THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
Canadian
Institute for Business and the Environment
Fisherville,
Ontario, Canada
Tel. 416
410-0432, Fax: 416 362-5231
Vol. 16, No. 3, June 28, 2011
Honoured Reader Edition
This is the honoured reader
edition of the Gallon Environment Letter and is distributed at no charge: send a
note with Add GL or Delete GL in the subject line to
subscriptions@gallonletter.ca. Subscribers receive a more complete edition
without subscription reminders and with extensive links to further information
following almost every article. Organizational subscriptions are $184 plus HST
nd provide additional benefits detailed on the web site. Individual
subscriptions are only $30 (personal emails/funds only please) including HST. If
you would like to subscribe please visit http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm If you feel you should be receiving the paid subscriber edition or have
other subscriber questions please contact us also at subscriptions@gallonletter.ca. This
current free edition is posted on the web site about a week or so after its
issue at http://www.cialgroup.com/whatsnew.htm.
See also events of external organizations at gallonevents.com Back free editions from January 2009 are also
available.
****************************************************
ABOUT THIS
ISSUE
We open with a guest editorial from well-known
climate campaigner and college professor Bill McKibben that is so much on the
mark that we decided that it should be reprinted for Gallon Environment Letter
readers.
Our feature topic in this issue is Food Waste
and we begin by pointing out what a complex but important issue this is. There
is no shortage of food for the world's population but there is a huge amount of
waste and maldistribution which means that millions are starving. The amount of
information about food waste and its causes is staggering. The amount of action
to reduce food waste, especially in Canada, is a tiny fraction of what is
needed! If you have any interest at all in food, we think you will find this
issue of Gallon Environment Letter absolutely fascinating. As you might expect,
even measuring food loss is a challenge. With help from USDA we explore the
challenges of measuring food loss.
We also review Ontario Environment
Commissioner's report on the Province's progress towards meeting GHG targets.
Ontario is doing well but is still not expected to meet the targets. Of
particular interest in this issue: one of the biggest problem areas is organic
waste, something that should be one of the easiest to address. If you wonder
where pathogens like E. Coli come from, some scientists are pointing fingers
towards — the way we deal with food waste!
We received some letters on the food
miles issue we addressed in the last issue and published one. As Jessie
Davidson, a member of the National Farmers Union, has said, limiting local food
to food produced within 50 km, even with all the complications of the CFIA
calculation, is a throwback to horse and buggy days. Everyone else seems happy
to consider local food as food produced with 100kn or 100 miles. Why does CFIA
have to block something that everyone else understands, unless it is at the
behest of large food processors and packers who want to try to shut down the
local food movement.
Lots of our readers will know Geoff Rathbone,
most recently a General Manager of Solid Waste at the City of Toronto and an
avid and extremely informed professional municipal recycler. His recent move to
the private sector has caused a small ruckus. In our People section we bring you
the details, all to do with outsourcing of municipal collections. There are also
some changes at the well-respected Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and
Policy - we bring you the highlights.
Finally, we once again draw your attention to
our new GallonDaily. Get more for your money, even if you are an honoured
reader, by keeping up to date with GallonDaily (http://www.gallondaily.com). Recent
headlines include:
Leaked
emails trash business of shale gas
Predictions
for Sustainable Packaging
Green
Manufacturing Expo Disappointing
Oregon
adopts strict water quality regime
China,
children and lead
In our next issue we plan to review
technologies for dealing with organics, including both waste food and the waste
from the back end of humans and our farm animals. In the meantime, enjoy this
issue and send us your comments as a Letter to the Editor to editor@gallonletter.ca
****************************************************
GUEST COLUMN:
A LINK BETWEEN CLIMATE CHANGE AND JOPLIN TORNADOES? NEVER!
By Bill McKibben
[This article was first published as an op-ed
piece in the Washington Post. May 23, 2011. Reprinted with
permission.]
Caution: It is vitally important not to make
connections. When you see pictures of rubble like this week’s shots from Joplin,
Mo., you should not wonder: Is this somehow related to the tornado outbreak
three weeks ago in Tuscaloosa, Ala., or the enormous outbreak a couple of weeks
before that (which, together, comprised the most active April for tornadoes in
U.S. history). No, that doesn’t mean a thing.
It is far better to think of these as
isolated, unpredictable, discrete events. It is not advisable to try to connect
them in your mind with, say, the fires burning across Texas — fires that have
burned more of America at this point this year than any wildfires have in
previous years. Texas, and adjoining parts of Oklahoma and New Mexico, are drier
than they’ve ever been — the drought is worse than that of the Dust Bowl. But do
not wonder if they’re somehow connected.
If you did wonder, you see, you would also
have to wonder about whether this year’s record snowfalls and rainfalls across
the Midwest — resulting in record flooding along the Mississippi — could somehow
be related. And then you might find your thoughts wandering to, oh, global
warming, and to the fact that climatologists have been predicting for years that
as we flood the atmosphere with carbon we will also start both drying and
flooding the planet, since warm air holds more water vapour than cold
air.
It’s far smarter to repeat to yourself the
comforting mantra that no single weather event can ever be directly tied to
climate change. There have been tornadoes before, and floods — that’s the
important thing. Just be careful to make sure you don’t let yourself wonder why
all these record-breaking events are happening in such proximity — that is, why
there have been unprecedented megafloods in Australia, New Zealand and Pakistan
in the past year. Why it’s just now that the Arctic has melted for the first
time in thousands of years. No, better to focus on the immediate casualties,
watch the videotape from the store cameras as the shelves are blown over. Look
at the news anchorman standing in his waders in the rising river as the water
approaches his chest.
Because if you asked yourself what it meant
that the Amazon has just come through its second hundred-year drought in the
past five years, or that the pine forests across the western part of this
continent have been obliterated by a beetle in the past decade — well, you might
have to ask other questions. Such as: Should President Obama really just have
opened a huge swath of Wyoming to new coal mining? Should Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton sign a permit this summer allowing a huge new pipeline to carry
oil from the tar sands of Alberta? You might also have to ask yourself: Do we
have a bigger problem than $4-a-gallon gasoline?
Better to join with the U.S. House of
Representatives, which voted 240 to 184 this spring to defeat a resolution
saying simply that “climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human
activities, and poses significant risks for public health and welfare.” Propose
your own physics; ignore physics altogether. Just don’t start asking yourself
whether there might be some relation among last year’s failed grain harvest from
the Russian heat wave, and Queensland’s failed grain harvest from its record
flood, and France’s and Germany’s current drought-related crop failures, and the
death of the winter wheat crop in Texas, and the inability of Midwestern farmers
to get corn planted in their sodden fields. Surely the record food prices are
just freak outliers, not signs of anything systemic.
It’s very important to stay calm. If you got
upset about any of this, you might forget how important it is not to disrupt the
record profits of our fossil fuel companies. If worst ever did come to worst,
it’s reassuring to remember what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce told the
Environmental Protection Agency in a recent filing: that there’s no need to
worry because “populations can acclimatize to warmer climates via a range of
behavioural, physiological, and technological adaptations.” I’m pretty sure
that’s what residents are telling themselves in Joplin today.
Bill McKibben is founder of the global climate
campaign 350.org and a distinguished scholar at Middlebury College in
Vermont.
****************************************************
DR. ROBERT
PAGE NOT RENEWED AS NRTEE CHAIR
Dr. Bob Page, one of Canada's leaders in
Sustainable Development, has not been renewed as Chair of the National Round
Table on the Environment and the Economy. Dr. Page was appointed to the position
by Environment Minister John Baird in June 2008. Apparently when his position
came up for renewal this year He Who Must Be Obeyed [and who does not want to
have his government forced into addressing climate change] decided that the
Round Table had been too outspoken on the subject of climate change and that
Page, as leader of that body, should be the fall guy.
Dr. Page is currently TransAlta Professor of
Environmental Management and Sustainability, Energy and Environmental Systems
Group, Institute for Sustainable Energy, Environment, & Economy, at the
University of Calgary, where he is also an Adjunct Professor in the Haskayne
School of Business. From 1997 to January 2007 he was the Vice President
Sustainable Development, TransAlta Corporation, Calgary, where he led their
significant efforts on climate change, emissions, and sustainable development.
Prior to joining TransAlta in 1997, Dr. Page spent 25 years in consulting,
academic teaching and research. Most recently, he was Dean of the Faculty of
Environmental Design at the University of Calgary, where he taught in the
Environmental Science program.
It is difficult to imagine a more appropriate
guy to lead the NRTEE than Bob Page. However, Dr. Robert Slater, a leader in
science policy within Environment Canada for thirty years and a great and
knowledgeable proponent of Sustainable Development and action on climate change,
has been appointed Interim Chair to replace Page while a more complete search
takes place. Slater is currently Adjunct Professor in Environmental Policy at
Carleton University, President of Coleman, Bright and Associates, a consulting
firm that operates internationally specializing in Sustainable Development
issues, and a Senior Fellow with the International Institute for Sustainable
Development. The one attribute that Slater may have that Page may have lacked is
knowing when, in government, to keep quiet.
Although NRTEE's funding has been renewed for
2011-2012, whisperings are that the new Chair may only be appointed for a one
year term pending a future defunding of NRTEE. After all, Sustainable
Development is clearly something about which He Who Must Be Obeyed knows
everything that there is to know. In Ottawa today, both science and advice are
as unnecessary as they have ever been.
****************************************************
****************************************************
THEME: FOOD
WASTE
****************************************************
Food waste is one of the most interconnected
of issues. Just describing its causes is a big task. Decline of bats due to
white nose fungus and death by wind turbine may lead to more crop damage by
insects because bats eat many crop pests. Droughts, floods, wild fires and other
events linked to extreme weather which some scientists say are symptomatic of
climate change devastate crops.
The unlevel playing fields between smaller
suppliers and large corporate buyers leads to specifications which lead to food
being returned to the sender as rejects. Regulators often tilt the scale
further. Way too much edible food is discarded due to consumer confusion about
"best before", "packed on", "sell by", "use by" and "display until" labelling.
Regulators formulate product regulations which have nothing to do with food
safety. The EU is working on reducing food waste by changing some of it rules
such as the one that used to ban bent bananas. Many farmers grow crops they
can’t sell because they can’t connect to the markets or can’t meet some of the
standards which often have nothing to do with food safety. Our local Fisherville
Greenhouses can sell grape tomatoes into a wider distribution chain because the
tomatoes are exempt from grading but for beefsteak farm products legislation
requires that tomatoes be of a consistent size in a pack and other specification
which the owners find too onerous so they sell beefsteak tomatoes at the
farmgate, a very small market leading to more waste.
When prices for crops such as potatoes are
lower than it costs the farmer to harvest, the crop is ploughed under. Too high
prices lead to illegal poaching such as of the abalone, the big sea snail, on
the coast of British Columbia. Abalone has become another endangered species.
Recently stories in the Canadian media have featured the waste inherent in
high-priced gourmet meals such as shark’s fin soup. The shark’s fins are cut off
and the rest of the shark thrown back into the sea. Waste associated with
fishing due to disposal of by-products (fish and other animals caught but not
wanted) is being addressed by the European Union. The ocean is a source of food
for billions of people and the recent very negative assessment of the state of
the oceans is not good news.
Pollution including nuclear disasters,
chemical and oil spills also cause food waste which ricochets through food
production, food manufacturing, household food, distribution and retail. For
example, restaurants in Tokyo have seen decreased number of customers who
formerly enjoyed the special fish dishes but are now afraid of radioactivity on
the food. The dead zones caused by excessive nitrogen runoff from intensive
agriculture operations (which perhaps ironically are seen as necessary in order
to produce more food) may lead to a takeover by jellyfish pushing out edible
marine species.
****************************************************
GEORGE MORRIS
CENTRE: FOOD WASTE IN CANADA
A report last winter by the George Morris
Centre in Guelph, Ontario starts with "Along with the rest of the world, Canada
invests enormous resources in seeking ways to feed a growing population through
increased production. Far fewer resources are invested in making more effective
use of the food already produced, even though doing so would have immediate
results."
High Cost to
Food Waste
The difference between what is produced on
farms, processed, distributed and sold annually compared to what is consumed is
worth more than $27 billion or 2% of GDP. The food loss/waste is 40% of food
produced. . That amount is more than the combined GDP of the 32 poorest
countries in the world. It is more than the value of the food Canada imported in
2007 and just less than the value of 2007 food exports. The price tag only
includes the actual value of the food not all the other costs such as impact to
the environment, the agri-food industry and the economy. Energy, water,
packaging, equipment repair and replacement, and the release of methane from
landfill are costs not included.
Food Miles and
Plastic Packaging Impacts Small
The report dismisses the emphasis put on food
miles saying that food miles add only 3% to food waste and not much more to
greenhouse emissions. Sometimes local food production result in increased waste
e.g. one study indicated that more Ontario-grown peaches go to waste than
California-grown peaches.
Plastic packaging is also seen to have
benefits for reducing environmental impacts e.g. plastic is lighter than glass
reducing transportation weight. Much more attention should be given to the
environmental impacts of food waste than to plastic packaging.
Causes of
Primary Food Waste
The report lists seven causes of food
waste:
- overproduction. Too much food or the
inadequate flow of products along the chain.
- defects in products or equipment. Short
shelf-life, poor quality products, equipment not functioning well,
communication and delivery errors.
- unnecessary inventory even in households:
creates spoilage due to excessive delays.
- inappropriate processing. incorrect
procedures or system.
- excess transportation: complex movement of
products or information.
- waiting. Long periods of inactivity and long
lead times lead to increased spoilage.
- unnecessary motion: poor design in the
workplace can lead to lost or damaged items.
Food Waste in
Canada: Statistics
Half of the $27 billion of food wasted occurs
in households. Reasons consumer waste food include cooking too much, not using
food in time and being leery of whether leftovers are still good. Foods
benefiting from refrigeration such as meat and fish, ready meals and
pre-prepared foods, dairy products, fruits and vegetables were most commonly
wasted.
Of the food waste created, the sources from
field to home in Canada are:
- field 9%
- transportation/distribution 3%
- food Service/HRI
(Hotel/Restaurant/Institutional) 8%
- packaging/processing 18%
- retail stores 11%
- homes 51%
The authors had to guesstimate these numbers
based on interviews with people working in the sector and extrapolate. The
average waste at retail was estimated using Loblaw annual waste of $1 billion
and extrapolating from the company's market share of 33%. Average waste at the
field is estimated to be 5% but each crop varies with little waste in grain and
10-15% in fruit and vegetable production. An estimate is that a well-run
restaurant shouldn't have more than 5% food waste due to breakage, spills, and
overcooking. Uneaten food accounts for another 5%.
Gallon wonders whether these statistics
indicate that eating out reduces food waste.
Examples of
Practices Leading to More Food Waste
Some of the issues which lead to increased
food waste are:
- Grocery fliers encourage consumers to seek
food by lowest price often based on buying larger quantities.
- Consumers buy more than they need and waste
it.
- At the processor level, waste occurs when
products delivered don't meet specification meaning that the product has to be
sold elsewhere at a discount.
- Livestock producers feed up the animals to
get higher prices because prices are per kilogram but then the processor has
to trim the fat and dispose of it.
- Up to 75% of raspberries are lost because
they require processes to protect them from picking, post harvest cooling and
shipping.
- 6% of wheat shipments to one miller were
rejected because of on-farm processes for growing, harvesting and storing
wheat which downgraded the quality.
- Farm support and risk management programs
reduce the need for farmers to respond to market signals, "Many continue
producing what they've always produced, in the same way they've always
produced it." Those who wish to change can't because of the current system and
policies and legislation. Regulators focus on sectors and commodities instead
of products and processes leading to waste and increased costs.
Examples of
Better Practices Relating to Food Waste
Some of the ideas for reducing food waste or
the negative impacts are::
- Energy to waste (biogas): more leadership for
energy from waste technology instead of dumping organic waste to
landfill.
- Triple Bottom Line: When businesses reduce
waste, they usually improve their profits and reduce their environmental
footprint.
- Tesco (UK): Buy One Get One Free BOGOF;
consumers can buy one and get a coupon to get the other free within the next
two weeks. Many smaller households see increased value in shopping at
Tesco.
- Warburton (UK): offers small loaf bread which
still has full size slices. The demand for this bread has resulted in
expansion with more different breads produced.
- Grocers in the UK are providing information
to help consumers understand how to store food e.g. put meat into an airtight
container or freeze some products. Recipes for leftovers are also
provided.
The authors conclude that Canada is behind
Europe in terms of encouraging all those along the food chain to reduce waste
and that there is much to be done with many benefits all along the food
chain.
The Value Chain Management Centre is part of
the George Morris Centre in Guelph, Ontario which works on contract with a focus
on agriproducts.
The references in the report provides links to
the major reports done in the UK on food waste.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references
here.
****************************************************
HALIFAX
HOSPITAL: DIAL FOR DINING REDUCES FOOD WASTE
“Dial for Dining", Canada's first 24 hour
hospital food service, allows patients, family members and staff at the IWK
Health Centre in Halifax to order what they want and when they want it. Last
year, the program was awarded a 3M Health Care Quality Team Award by 3M Health
Care and the Canadian College of Health Service Executives.
People can order by phone anytime between 7 am
and 5 pm. The menu is wide range including specifying your own pasta or
sandwich, fresh fruit and vegetables, and an all day breakfast. Family members
can help and so do staff with adjustments for patients with dementia. Food waste
is reduced because patients order only what they want to eat with a much greater
range and they can order closer to the time when they feel like eating. In the
past, paper menus with one or two choices were handed out, say on Sunday for
meals on Tuesday. Patients might have left (in one way or another), might not
feel good at mealtime or felt the choice they made two days ago wasn't what they
wanted today. Some patients are used to eating at different times than the
traditional hospital schedule. One estimate is that between 30% - 50% of the
food was sent back. Some patients were not meeting their nutritional needs
during a stressful time of illness. Under the new system, the food is made from
scratch and arrives hot and fresh within 40 minutes of ordering. Other hospitals
are adopting the model.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references
here.
****************************************************
HOSPITALS: PRACTICES TO REDUCE FOOD
WASTE
Although one
might think that most of the waste from a hospital is biomedical (ie hazardous)
waste, according to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, most of the waste
generated by a hospital is non-hazardous solid waste much like that of an office
building, mostly paper, cardboard, metal and food waste, which could be diverted
through a recycling program.
A 2006
Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Council estimates that only 15% of hospital waste
is biomedical, chemical and liquid, laboratory, pharmaceutical or hazardous.
Typical hospital waste is 53% paper, 4% diapers, 14% plastic, with less than 5%
each for yard trimmings, glass, metals and other. Food and organic waste is 17%.
The factsheet from SWRC states, "A large training hospital can produce as much
waste as a small town! Care and treatment of the average hospital patient
typically produces about 5.5 kilograms of waste each day. That translates to
over 400 tonnes of waste each year from a medium-sized hospital with 200
beds."
A report from
Aramark Canada which provides food services to hospitals and other facilities
outlined some of the programs in hospitals to reduce food waste through
literature review, case studies, and interviews with healthcare managers in food
service. Included as a source of information was a survey of 120 food service
managers in Ontario. Some of the observations from that survey
were:
-
Waste Audits:
Almost half of the hospital food service departments (49% in the Ontario
survey) do no waste auditing of the waste stream. Many items returned on the
food tray are non-food such as milk and juice containers, paper menu cars,
condiments, napkins and straws. By conducting a waste audit, some hospital
food managers have reduced cost and eliminated waste by providing condiments
or straws only if the patient asks for them. Also most patients don't eat very
sweet desserts such as cakes so changing the menu also helps reduce
waste.
-
Purchasing
Decisions: Only 4% of food service managers guided purchasing based on
products with the least amount of packaging. While some hospitals reduce
packaging by bulk purchases, e.g. milk in bulk rather than individual
containers, most suggest that the cost of labour is too
high.
-
Software: The
survey indicated that 60% of facilities used some kind of forecasting software
to reduce food waste.
-
Portions:
Patients often have reduced appetite due to illness and lack of exercise. The
meal usually includes appetizer and dessert as well as the main course. Staff
often overportion the amount on the entrée plate. Enforcing portion control
reduces waste. Tools to manage portions includes random audits of the amount
of food on plates, auditing of how many portions should be in a bulk package
e.g. how many portions in a bag of vegetables and use of appropriate serving
utensils.
-
Source
Separation: 65% of Ontario hospitals surveyed disposed of food, milk cartons,
plastic juice containers, aluminium foil, napkins and tea bags in the regular
waste stream. 68% had no system for sending compostable/ organic items to a
major composting site sending these to regular waste. For many, the main
obstacle was the labour costs for separating waste.
-
Compostables
should include tissue papers: Of the 32% of Ontario hospitals with an
organic waste stream, less than half included paper towels and napkins
disposing of these in regular waste rather than organic materials
waste.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
VALUE-ADDED: SMALLER PORTIONS IN
RESTAURANTS
The top 20
trends identified at the US National Restaurant Association's What's Hot survey
of 1500 professional chefs indicates that more diners express an interest in
sustainable issues including the source of the food such as local sourcing,
healthy choices, organic produce and sustainable seafood. One of the top 20
trends is smaller portions for a smaller price. GL's editor thinks this is a
great trend and wouldn't even mind if the price wasn't that much smaller. Some
of the other options for reducing portion size such as choosing from the
appetizer menu or sharing a main course don't seem to suit some of our
relatives. Brought up with the idea that one is required to eat everything on
the plate because some children somewhere are going hungry, they are put off by
gargantuan servings and when together we have given quite a few restaurants the
go-by because the displayed menu didn't appear to give the choice of smaller
meals. Many restaurants can't reduce the size because they buy pre-packaged
meals which require little in the way of skilled labour to prepare.
Some restaurants
have gained customers from huge servings, all-you-can-eat buffets,
and bottomless refills of soft drinks, so many extra and unneeded
calories.The Big Texan Steak Ranch in Amarillo, Texas is known for its
challenge: eat the 72 oz. steak with fixins (a baked potato, salad, dinner roll
and shrimp cocktail) and you get it free. There are rules like once you start
you can't go to the bathroom and the food has to be eaten within an hour. When
Gallon’s editor visited many years ago, the enormous slab of steak was on
display in a cooler. Nobody took the challenge while we were there but many have
tried, many have failed. The restaurant and its offer have become world famous.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
STATISTICS CANADA: FOOD IN CANADA
2009
Canadians spent
$75 billion on food and non-alcoholic drinks from retail stores in 2007.
Spending on beer, wine and liquor was $17 billion for a total of $92 billion.
For 2007, Statistics Canada says food loss from retail through the plate was
over 6 million tonnes or 183 kg. per person. Of the solid food available for
retail sale, this represents 38% of solid food by weight wasted. In addition,
2.8 billion litres of liquids such as milk, coffee, tea, pop and juices were
discarded. This does not include food at the farm level or
processing.
In 2007,
Canadians in addition to retail purchases spent $41 billion on restaurant meals
and $9 billion on alcoholic beverages in licensed establishments or $50 billion
in total.
In 1913,
families in cities paid more than half of their weekly budget on food. By 1961,
spending on food including restaurant meals and alcohol was 28% of total
consumer spending in Canada. By 2007, that figure was 17%.
Energy is used
along the chain such as for tilling the land, producing fertilizers,
insecticides and herbicides, and electricity for washing and processing the
food. Statistics Canada states that for 2003, Canadian purchases on food and
non-alcoholic beverages from stores resulted "in production of 45,687 kilotonnes
of greenhouse gases, equivalent
to 14% of all
the direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions attributable to
households."
The statistics
are in a special section of the 2009 Human Activity and the Environment called
Food in Canada.
****************************************************
FAO: GLOBAL FOOD WASTE
A recent report
published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
issued in May at the Interpack2011 conference in Germany discussed two studies
by The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology SIK on global food losses.
The first study was on high/medium income countries and the second on low income
countries. Among some of the comments were:
-
Roughly a
third of all food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted globally or
about 1.3 billion tons each year. Counting only the edible parts of food, food
production in Europe and North America is about 900 kg/year per capita and in
Subsaharan Africa and South/southeast Asia 460 kg/year. Within the food chain,
food loss in Europe and North America is 280-300 kg/year and for Subsaharan
Africa and South/southeast Asia is 120-170 kg./year.
-
The wasted
food also then wastes all the resources used to produce, store, and transport
it.
-
Every stage of
the food supply chain loses and wastes food. In higher income countries, food
is wasted at the early stage of in the chain and primarily at the
consumption stage even though it is still edible. In lower income countries,
food is lost in the early and middle stages: poor consumers waste much
less.
-
Consumers in
industrialized countries waste almost as much food (222 million ton) a year as
is produced in sub-Saharan Africa (230 million ton). Per capita food wasted by
consumers in Europe and North-America is 95-115 kg/year, while in sub-Saharan
Africa and South/Southeast Asia, per capita food waste is only 6-11
kg/year.
Food loss is the
term used in the report to the decrease in edible food mass in the earlier parts
of the supply chain (production e.g. farms, post harvest and processing). Food
loss at the end of the food chain e.g. retail and consumers is mostly called
food waste. If food was originally intended for human consumption but is
diverted to non-food use such as animal feed, bioenergy or other uses, that food
is still counted in the food loss. If the crop was grown and intended for
non-food use e.g. corn for biofuels than it is not counted as food
loss.
The report
discusses five system boundaries or segments in the food supply chains for each
of the two categories: vegetable and animal (including fish and seafood)
commodities. Examples include:
-
Segment:
processing for vegetables. This includes spillage and degradation during
industrial or domestic processing such as juice production, canning and bread
baking. Losses may be due to sorting out of crops which don't meet
specification, or washing, peeling, slicing, boiling. Accidental spillage,
failures in the production line and interruptions may lead to
spoilage.
-
Segment:
postharvest handling and storage for bovine, pork and poultry meat: Losses may
be due to animal death during transport to slaughter and condemnation at
slaughterhouse. For fish, losses may be due to spillage and degradation during
icing, packaging, storage and transport.
Food security is
a big issue in the developing world. Reducing food loss is one of the ways to
increase the supply of food without the challenges of increasing food
production, "In a world with limited natural resources (land, water, energy,
fertilizer) and where cost-effective solutions are to be found to produce enough
safe and nutritious food for all, reducing food losses should not be a forgotten
priority."
Lack of access
to food for the poor consumer is mostly due to lack of purchasing power and food
prices rather than food supply. However, reducing waste could be one way of
reducing the cost of food.
Answers to
questions about how much food is lost and wasted and how to prevent food losses
are imprecise. The report recommend urgent action to fill the big data
gaps.
Reasons for Food Loss
In lower income
countries, causes of food loss are due to financial, management and technical
limitations related to harvesting, storage and cooling facilities in regions
where climate is adverse and infrastructure, packaging and marketing systems are
not supportive for food loss prevention. Smallholder farmers would experience an
immediate improvement in their lives if food losses were reduced. Small farmers
need to be involved in cooperative organizations, and upscale both production
and marketing. Public and private investment in infrastructure, transportation,
food industries and packaging industries would make a significant
difference.
In
medium/high-income countries, consumer behaviour is key to food waste as well as
lack of coordination between different actors in the supply chain. Contract
specifications and other aspects of agreements between farmers and buyers leads
to more waste due, for example, to quality standards which require food items to
be a certain size or shape. Poor purchase planning and best before dates cause a
lot of waste as well as a poor attitudes because consumers can afford to waste
food. More awareness and connections between those in the food value chain would
reduce food waste. Also needed are more initiatives to redirect and use food
that is still safe to eat.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
NETHERLANDS: FOOD WASTE REDUCTION
TARGET
The Netherlands
Minister of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality LNV in 2008 produced a policy
document on food sustainability not only for the Netherlands but for the
Netherland's role in global food system. The policy relates to other policy
documents on sustainable agriculture, healthy diet throughout life and the
government-wide approach to sustainable development. One of the themes was that
producers and consumers are not charged the full societal cost of a product:
"Both supply and demand must be confronted with the external costs of production
and consumption."
The policy set a
target for reducing food wastage throughout the food chain by 20% by 2015
including:
-
Adding value
to the waste streams in the whole chain while retaining food for human
consumption such as recycling into compost, biomass and animal
feed.
-
Reviewing the
European Union ban on making bonemeal and meatmeal from carcass meat. Despite
the ban due to concerns about BSE, using this raw material should be
addressed.
-
Pilot a
project within the ministry to offer a 100% sustainable range of food in the
canteen while reducing both food and other waste produced in the
canteen.
The policy also
provides for funding to research substitutes for conventional meats such as
algae, insects and artificial meat protein, alternatives to soy for animal feed
and recovering protein from manure and other sources.
The stakeholders
in the food chain never expressed much interest in supporting the policy. With
the election in 2010, the ministry name changed to Economic Affairs, Agriculture
and Innovation with emphasis on the private sector to drive the economy.
Priorities are a fiscal policy favourable to business although business
practices should take nature and animal welfare into account.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
LESTER BROWN: WORLD ON THE EDGE
In his new book,
World on the Edge, Lester Brown, president of Earth Policy Institute in
Washington, DC, explores many issues including food security, "The choice is
ours - yours and mine. We can stay with business as usual and preside over an
economy that continues to destroy its natural support system until it destroys
itself or we can be the generation that changes direction, moving the world onto
a path of sustained progress. The choice will be made by our generation, but it
will affect life on earth for all generations to come." Although the future view
could be gloomy, Brown as always highlights the positive:
Some innovations
in food production which increase food supply and reduce food lost for human
consumption include:
-
residue feed:
India became the leading producer of milk and other dairy products in 1997.
Grain feed has been replaced by crop residues such as wheat straw, rice straw
and corn stalks as well as grass gathered from roadsides. India produces more
value in milk than in rice. Gallon notes that many people think that using
crops which could feed people as animal feed is food waste.
-
agroforestry:
Both food and energy are provided by combining grains with nitrogen fixing
trees. The trees grow slowly enough to allow for the grain to be harvested.
The leaves of the trees drop unto to the soil increasing its fertility and
then the trees are cut to provide fuelwood. The technique has been developed
at the World Agroforestry Centre in Nairobi.
Gallon notes that Andrew Gordon from the University of Guelph in Ontario has
been promoting intercropping of valuable tree species and agricultural crops
since the 1980s. The first North American Agroforestry in North America
conference was held in 1989. The trees don't have to be cut down if they
are producing a high value food crop. For example, Ernie Grimo, one of the
founders of the Society of Ontario Nut Growers SONG and owner of a nut tree
nursery in Niagara-on-the-Lake recommends heartnut trees for southern Ontario
as an early to mature tree with easily cracked nuts. The trees are planted a
large distance apart because their mature width is 20-30 metres, that is wider
for one tree than the frontage of many city lots. He and other commercial nut
growers in Ontario meet only a small percentage of the demand for nuts
including butternut, hickory, and Persian (northern walnut) but are able to
obtain higher than world prices because of the demand for local
supply.
-
water
shortage: losses due to drought are decimating crops. Drip irrigation and
other ways of delivering water with minimal losses help to increase yields.
The potential exists to recycle urban water and to convert to wind power
reducing the huge amounts of water used for cooling coal-fired power
plants.
-
aquaculture:
Some fish farming such as open sea salmon farming waste food by the feeding of
large amounts of fishmeal from wild caught fish. Some countries such as carp
in China and India and catfish in the US are much more efficient in protein
production using grain instead of fishmeal. Many of China's farmed fish are
grown in inland freshwater ponds, lakes, reservoirs and rice paddies. Using
four types of carp which feed at different levels of the food chain increases
productivity.
-
local food
demand: localization is increasing the number of farms which in the US grew by
80,000 to 2.2 million. Many of these are smaller farms operated by women
producing fresh fruits and vegetables and specialized products of milk, cheese
and meat. Organic farms grew from 12,000 in 2002 to 18,200 in 2007. Farmers'
market increased in 1,755 in 1994 to over 6,100 in 2010. Gallon doesn't know
if local food reduces food loss but certainly the knowledge, skill and land
use which often substitutes labour for machinery increases the supply of
food.
-
home/urban
gardening: Michelle Obama's initiative to use part of the White House lawn for
food production highlights the potential of gardening to supply food. Home
lawns in the US cover 18 million acres. During World War 2, home gardening
called Victory Gardens supplied 40% of the US fruits and vegetables. A program
by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization helped 20,000 urban gardeners in
the capital city Kinshasa, of the Congo supplying 80,000 tons of vegetables
per year or 65% of the city's demand.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
USDA: TRACKING FOOD WASTE
The US
Department of Agriculture first began to publish data on the availability of
food and nutrients in 1941 and later extended the data back to 1909. The data
measures food supply for over 200 food commodities such as beef, fresh apples
and eggs. The Food Availability data presents the sum of production, imports and
beginning inventories and subtracts exports, farm and industrial uses and ending
stocks. Over time the ERS developed methods for accounting for spoilage and
other losses resulting in the Loss-Adjusted Food Availability data series. Three
general types of losses are calculated:
"(1) loss from
primary (e.g., farm) to retail weight.
(2) loss at the
retail level (e.g., in supermarkets, megastores such as Walmart, and other
retail outlets, including convenience stores and mom-and-pop grocery stores).
This type of loss does not include losses in restaurants and other foodservice
outlets.
(3) loss at the
consumer level. This includes losses for food consumed at home and away from
home (e.g., restaurants, fast-food outlets, school and company cafeterias,
hospitals, nursing homes, catered events, etc.) by consumers and foodservice and
has two components:
(a) “Nonedible
share” of a food (e.g., asparagus stalk, apple core). Data on the nonedible
share are from the National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, compiled
by USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (U.S. Department of Agriculture,
2007).
(b) “Cooking
loss and uneaten food such as plate waste” from the edible share."
ERS has been
working on updating its data and has produced several reports. See next articles
for one on consumer food waste and one on supermarket waste. The reports
highlight the complexity of compiling such data while maintaining a reasonable
level of credibility about data accuracy.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
USDA: TRACKING CONSUMER FOOD WASTE: WE DON'T WASTE
FOOD!
The USDA
Economic Research Service reports on food availability less food losses and it
is a ongoing effort to keep up to date with food trends. Consumer loss is the
least documented due to limited research and data complications because
consumers eat both at home and away from home. A January 2011 report on losses
at the consumer level shows both increases and decreases in food loss at the
consumer level. So many things have changed over the years about the way
Americans eat. At one time, a consumer might buy the whole chicken, occasionally
even alive or with just the head removed. Everything about the chicken like the
feet, the neck, the gizzard, heart, liver and so on would become some kind of
food in the same home. Now to calculate food waste, people such as those at the
US Department of Agriculture have to consider the transformation of the chicken
to boneless chicken filet. Some foods such as grains and shortening are used
almost exclusively as ingredients. Standard recipes are used as references to
allocate ingredients by weight to the food categories. As consumers make
different food choices, conversion factors change. Food purchased less food
consumed equals food loss.
The changes in
food behaviour make it more difficult to know where the inedible portions like
the peelings and bones are removed; this raises the risk of double-counting the
inedible portion. A chart provides a standard figure for inedible portions e.g.
Unshelled walnuts have 55% inedible portion, and shelled walnuts have
0%.
There are five
different processing types calculated: fresh, frozen, dried, canned and juice.
Each type of food needs calculations to determining how much fresh product went
into it, how much is inedible and edible and how much is lost. For example, for
canned food, the liquid portion is subtracted from the solid portion. Mixtures
such as peas and carrots require estimates allocating how much of each has been
purchased. Calculations are based on weight so liquids have to be converted from
volume to weight. Some food is sold by count not by weight e.g. bunch of radish,
or broccoli. Eggs are sold by size so need to be converted to
weight.
At the consumer
level, surveys of householders are done but are often not reliable because
people feel guilty about wasting food and during the survey adjust or report
that they waste less. One survey provides them with a scanner and while many
reliably scan their main grocery shopping, many forget to scan purchases from
convenience stores and mid-week shopping like the extra milk and bread. Not very
much research has been done on food loss at the consumer level with a new report
out in January 2011 from ERS. Even when food waste is tracked by sorting through
the garbage it doesn't provide an accurate figure because food might have been
fed to pets, disposed of at the workplace, put in sink disposals or composted.
Also some food isn't sourced from the traditional food chain (farm,
supermarket, household), for example, hunting and fishing and and other wild
sourcing such as wild blueberry picking, home gardening, backyard poultry,
farmer's markets, local speciality shops such as bakeries and
butchers.)
Consumer level
food waste depends on:
-
season: more
food waste in the summer
-
age of
children: younger children waste more
-
gender:
females waste more
-
income: higher
income individuals waste more
-
setting:
Hospitals and military canteens waste more than school and company
cafeterias
-
size of
households: larger households waste more (probably due to
children)
Food waste
occurs due to "cooking and preparation (e.g., frying fats); discards due to
preparation of too much food; expired use-by/open dates; spoilage; and plate
waste." The report which focuses on the edible portion suggests that consumer
food loss is higher than currently calculated. Some of the foods commonly
consumed have lower loss estimates e.g. fresh potatoes have a new estimate or
16% loss compared to the previous 30%.
Most meats have
lower new losses e.g. beef is new 20% compared to previous 32% and chicken is
new 15% compared to previous 40%. The lower loss rates are probably due to the
fact these products are sold differently: they are trimmed more, sold boneless
and ground meat has less fat which would often be thrown away.
On the other
hand, for fresh bell peppers the new loss rate is 39% compared to the previous
20%. Some of the cheeses such as Mozzarella are new 31% compared to previous
13%. The report contains charts of consumer loss estimates for all the
categories e.g. meat, poultry, fish, eggs and nuts. Gallon found it on the
shocking side to see that for quite a few foods, a third or more e.g. frozen
yoghurt, turkey, frozen corn and often close to half of the food e.g. eggnog was
lost.
Food Eaten out vs at Home
Foodservices
reduce some food loss compared to the home and increase other food
loss:
-
foodservice
more likely to monitor and purchase more frequently. Spoilage in households is
likely greater.
-
foodservice
reduce more waste by use of pre-portion and pre-trimmed products
-
foodservice
likely to have more waste oils and fats due to more use of frying
-
foodservice
likely to have larger portions than households with less control by
individuals. Result is more plate waste.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
USDA: TRACKING SUPERMARKET FOOD
WASTE
A report in 2009
on estimated food loss in supermarkets prepared for the USDA Economic
Research Service highlights how difficult it is to estimate retail food loss.
Estimates for losses of different commodities affect ERS calculations on amounts
of different foods are available to Americans. The foods studied were fresh
fruit, vegetables, meat and poultry which is just some of the categories covered
by ERS database..
In 2005-06,
average loss rates at the supermarket level varied from 0.6 % for sweet corn to
63.6% for mustard greens. ERS found that annual supermarket losses for 2005 and
2006 averaged 11.4 percent for fresh fruit, 9.7 percent for fresh vegetables,
and 4.5 percent for fresh meat, poultry, and seafood. The new estimates
indicated a decrease in food waste in supermarkets compared to the estimates
used by ERS before.
Conventional
grocery stores with more than $2 million sales such as Safeway, Kroger,
Albertson's and AHold totalling about 63% of the total grocery-channel dollars
were used to provide the data. Proprietary data matching shipment data for food
into about 600 stores was matched with data of consumer purchases from six
chains. Omitted are convenience stores, small independents, mass retailers/clubs
such as Costco and megastores such as Walmart. for the year 2005-2006 Each food
listing such as fresh carrots encompassed a number of universal product codes
such as baby carrots, shredded carrots, 1, 3 and 5 pounds of whole carrots
plus whole carrots sold by the pound. Loss is measured as pounds that came into
the store but were not sold divided by the pounds of the product that came into
the store.
Definitions had
to be developed. For example, fresh apples included packaged apples and random
apples as well as pre-sliced apples but did not include caramel apples or sliced
apples mixed with other fruit. Fruit mixtures couldn't be allocated to the ERS
data because the contractor couldn't know what fruit was in the mixture or the
weight of different fruit in the mixture. As foods which weren't common before
enter the marketplace questions arise as to where to put the new food e.g.
whether arugula should be put with romaine and leaf lettuce. Data availability
depends on how supermarkets track their purchases and sales. For example, meat,
poultry and seafood such as fish and shellfish are tracked less effectively by
retailers than produce so level of detail required to match purchase, sale and
ERS data group is sometimes lacking. in many stores.
Losses of fresh
food are increased by:
-
lower product
turnover. Greater number of items and subcategories such as in the leafy
greens where greater variety in packaged salads is offered means each item is
competing for the consumer's attention and dollar. Sales of salads overall may
rise but more individual salads may spoil even though packaged salads have a
longer shelf life. Promotions of specific salad also increase turnover of
those at the expense of other varieties. Consumer unfamiliarity with how to
prepare the food also leads to food spoilage.
-
inherent
perishability of product resulting in spoilage and wilting
-
lack of
availability or poor application of technologies to reduce product
deterioration such as refrigeration and produce misting.
Loss has
declined over time due to several different factors, such as:
-
improved
packaging (e.g., plastic clam shells)
-
improved
ordering systems
-
more frequent
deliveries
-
increased
product handling training for in-store personnel
-
improved
temperature-control tracking
-
introduction
of produce varieties with improved shelf life.
Fresh Fruit
Average loss
between 2005 and 2006 decreased from 10.7% to 8.4%. One possible reason is the
rapid growth of fresh cut fruit. Even though this has a shorter shelf life than
whole fruit and the stores created more waste with rinds, cores and peelings,
the demand was high enough to reduce total loss for fresh fruit.
Blueberries had
the lowest loss at 4.6% in 2006. The clear plastic container they are sold in
prevents food loss and increases the shelf life. Also new varieties of
blueberries have better keeping quality.
Fresh fruit with
high losses in 2006 were papayas 51.0%, apricots 32.6%, honeydew melons 24%, and
tangerines 21%. Losses were different in the two years e.g. loss of mangoes in
2005 was 21.2% but only 7.7%.
Consumers may
not have enough knowledge about when to papaya is ripe leading to delays in
deciding to buy. The variability in mangoes may mean that there may be
year-to-year differences in this tropical fruit. The quality of honeydew melons
and cantaloupe also varies from year to year due to different crop
conditions.
Apples and
bananas showed declines in loss which is attributed to post harvest technology
controlling ripening. Of all fresh fruit, Americans eat more apples and
bananas.
Fresh Vegetables
Total vegetable
loss at the supermarket level declined from 10.3% in 2005 to 8.4% in
2006.
Corn has the
lowest loss. One reason may be that corn has a limited season so consumers
purchase corn when it is available.. Corn is sold in the husk which either
protects it or hides damage until the consumer gets it home. Loss for tomatoes
has declined due to clamshell packaging and new varieties improving shelf
life.
Fresh mustard
greens had the highest loss of 63.6%. This may be due to lack of consumer
knowledge about this product. Consumers are more used to buying the frozen
mustard greens. Other leafy greens such as endive (47%), kale (36%)and collards
(32%) also had high losses. One of the causes of loss of turnip greens is that
they need refrigeration after harvest to retain moisture.
Despite recall
of spinach in September 2006 due to E. coli, spinach loss remained constant at
14%.. The recalled spinach wasn't counted in the loss calculations. Spinach
sales were low in the month following the recall.
Fresh Meat
Veal had the
highest loss averaging 25%. Retailers offer veal to show variety in the meat
department; only some people buy veal regularly.
Lamb losses were
also relative high at 12%. Retailers want to offer it but it is more likely than
other meats not to be sold by the expiry date. If the cut they want isn't
available, consumers are less likely to buy lamb. Consumers often don't know
what to do with lamb so. New ways of trimming lamb and processing is producing
cuts which are more likely to meet consumer demand.
Beef, pork and
chicken losses are 4%. Beef losses increased slightly with some retailers saying
they are providing beef prepared at packing plants instead of by in-store
butcher. Some consumers are hesitant about buying case-ready meats.
With fewer meat
departments doing cutting, beef products often go out of code (sell by date).
With meat departments, the staff would pull less expensive cuts of meat from the
counter before the cuts went out of code and ground these meats for ground
beef.
The overall
fresh meat, poultry and seafood loss is relatively lower than fresh fruits and
vegetables but may be rising. Supermarkets carry a larger variety of flavours,
cuts and convenience options such as sliced and boneless. With more unique meat
products, the supermarkets have a more difficult job managing inventory and
shelf space.
Turkey has the
lowest loss at 2.5% due probably to the fact it is often shipped frozen and kept
partially frozen increasing shelf life.
Losses for
seafood decreased. It could be due to more consumers purchasing. When employees
are at the seafood counter and share information about how to cook different
seafoods, customers are more likely to purchase. But packaged fish has lower
losses than fresh fish counters. If the seafood section offers ready to heat and
serve cooked seafood, there is less loss because cooked seafood has longer shelf
life than fresh.
What Happens to Supermarket Food
Waste?
Future work is
suggested to find out more about the nature of the food loss in supermarkets.
For example, how much spoils or loses moisture, how much is tossed out, or
recovered in some way e.g. sent to food banks or for animal feed.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO: METHANE AND
ORGANIC WASTE
Ontario's
greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions are doing better than meeting the target set by
the Government for 2014 but Gord Miller, Environment Commissioner of Ontario ECO
for the province, says that as the economy improves, emissions will rise again
so the job is not done. "The Province recognises this to some degree because in
their recent CCAP update report, they conclude that the province will be 4 Mt
over the 166 Mt target in 2014." said Miller. Miller said their independent
analysis using the most favourable grams of CO2 per dollar of GDP, arrives at 13
Mt of CO2 emissions over the target for the government's projected economic
growth by 2014. This means that the 2020 targets won't be met
either.
The report
includes a number of recommendations many of which relate to decoupling economic
growth and carbon dioxide emissions including carbon pricing. In terms of this
GL issue's theme of food waste, the report strongly recommends against landfill
biogas mostly because of suspect measurement of methane releases from landfills.
The issue is key to managing organic waste especially whether to divert such
waste to composting or to capture the methane for energy in
landfill.
Although the
government has stated that the best long term option is diversion from landfill,
the ECO report states that the government is sending mixed messages to
municipalities. Among the conflicting information is:
-
Landfills can
extend over many hectares and over 20 metres down. They can leak into the
atmosphere and into water through cracks and broken seams as well as trenches
and pipes. These fugitive emissions escaping in many directions are difficult
to measure so modelling is often done taking account various factors such as
types of waste, operating methods, moisture and so on. ECO suggests that a
much larger amount of methane may be leaching out of the landfills than the
models indicate.
-
The lifetime
gas generation potential LGGP estimates are likely too low. The assumption
commonly used is that the LGGP of a tonne of organic waste is 100 cubic
metres. But some studies indicate that the LGGP can be as high as 310 cubic
metres / tonne of organic waste. The methane component of the total gas
generated is assumed to be 50% in Ontario but the range may be 35% to 60%. How
much degradable organic content is in the waste is an important part of the
calculation for methane gas generation.
-
Moisture
content. Methane is generated when moisture content is from 60-80%. Newly
deposited waste is usually around 20% moisture content. Moisture isn't evenly
spread throughout the landfill, waste is often compacted in plastic bags which
is why carrots can still be identified after many years. Landfills that
recirculate leachate to protect groundwater and bioreactor landfills increase
the moisture. More moisture means more methane which means more fugitive
emissions. And all that organic waste that doesn't decompose now, will
decompose in the future, for example if the landfill cover cracks letting in
rain.
The ECO report
states that these uncontrolled releases of methane and other GHGs "could reduce,
offset or even exceed the potential environmental gains from landfill gas
capture and power generation." The true impact of landfilling organic waste is
uncertain and this "calls into question the rationale for landfill energy
production as an appropriate component of a climate change mitigation
strategy."
A discussion of
the regulations talks about the conflicting policies some of which may lead to
more methane emissions. For example, the requirement to install gas capture
systems may encourage municipalities to increase the amount of organic waste in
the landfill to feed their energy production resulting in an increase in
fugitive methane emissions greater than the GHG emission reductions from
replacing fossil fuels with biogas. Landfills should be operated so that nothing
decomposes and the contents remain essentially inactive. This reduces releases
not only of methane but other hazardous materials. This type of operation means
there wouldn't be enough methane produced for electricity generation. The
government projects 2.1 Mt of GHG emissions by 2020 through landfill gas but the
ECO report says this is "at best optimistic and at worst, may be completely
negated due to the increase in fugitive methane releases." Organics not yet in
landfills should be diverted, "Diversion will always produce greater GHG
reduction benefits." Existing landfills should be managed by flaring the methane
and aiming to keep the landfill as inactive as possible.
Recommended are
composting, anaerobic digestion and thermal conversion such as pyrolysis.
Municipalities should be implementing green bin programs for food scraps, pet
wastes and soiled paper. Higher levels of organic diversion are
feasible.
Environmental
Commissioner of Ontario. Meeting responsibilities: Creating Opportunities.
Submitted to the Legislative Assembly by Gord Miller, Environmental Commissioner
of Ontario on May 31, 2011.
and
associated material at
****************************************************
GERMAN BIOGAS INDUSTRY DENIES LINK TO
PATHOGEN
Enterohaemorrhagic E. coli, or EHEC has shaken the
confidence of consumers, medical profession and scientists. Resistant to many of
the antibiotics used in Germany, EHEC causes serious illness even though the
bacteria is present in relatively small quantities. Spanish vegetable growers
are claiming compensation because the German government pointed the finger at
Spanish cucumber resulting in loss of sales and food. Businesses are at risk
when fears about a dreadful disease are shrouded in so much
uncertainty.
Although bean
sprouts in northern Germany were identified as the source of the outbreak, it
isn't clear where the EHEC came from. It is likely to be transferred to food and
then to humans or from humans to the environment and then to food.. The strain
O104:H4 is probably a "recombinant of two pathogenic E. coli types" according to
the German risk assessment agency (Bundesinstitut fuer Risikobewerting). First
documentation of it date from 2001 and then again in 2006 when it was associated
with a woman who contracted it in Korea. Many of the properties of the bacteria
aren't described in the science literature.
Anaerobic
digesters were one of the businesses identified as having a connection with the
outbreak. Northern Germany has a large number of biogas facilities which process
organic waste in the absence of oxygen (much as happens in a landfill only more
controlled) to produce methane and to leave residual material often spread on
land although some countries such as Switzerland don't allow such material on
agricultural land.
The German
Biogas Association denied any association between the EHEC outbreak in Germany
and biogas facilities. Dr. Werner Philipp from Hohenheim University has
suggested that the lower process temperatures (37-42 deg C) of mesophilic
fermentation in anaerobic digesters which handle organic waste from sources
which don't normally mix together including food waste, municipal solid waste
and manure may have led to the situation where bacteria which normally wouldn't
associate with each other could exchange genes to become more virulent bacteria.
The biogas press release says that indications are that the processes destroy
99.9% of pathogens.
Gallon notes
that while recycling of material such as food waste has beneficial effects on
soil and reduces waste sent to landfill, the negative effects include the risks
from bacteria, viruses, protozoa and parasites which can affect health of
people, animals and plants. New regulations and policies had to be developed to
stop the recycling of animal bone and carcasses because these spread BSE aka mad
cow disease when animal waste products containing prions spread the disease to
cattle and in turn to humans. It is not possible to test for all the possible
pathogens that might present risk in the organic waste material before or after
treatment such fermenting in biogas plants and subsequent heating.
The German
biogas association says that after the biowaste is fermented, the solids
remaining are heated to 70deg C for 1 hour in holding tanks which reduces
measures of microorganisms below detection level. Gallon has no evidence of any
shortcuts taken by the German biogas industry but speculates that because
pasteurization takes extra energy for the heating, it wouldn't be surprising if
some in the industry speed the flow of material along.
Research is
still ongoing about how to test biowaste for organisms which by their presence
could be used as indicators of pathogen risk. The US Water Environment Research
Foundation is publishing a series of articles and organizing conferences on
residual materials. As an example, one paper to be available for purchase in
March 2012 indicates that E. coli may be one of the bacteria that can survive
for longer and at higher temperature than previously thought.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
SUBJECT:
LOCAL FOOD GALLON V15 N02
Hello
Colin
Here is the
reply from CFIA. I suggested to them that 50 k for local was out of date (since
horses & buggies).
However the
alternative labels for home grown food do not seem unreasonable. I'd like to see
a label that differentiates between family farmers and
corporations.
Jessie
Davidson
National Farmers
Union member
From: WebMaster
CFIA <CFIAMaster@inspection.gc.ca>
To: jessie
davidson
Thank you for
your comments.
The Food and
Drug Regulations (Section B.01.012) establish that "local food" means a food
that is manufactured, processed, produced or packaged in a local government unit
and sold only in
a) the local
government unit in which it is manufactured, processed or packaged,
b) one or more
local government units that are immediately adjacent to the one in which it is
manufactured, processed, produced or packaged, or
c) the local
government unit in which it is manufactured, processed, produced or packaged and
in one or more local government units that are immediately adjacent to the one
in which it is manufactured, processed, produced or packaged
The 50 km
guidance is used to be less restrictive in areas where there may be several
municipalities in the close proximity.
Other terms such
as "Product of Nova Scotia", "Foodland Ontario", " Buy BC ", or "Quebec Vrai,"
etc. may be used to describe fresh produce which is produced and grown within a
province but which does not meet the criteria for "local".
The local food
section of the Food and Drug Regulations were last updated in 2000 by Health
Canada who is responsible for setting the standards under the FDR. The Canadian
Food Inspection Agency enforces those standards.
Thank you for
using the CFIA web site.
****************************************************
GEOFF RATHBONE: PRIVATIZATION REQUEST FOR QUOTATION
CREATES PERCEPTION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
News that Geoff
Rathbone, General Manager of Toronto's Solid Waste Management Services was
leaving as of May 27, 2011 created quite a challenge for Mayor Rob Ford's
privatization plan for garbage. Rathbone left to become Vice-President
Progressive Waste Solutions, formerly called BFI Canada, part of one of the
largest waste management companies in Canada. Progressive Waste Solutions has
corporate offices in Vaughan with American HQ in Fort Worth, Texas.
Before he left,
he wrote a report recommending privatization of Toronto garbage collection.
Although Rathbone said he took steps to deal with the conflict of interest, some
councillors are very concerned about the perception of conflict of interest
associated with the contract.
On April 14,
2011 a report to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee from Rathbone and
Lou Pagano Director of Purchasing and Materials recommended in addition to three
other garbage activity outsourcing that a request for quotations be issued to
privatize garbage collection in District 2, an area west of Yonge St to the
Etobicoke border. The contracting out would replace 300 in-house employees.
About 165,000 homes are in the area. The approved budget is $27.721 million per
year. Savings are expected to be 15-20% labour cost savings, $3 million which
doesn't have to be added to the equipment reserve for equipment and vehicles,
lease revenue for a facility and a one time $1.5 million in one time sale of
assets. District 1, the former City of Etobicoke was already private. The report
states that cost per tonne of household waste is $103.14 in District 1 compared
to $149.68 in District 2. On April 26, the Committee adopted the recommendations
without amendment including processes for bid approval out of the public
eye.
Gallon notes
that while it might look like the cost difference is due to contracting out in
District 1, another in-house District 4 had a cost per tonne of $113.27 much
closer to the outsourced costs. Perhaps other factors which could be considered
to reduce in-house costs enter into the equation.
Rathbone said he
took steps to distance himself from the potential for conflict of interest but
the short time scale between his recommendations and his leaving to join a
company with bidding interest caused concern. Instead of accepting the fast
track recommended by the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, on May 17,
2011, City Council adopted Agenda Item 2011.PW3.1 with amendments. Among the
amendments is a prohibition of companies affiliated with Progressive Waste
Solutions or BFI Canada from bidding on this potential contract and requiring
bidders to meet the minimum cost savings "that the City claims.".
Union Cautiously Optimistic
The Toronto
Civic Employees Union TCEU CUPE Local 416 issued a press release expressing some
optimism that the garbage collection might not be outsourced after all due to
the amendments made at City Council. President Mark Ferguson said, "We have
worked very hard to bring to the attention of council and the taxpayers of this
city, that the figures the city has publicly released are not complete, that
their comparators were incorrect and that the responsibility for such a large
contract should rest with council. We are dealing with a $1/4 billion contract
and all the facts must be in the public record." CUPE is running ads which say
that Toronto's waste collection costs are 30% lower than average including
municipalities using private collection and greener: "Public garbage workers
have made Toronto a leader in Canada for waste reduction and recycling, keeping
over 60% of our waste out of landfills. Private companies have other ‘green’
priorities – making money for themselves."
Gallon is
generally reasonably happy to see the private sector provide services as long as
the contract requires both environmental and labour standards which are
enforced. We agree with Mark Ferguson of the Toronto Civic Employee Union TCEU
that garbage collection is dangerous and dirty work and that there should be
protection of workers for decent working conditions and for decent wages. We
have lived in two areas with private garbage collection. In one place, the pace
and expectations seemed at least from a distance to be reasonable. In another
area, the company's practices put workers at risk: the speed that they were
expected to lift heavy garbage containers and the fact that they seemed to be
expected to run behind the truck all day clearly set a stage for injury. We
watched often enough to realize that the cheapness of the contract was due
almost entirely to poorly designed trucks and practices and an attitude that
workers were disposable.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references
here.
****************************************************
PEOPLE: ANDREW BENEDEK
Andrew Benedek
who founded his own company ZENON Environmental Inc. in the 1980s has added
another prize to his life achievement which already includes Lee Kuan Yew Water
Prize and the Swedish Industrial Water Prize. The University of Washington
College of Engineering awarded him the Diamond Award of Entrepreneurial
Excellence. The Diamond Awards recognize significant contributions to the field
of engineering. ZENON's ZeeWeed membrane is used in over 400 wastewater and
drinking water treatment plants around the world. In 2006, GE Water &
Process Technologies paid about CDN$760 million for shares of ZENON. Benedek is
Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director, UTS Biogastechnik GmbH based in
Bavaria in Germany.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
CIELAP JOINS WITH CELA
On June 9,
Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy CIELAP and the Canadian
Environmental Law Association CELA joined up again in a "Homecoming 2011"
celebration. CIELAP and CELA began as one organization in 1970. Grant Caven,
chair of the CIELAP's Board of Directors described the reason for the
homecoming, "
Given a number
of current realities including a changed funding landscape, a plethora of new
and vibrant organizations and initiatives on the scene, as well as the overlap
between the mandates of CIELAP and CELA, CIELAP’s Board has decided that it does
not make sense to continue as a separate organization." CELA will continue
making the publications available and the Centre for Environment at the
University of Toronto is archiving research papers and duplicate
publications.
Anne Mitchell
was head of CIELAP from 1992 to 2009. For Gallon's editor, she was the face of
CIELAP, the person he talked to many times over the years. She left to take up a
position with the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers).
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
IT'S NOT THE BABIES, IT'S THE
FISH
BPA is one of
the best known endocrine disruptors, chemicals which mimic human hormones and
are believed to cause problems for human reproduction. A team of scientists led
by Jessica M McCormick of Rutgers University has just published a paper
indicating that microbes can convert bisphenol A, the material that Canada has
banned from baby food contact applications, into substances that are more toxic
to fish than the BPA itself.
Maybe Canada and
other nations should put more effort and resources into studying the
environmental aspects of endocrine disruptors. Keeping our babies safe is
important but human babies cannot live on a sterile planet. Fish are important
too!
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references
here.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copyright ©
Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment
119 Concession 6
Rd Fisherville ON N0A 1G0 Canada. Fisherville & Toronto
All rights
reserved. The Gallon Environment Letter (GL for short) presents information for
general interest and does not endorse products, companies or practices.
Information including articles, letters and guest columns may be from sources
expressing opinions not shared by the Canadian Institute for Business and the
Environment. Readers must verify all information for themselves before acting on
it. Advertising or sponsorship of one or more issues consistent with sustainable
development goals is welcome and identified as separate from editorial content.
Subscriptions for organizations $184 + HST = $207.92. For individuals
(non-organizational emails and paid with non-org funds please) $30 includes HST.
Subscription includes 12 issues about a year or more. http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx