe within the customary disposal environment.  The company making that claim should have reliable scientific data to back up the one year timeframe for biodegradation within the customary disposal environment.

Or, for products that are biodegradable but take longer than one year to biodegrade, (After all, even food waste takes longer than a year to biodegrade in a landfill environment) the claim must be fully qualified.

What does “fully qualified” mean?

It means that a company must include additional information along with the claim of biodegradable.  That additional information includes the environment and timeframe.

This approach also applies to claims of compostable.  Products that use the general claim of compostable must compost in a backyard compost environment and compost very rapidly.  For products that will not readily compost in typical backyard compost environments, the claims would need to be fully qualified to include the type of compost environment and if needed the timeframe.

There is a caveat to this, and that is that many compostable plastics require an Industrial or Commercial Compost Facility in order to properly compost.  These facilities are not readily available to most of the world and so the availability of placing the compostable product into the proper disposal environment should be included in with the marketing claims.

And what about the claim “recyclable”?

Most polymers are technically but unfortunately are not.  With recyclability claims be sure to use a qualified claim if less than 60% of consumers have access to facilities that recycle your product.

The general idea behind the updated FTC green Guidelines is to minimize or prevent confusion about environmental claims being made about a product and/or the products packaging.  ENSO fully supports this approach and we believe it is crucial that green marketing claims are as accurate and complete as possible so not to result in confusing or misleading claims.

If you would like additional information on this subject please feel free to contact us.

BioPlastics Dirty Little Secret

So you know all about bioplastics, Right? You know they are difficult to process, often cause more detriment to the environment than traditional plastics, have limited shelf stability and can be very expensive. But what you may not have known is…..

Nearly every plastic on the market today is a bioplastic! In todays market, when one uses the term “bioplastic” they typically beleive they are refering to a plastic that is sourced from plant materials. What most don’t realize (and many try to avoid admitting) is that most all plastics are made from plant materials!

When I was in elementary school, I had an amazing 4th grade teacher. Of the many things she taught me, one was that fossil fuels were the remains of dinasour bones. Little did my teacher realize the error of her ways. Fossil fuel is primarily comprised of ancient algae (YEP, PLANTS!). So any product made from fossil fuels, is made of……

Plants.

Now, don’t get me wrong; I am not advocating the use of fossil fuels. Quite to the contrary, it is imperitive that we get away from the use of the ancient plants as quickly as possible. These plants have sequestered carbon for millions of years. Carbon that if released into our atmosphere could cause irrepairable damage.

What I am advocating is to educate properly, get rid of the fluff and marketing and call things as they are. The source is not the issue, it is the environmental impact of the source that is the issue. Perhaps we need to identify plastics as “sustainable” or “not sustainable” and leave it at that. Because you either are or your not, it’s that simple.

Compostable Products Go Straight To Landfill

In Marin, Many Compostable Materials Go Straight to Landfill

Despite proliferation of biodegradable foodware, those products aren’t being composted at the two waste management facilities in Marin. As a result, people’s choices might not be as eco-friendly as they think.

Greenwood School 8th grader Leyla Spositto and her classmates knew something was amiss just a few weeks into the school year when they saw the trash piling up.

Greenwood administrators had chosen San Ramon, Calif.-based Choicelunch as the school’s new lunch provider largely because nearly all of its packaging was made of compostable materials – from corn-based bio-plastic cups to potato-based “spudware” forks and spoons – and therefore would be diverted from the landfill. The move fit with one of the school’s core values of environmental stewardship.

But when Greenwood environmental science teacher Julie Hanft told the students that so-called bio-plastics weren’t being composted in Marin, Greenwood’s 7th and 8th graders, who handle the school’s trash as part of their after-school chores, were stunned.

“All of the stuff from Choicelunch was going to the trash,” Spositto said. “We were very surprised that a system didn’t exist for the packaging to be composted like it was supposed to be.”

So was Greenwood School Director Debra Lambrecht.

“We were very, very surprised,” Lambrecht said. “And the fact that the children were shocked and appalled? We thought, ‘Well right on.’”

With lots of packaging that could neither be composted nor recycled – bio-plastics can’t be recycled like regular plastic – the students and Hanft arranged to have a large collection of their Choicelunch packaging taken to Recology near Candlestick Park in San Francisco, where bio-plastics are composted. But they quickly realized that having a parent or teacher drive a truck across the Golden Gate Bridge weekly wasn’t exactly a sustainable solution.

Greenwood’s students and school administrators found themselves at the crossroads of an issue that all involved say is riddled with complexities. As a result, many Marin residents who think they’re making eco-friendly decisions – buying only compostable plastic cups for their children’s birthday party, for example – are sending more garbage to the landfill than if they were using recyclable materials.

“That’s the big shame about bio-plastics – people think they’re doing the right thing,” said Jessica Jones, the district manager for Redwood Landfill and Recycling Center in Novato, where most of the trash, recycling and compost from northern and southern Marin is taken.

Jones said Redwood, a subsidiary of Waste Management Inc., doesn’t compost bio-plastics because the compost the company produces is sold to and used on organic farms. If its compost contained any materials that took longer to biodegrade – like corn-based foodware or bio bags, for instance – it could not be certified by the Organic Materials Review Institute, the Eugene, Ore., which provides independent review of products to be used in organic farming.

Jim Iavarone, managing director at Mill Valley Refuse, which sends all of its waste to Redwood, said the inability to compost bio-plastics “has been a continual issue for us” ever since the company rolled out compost service in August 2010.

“The makers of these products and food services (like ChoiceLunch) have hung their hat on that,” Iavarone said. “It’s a good idea that just isn’t delivering as hoped or as advertised.”

Devi Peri, the education coordinator for Marin Sanitary Service, which serves most of Central Marin, including San Rafael, Larspur, Corte Madera, San Anselmo, Fairfax and the Ross Valley and Las Gallinas sanitary districts, says her company is in the same boat as Redwood.

“Not all compostable plastics are created equal and we don’t even have any way to see if it’s a true biodegradable plastic,” she said.

But compostable bio-plastics are accepted by other Bay Area waste companies like Recology, which processes most of its OMRI-certified compost at Jepson Prairie Organics, a facility in Vacaville.

“There is a clear disconnect between how Recology can compost bio-plastics and how we can’t,” Jones said.

The difference, according to OMRO Program Director Lindsay Fernandez-Salvador, is that Recology has an extensive “foreign removal program.” That program, essentially a filtering system, calls for manual removal of any all bio-plastic products not clearly labeled compostable. Under California law, products labeled compostable must meet the Biodegradable Products Institute’s ASTM D6400 standards, which “determine if plastics and products made from plastics will compost satisfactorily, including biodegrading at a rate comparable to known compostable materials.”

“Any compost may become contaminated with compostable plastics, but if the program has a reasonably robust foreign removal program, that satisfies OMRI’s requirements,” Fernandez-Salvador said.

A foreign removal program means that bio-plastics that aren’t labeled clearly or don’t meet the standards either end up in a separate compost stream of only products that will degrade at a slower rate than food scraps or yard waste – or they’re tossed into the landfill.

Peri said there is some industry skepticism about how much bio-plastic material is actually ending up in the compost streams at places like Recology.

“I have a feeling that it might be more (going to the landfill) than people might want to hear,” Peri said. “And maybe more than they are reporting.”

Jack Macy, the Zero Waste Coordinator for the city of San Francisco, acknowledged that some “compostable stuff that is not labeled well ends up in the landfill.”

“But the reason that we accept compostable bags and compostable foodware is that it allows us to capture more of the organics that we’re trying to divert from the landfill,” Macy added. “Every composter would prefer not to take that stuff because of the challenges of identification and the breaking down aspect. It’s easier to say no.”

That’s the choice Redwood has made, which spurred Greenwood’s 7th and 8th graders to take on the issue as a community action project. The students researched other options, spoke with potential vendors and made a presentation to Lambrecht right before the holiday break. The school intends to move to a completely independent lunch system next year, with an in-house chef making lunches dispensed with reusable plates and utensils. The move is one that only schools as small as Greenwood, with just 127 students, can afford to make.

In the meantime, Greenwood administrators have decided to dump Choicelunch and explore alternative options for the rest of this year.

“It is very disappointing,” said Karen Heller, the director of business development for Choicelunch, whose company supplies lunches for more than a dozen schools in Marin, including the Mill Valley and Ross Valley school districts. “But it hinges on the waste management company. Our hands are kind of tied.”

For two days a week, the school’s 8th graders will be selling lunch from Grilly’s and Tamalpie Pizzeria (one day apiece) to raise money for their 10-day spring trip. Lambrecht hopes to have a new deal in place in the coming days for the other days.

“We’ve really felt like we’ve accomplished something,” Spositto said of the student’s campaign. “We’re glad we had the authority to make this happen.”

Making green claims without ‘greenwashing’

by Sharmel Ali  sharmel.ali@csr-asia.com, csr-asia.com
As environmental awareness is increasing in Asia, so is the rise of “Greenwashing” – i.e. making misleading claims or statements on the environmental credentials of products or processes.
Whilst consumers in this part of the world might not yet be as cynical as their Western counterparts, smart companies should look ahead and ensure that they get it right, to avoid future loss of consumer trust and confidence. However, not all ‘greenwash’ is deliberate, but is based on companies misunderstanding of terminologies or good practice. And consumers are still interested in bona-fide green credentials, so how can companies get it right:
  1. Do the homework –Ensure that the green claims of the business, product or service are true and consistent with wider business activities. Example: A large cosmetics company were promoting their fund-raising for breast cancer research, but were attacked by activists for including carcinogenic substances in its products
  2. Be honest and humble – Nothing is perfect and honesty goes a long way. If the business or company is not 100%, don’t pretend it is. By acknowledging the areas of products or business that are not yet green and show commitment towards addressing some of the concerns, there is a better chance that stakeholders will trust the claims that are made. A small modifying word can often do the trick. Example: Carlsberg’s longstanding “Probably the best beer in the world” – is almost impossible to dispute
  3. Provide documentation – The information and further/relevant details should be made accessible to the public. Are green claims certified based on established eco-labels, methods or experts? Companies should make it easier for customers to be able to understand and check on green claims being made. Example: M&S have an extensive website documenting and explaining all in-store claims
  4. Consult stakeholders – Engaging with stakeholders, both internal and external, in a dialogue on green marketing – is invaluable. It shows the company’s good intent, willingness to want to improve and its concern for the views of their stakeholders. This in itself is not only good practice but inherently a good branding opportunity. Companies can take the opportunity to find out if their green claims are acceptable to their staff, suppliers, customers, NGOs and the community and check on whether they are on the right track or seen to be greenwashing. Example: Several alcohol producers now have stakeholder panels who comment on whether their advertisement is ethical
An honest green story starts from inside the company, not from a marketing idea that a company tries to spin. Starting from an honest place does not mean that companies have to think small. Greenwash isn’t worth it – the longer term repercussions of dishonesty in ‘false’ claims without actual substance are more negative than positive at a time where consumers are becoming more aware, and where information is easily accessible. If a company seeks to jump on the green bandwagon and ultimately improve their green standing, branding and reputation – it is far better and more rewarding to take an honest, transparent and realistic approach in alignment with an actual proactive interest in understanding the real issues and in addressing them.

Doing What’s Right When Nobody’s Looking

In a time when environmentally conscious branding is paramount in marketing circles, the overall adoption of “Green” initiatives should be, first and foremost, a fundamental decision. Where choices are made based on what’s right instead of what’s convenient. Often, technologies advance so rapidly that legislation is caught playing “catch-up”. It is during these times that brands face the decision of doing what is the scientifically proven best choice for the environment or shelving this choice because of marketing obstacles.

Often the final decision comes down to the corporate integrity of the brand and personal devotions of those brands leaders. The “why do we do what we do?” question. Do you implement environmental measures because it is the right thing to do, or do you implement them because it may improve your bottom line?

For example: Novartis is an international company who has made a corporate commitment to pay a ‘living wage’ to all employees worldwide. This means that they are often paying above legally required minimum wage because they understand that minimum wage does not provide for basic human needs. They implemented this corporate directive, not because it improved their immediate bottom line; but because their corporate moral standing includes a belief that an appropriate standard of living should always be respected in the course of business.

This is a specific example about human rights issues, and environmental rights follow the same path. Many companies are in business simply to make money for the shareholders, while others hold themselves to a higher standard or social cause, whether that is human rights, environmental issues, legislative involvement or truth in advertising. When your brand faces these tough decisions, it is much like a refiner’s fire where the true moral standing of your brand shines through. When all is said and done, those companies that tout their environmental accountability through the integrity of that decision and not the convenience that it offers will be clearly recognized by the consumers as brands with integrity and moral.

ENSO Plastics is both proud and honored to be partnered with many brands and manufactures who stand behind their commitments, with the foundation of scientific research, to become leaders in the adoption of improved methods for a healthier planet.

The Plastic Monster will be taking over PACK EXPO

ENSO Plastics is bringing the Heat to PACK EXPO this year

It’s no secret that ENSO Plastics’ biodegradable plastic technology brings the most desirable premium feature to any plastic product on the market wanting to go green. Interested? Intrigued? If you are attending PACK EXPO in Vegas get excited, because ENSO Plastics will be there and making noise in a way that you have not seen before. ENSO is bring the Plastic monster to PACK EXPO!

If you haven’t heard of PACK EXPO you’re missing out because PACK is North America’s largest packaging and processing show. With the opportunity to see 1600 world class suppliers, explore cutting edge technologies for all vertical markets , and discover a brand new array of products, why would you miss out on expanding your network and broadening your packaging knowledge?!

PACK EXPO 2011 | September 26–28, 2011
Las Vegas Convention Center | Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
http://www.packexpo.com/pelv2011/public/enter.aspx

Whether you are just attending, sporting a booth, or if we have intrigued you enough to make last minute plans to attend, I hope to see you in Vegas! Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like me to visit your booth or would like to personally meet and engage an ENSO Business Development professional.