What do the different labels mean?

What does it mean when a label states that a product is 100% organic, organic or made with organic ingredients? As a consumer, it’s important to know what each of the different labels appearing on organic items mean. Below is an explanation of each of the labels permitted under the Standard.

100% organic

100% organic products must have all of their ingredients, with the exception of salt and water, derived from organic production methods.

Organic

Organic products must have at least 95% of their ingredients, with the exception of salt and water, derived from organic production methods. Any remaining product ingredients must consist only of approved substances. Approved substances exclude those derived from genetically modified technology, those treated with ionising radiation, those which interfere with the natural metabolism of livestock and plants, and those that are not compatible with the principles of organic agriculture. Furthermore, any ingredient used that has not been derived from organic production methods must be clearly indicated as such in the product’s list of ingredients.

Made with organic ingredients

A product stating that it has been made with organic ingredients must have at least 70% of its ingredients of agricultural origin derived from organic production methods. All remaining product ingredients must consist only of approved substances. Any ingredient used that has not been derived from organic production methods must be clearly indicated as such in the product’s list of ingredients.

Products containing less than 70% organic ingredients

Any product that contains less than 70% organic ingredients cannot use the term organic on the principal display panel (main or front label). However, reference can be made in the ingredients list of the product to any ingredients used that have been derived from organic production methods.

In conversion

The term “in-conversion” refers to a production system that has adhered to the Standard for at least one year but has not yet achieved full organic certification. It should be noted that a minimum period of three years must elapse before a production system can attain full organic certification.

Products labelled as “in conversion” must comply with the Standard. Equivalent ingredient threshold percentages apply to in conversion organic products. For example, a product labelled as being in conversion organic must have at least 95% of its ingredients, with the exception of salt and water, derived from in-conversion organic production methods.

Coming clean on organic logos

This article from Australia explains how misleading organic labelling can be. When buying organic especially from supermarkets it is important to look for the organic labelling found at the end of the article.

Article

LABELLING on organic products in Australia is confusing, potentially misleading and urgently needs reform, consumer advocacy group Choice says.

It is calling for a single, unified system of certification to replace the current method, whereby several different bodies regulate producers, and some brands make completely unsubstantiated claims to be organic.

Research by The Sun-Herald reveals how buying "organic" can cost customers more than twice as much. The organics industry is one of the fastest growing in the Australian food and grocery sector, increasing by 30 per cent in the past year.

It is now worth about $400 million a year in the retail sector, the Government's Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation says.

There are eight organic certification bodies, which are overseen by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service.

But some own-brand organic products bought by The Sun-Herald in Coles and Woolworths last week had none of the official logos. Woolworths' organic tinned tomatoes had no official certification, and the small print on Coles organic carrots stated "product in conversion to national standard" with no other explanation.

Five different products bought in Coles used five different organic logos.

The Sun-Herald also looked at the cost of organic goods compared with conventional products.

Organic carrots from Coles cost $3.48 for one kilogram compared with $1.68 for the conventionally produced equivalent.

In Woolworths, organic carrots were $3.98 compared with 94 cents for the mainstream equivalent.

Organic tinned tomatoes in Woolworths cost $1.15, compared with 58 cents for a "normal" tin.

And 500 grams of regular minced beef from Coles cost $5.55 compared with $7.33 for its organic rival.

Andrew Monk, spokesman for Biological Farmers of Australia, one of the largest official certification bodies, said: "Coles and Woolworths are both working very hard to simplify the system of organic certification.

"We do have concerns about organic labelling and we have to make sure we are not just bandying about the word organic willy-nilly."

On the subject of price, Dr Monk said: "Some organic products such as carrots are always going to be a little bit more expensive because they cost more to produce without pesticides and chemicals, but there is no reason why other things should cost more."

Coles and Woolworths did not respond to requests for comment. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said it might look at the cost of organic brands in its inquiry into the price of groceries.

Labelling to look for

National Association for Sustainable Agriculture (NASAA)

P.O. Box 768
Stirling SA 5152
Phone: (08) 8370 8455
website

Australian Certified Organic

P.O. Box 530
Chermside QLD 4032
Phone: (07) 3350 5716
website

Organic Growers of Australia (OGA)

P.O. Box 6171
South Lismore NSW 2480
Phone: (02) 6622 0100
website

Organic Food Chain (OFC)

P.O. Box 2390
Toowoomba QLD 4350
Phone: (07) 4637 2600
website

Safe Food Queensland

P.O. Box 440
Spring Hill QLD 4004
Phone: 1800 300 815
website

Tasmanian Organic-Dynamic Producers (TOP)

P.O. Box 13
Campbell Town TAS 7210
Phone: (03) 6381 2004
website

Bio-dynamic Research Institute (BDRI)

Main Road
Powelltown VIC 3797
Phone: (03) 5966 7333
website

In a future article I will discuss exactly what the labels mean. In the meantime regardless where you are in the world we should attempt to lobby for a singular national standard for organic foods that prevents confusion and misleading consumers.

Bottled water: the new social poison?

FIRST fast food, then plastic bags. Now bottled water is the next alleged social evil to find itself in the crosshairs of pressure groups.

Environmentaists lay the blame for a growing mountain of plastic in landfill and the increasing strain on water resources directly at the feet of the large companies that sell bottled water.

The problem of our growing addiction to bottled water will come up at a meeting of environment ministers next month where the question of a national refund scheme for plastic or glass bottles will be raised.

Figures show the thirst for bottled water is far from being slaked. The market is expected to grow 9.1 per cent to $460 million this financial year, according to a forecast by the market researcher IBIS World, and Australia lags other developed countries in consumption.

NSW households are second only to those in South Australia in their reliance on bottled water: 13 per cent of South Australian households say they rely on bottled water as their main source of drinking water, compared with 9 per cent in NSW.

In the next year Australians are expected to drink 242 megalitres of bottled water, the equivalent of 19 600-millilitre bottles each. IBIS World predicts a boom in "premium" water as manufacturers claw back the higher costs of producing the plastic bottles from a crude oil derivative.

Expensive brands of water, marketed to younger women as essential fashion accessories or the key to a healthier lifestyle, are appearing on the market. The latest from Coca-Cola Amatil, which dominates the water market, is the trendily packaged Glaceau brand which contains added vitamins.

As sales of fizzy drinks flatten, beverage companies like Coca-Cola and Frucor are turning to water to pick up the slack. Audrey Riddell, an analyst for IBIS World, says canny marketing, in particular to women who drink more than men, is driving demand for a demand for a product only as good as what comes out of the tap. "Young women aren't buying it just for rehydration but to send a signal that they can afford to pay for something that is many more times expensive than tap-water," Ms Riddell said. "They are showing off their affluence and sophistication."

Clean Up Australia estimates the average price of bottled water is $2.53 a litre, against about a cent a litre for tap water.

The chief executive of Clean Up Australia, Terrie-Ann Johnson, said the shift in drinking habits from sugary fizzy drinks to water was showing up in waste. "We are finding more and more that the [plastic] bottles that we find in the waste stream are for water," she said.

The director of the Total Environment Centre, Jeff Angel, who wants a national refund scheme such as the one operating in South Australia, said: "When you look at the life cycle of a bottle of water from the extraction process, through to the transport and right the way through to its disposal, which is more often than not in landfill, then you have to say that this is an unjustified luxury."

The Department of Environment and Climate Change estimates about 200 millilitres of oil is used to produce each one-litre bottle, including the plastic, transport and refrigeration.

The bottled water industry says that amount of oil makes three bottles.

Mr Angel added: "As demand increases, there's a serious potential to exhaust local supplies of water [from aquifers]."

Earth Hour is Coming!

Climate Change and Endangered Species - A New Wave of Mass Extinction

Great report in the Newscientist which looks at the effect of climate change on endangered species.

Life on Earth is in the throes of a new wave of mass extinction, unlike anything since the demise of the dinosaurs. In the last 500 years, 844 species - like the passenger pigeon, auk, thylacine, and quagga - are known to have died out, and up to 16,000 others are now known to be threatened. Two thirds of turtles could be gone by the 2025, great apes have recently declined by over 50% in parts of Africa, half of marsupials and one in three amphibians are in jeopardy, and a staggering 40% of Asia's plants and animals could soon be lost.

But this may only be a fraction of the true number facing extinction. Though only 1.5 million species have been described, there could be between 5 to 30 million in total. Of these, some experts predict that one could be falling extinct every 20 minutes - or 27,000 a year.

Conservationists argue that humans have an ethical obligation to protect other species, that diversity and natural beauty are highly prized by mankind, and that biodiversity is a vital resource: we rely on ecosystems to provide food, oxygen and natural resources, recycle wastes and fertilise soils for agriculture. The total value of services provided to man by nature has been estimated at $33 trillion annually.

more...

Ozone Depletion Still a Problem

Whilst not a new report the, The 2007 Antarctic Ozone Hole Summary: Monday 01 October 2007, reminds us that whilst the Ozone hole over the Antartic has slowed growing and reversed in previous years, there are signs that it will continue to remain a problem. There are also signs that other factors other than CFCs are contributing to its depletion.

Refer to the following report:

The 2007 Antarctic Ozone Hole Summary

Best and cheapest halogen replacements on the market

Here is a great ebay store that sells energy efficient lighting. I would recommend in particular (if looking for a downlight (halogen) replacement) to buy the following:

MR16 - 3w - Led Down Light, it comes with 1 year warranty and is equivalent to a 35w Halogen using less that 1 tenth of the power. This means less greenhouse gasses and cheaper electricity bills!!!!

Check out this sellers ebay store, by far the cheapest most effective halogen replacements on the market.

http://stores.ebay.com.au/XL-Lights

Environment Victoria

Public Transport Challenge 2008 - Apply Now!
Environment Victoria and Metlink are inviting secondary schools across Melbourne to get aboard and register their interest for the 2008 Public Transport Challenge.

Educating students about greener, smarter travel is the aim of the game, as teams of year 7 – 10 secondary students go head to head in a contest of skill and strategy! Traveling only on public transport and earning points as they go, students will get to know their transport system by visiting checkpoints across the city and the suburbs including sports stadiums, entertainment hotspots, beaches and environmentally important sites.

The Public Transport Challenge - a joint EV and Metlink intitiative.

Green flights on the horizon

New-generation biofuels may help to keep air fares down as well as fight global warming, writes Peter Needham.

You're jetting towards a blissful holiday. Your plane has just climbed through the clouds, flight attendants are about to serve cooked lunch and all seems well with the world.

Who cares what sort of fuel powers the plane? For most people, that's a technical issue - best dealt with by aviation engineers. Airlines, however, are increasingly keen to come up with alternatives to petroleum-based jet fuel.

Their motive has much to do with ticket prices. Fuel is the greatest single recurrent expense they face, accounting for more than half the total cost of a long-haul flight. Qantas, for instance, will pay almost $4billion for fuel next year and the annual sum is unlikely to fall. Qantas chief risk officer, Rob Kella, expects oil prices to remain around current levels in the foreseeable future. The cost is passed on to consumers as a substantial part of the air fare. Many airlines list some of their fuel costs separately as a surcharge, making the core fare appear lower.

Global warming - and the widespread public perception that air travel plays a role in it - worries airlines too. In reality, aviation's contribution to global warming is small. Flying produces perhaps 2 per cent of man-made carbon dioxide - and the man-made variety constitutes only about 3 per cent of the atmospheric total. But aviation is growing fast, especially in emerging markets like India and China. Although aviation is becoming more fuel efficient (at the rate of about 1 per cent a year) its contribution to greenhouse gases is growing as well. Planemakers want to make the industry as clean and green as possible. Airlines have no wish to be slugged with hefty carbon imposts which, in the form of carbon taxes or tradeable permits, could lift the cost of a Sydney-Europe round-trip flight by more than 20 per cent.

At a seminar hosted by Boeing in Sydney this month, tourism economics expert Professor Peter Forsyth estimated that any climate change mitigation scheme involving a carbon price of $50 a tonne was likely to push up air fares from Australia to Britain by 21.2 per cent. That would see a return fare of $2400 soar to $2909. Forsyth said the $50 a tonne price was at the high end of the scale. Details will be hammered out in a year or two.

Whatever taxes may be around the corner, airlines have only two ways to reduce their carbon emissions. They must use less fuel or switch to "greener" fuel with a smaller carbon footprint. Manufacturers are tackling the first issue with lighter, new-generation aircraft and engine designs, augmented by new navigation techniques that cut fuel burn. Airlines are pushing for a 25 per cent further improvement in fuel efficiency by 2020. Qantas is on track to slash 2 million tonnes from its greenhouse gas emissions by 2011.

The search for greener aviation fuel, meanwhile, focuses on plants and seeds. Airlines see biofuel as a better solution than hydrogen for the near future because it can be used in existing engine technology, rather than requiring radical - and massively expensive - modifications. Airlines don't plan to clear rainforests, savannas, wetlands or grasslands to grow the "feedstock" to produce biofuel. That would end up releasing more carbon than it saved. Instead, they plan to produce biofuels from wasteland, in brackish, undrinkable water and on land not considered arable.

Boeing's managing director, environmental strategy, Billy Glover, said recently that enough fuel to sustain all aviation could be produced "from a space about the size of Belgium". Aircraft were likely to be using biofuel blends within five years, Glover said, adding that just two years ago, he was "a total sceptic that this would work". Rapid advances in the meantime have converted him.

Biofuel flight tests are under way already. Virgin Atlantic is due this week to fly one of its Boeing 747 aircraft between London Heathrow and Amsterdam using a "truly sustainable type of biofuel that doesn't compete with food and freshwater resources", according to the airline. The fuel will be a mix, probably 20 per cent biofuel and 80 per cent conventional jet fuel. Its exact formula is secret. The flight will be a demonstration run, carrying no passengers, operated in conjunction with Boeing and engine maker GE Aviation.

Announcing the trial, Virgin Atlantic president Sir Richard Branson said the demonstration flight would give the airline "crucial knowledge that we can use to dramatically reduce our carbon footprint." The Virgin Group, he pointed out, had pledged to invest all profits from its transport companies towards developing clean energy. "With this breakthrough we are well down the path to achieving our goals."

Virgin's test flight will be followed, less than a year later, by a similar test involving Air New Zealand, Boeing and engine maker Rolls-Royce. One engine of an Air New Zealand Boeing 747 will run on a blended biofuel/kerosene mix and the other three engines will be powered by regular aviation fuel.

In a parallel development, aircraft manufacturer Airbus has run one of its giant double-decker A380 planes in a test flight using a liquid fuel processed from natural gas. The industry's main thrust, however, remains biofuel.

Growing biofuel

* Algae These simple plant-like organisms, known collectively as pond scum, are a promising future feedstock option for biofuel production. Boeing researchers believe algae could provide a much higher oil yield per hectare than many other biofuels, as well as being far less demanding on the environment.

* Babassu This native Brazilian palm tree produces a nut that might provide a sustainable source of oil for biofuel in Brazil. Different biofuel feedstocks will be used in different parts of the world, suiting local conditions.

* Halophytes Saltwater plants, or halophytes, grown in desert areas and irrigated with seawater could become a promising biofuel feedstock. Australia's arid regions are suited to this, as is the Sahara.

* Jatropha This hardy bush, known to botanists as Jatropha curcus, is believed to have the same medicinal qualities as a laxative. Its profile has surged with the discovery that it might also be an ideal biofuel crop, producing seeds with up to 40 per cent oil content.

RSPCA endorsing 'inhumane' chicken farm

THE RSPCA is endorsing a range of eggs which Animal Liberation says are laid by chickens kept in inhumane conditions.

The RSPCA gives its official seal of approval to Pace Farm barn-laid eggs.

It receives 2 per cent of the wholesale price of the eggs, which are sold under its "choose wisely" accreditation scheme.

But pictures obtained by The Sun-Herald show hens at a Pace Farm facility in Buchanan, near Newcastle, in cramped conditions with no outside access.

Many have large amounts of feathers missing where they have pecked each other, a sign that experts say shows they do not have enough space.

The birds have also had their beaks clipped - a practice known as "debeaking" which involves cutting the beak with a heated blade in order to stop the birds cannabalising each other.

Campaigners have called on the RSPCA to stop endorsing all barn-laid eggs - not just those produced by Pace Farm - saying customers are being misled about the welfare standards behind such products.

An Animal Liberation spokeswoman said the group was shocked by the conditions at the Buchanan facility.

"They are exhibiting the type of behaviour that is normally associated with caged birds," she said.

"The public assumes that because these eggs have been endorsed by the RSPCA that they are cruelty-free and welfare-friendly - sadly, in this instance, this is not the case."

Barn-laid eggs do not have to conform to the same criteria as free-range products, where the hens must have access to outside areas during the day. Barn-layer birds are kept inside constantly, in tiers, though not in cages. It is intended that they have more space to move around and to nest naturally.

On Friday, the RSPCA defended its decision to endorse the Pace Farm barn-laid brand.

Chief executive Heather Neil said: "RSPCA standards for accredited egg production ensure that hens are given the freedom to exhibit natural behaviours.

The program involves a process of stringent and regular inspections every eight to 12 weeks to ensure standards are being met."

Ms Neil confirmed the RSPCA endorsed beak clipping of birds at the Buchanan facility.

"The RSPCA is aware of behavioural problems with this particular flock at Buchanan, specifically feather picking," she said.

On the allegation that the birds were too cramped, she said RSPCA standards allowed for seven birds per square metre as opposed to the national code of practice standard of 12.

Animal Liberation said the RSPCA standard gives each bird an amount of space equivalent to a piece of A3 paper.

Ms Neil said the demand for eggs in Australia was about 200 million dozen eggs a year.

"Such a demand necessitates large-scale commercial production," she said. "The RSPCA would prefer to be in there helping to improve the welfare of birds in commercial egg production rather than not being involved at all."

She said all the money received from the sale of the eggs - believed to be hundreds of thousands of dollars - was channelled back into the accreditation scheme.

Pace Farm is the biggest battery egg producer in the southern hemisphere but also has free-range and barn-laid products.

A spokesman for the company refused to comment on the allegations or the pictures, which were taken a week ago.