Category: Sustainability Tools

January 2018 Composting Collaborative Meeting

Post author By user
Post date February 22, 2018
No Comments on January 2018 Composting Collaborative Meeting

The Composting Collaborative gathered on January 21st at the US Composting Council’s annual conference in Atlanta. More than 70 members, including many first-time participants, congregated for a jam-packed afternoon of flashtalks, a thought-provoking discussion on organics measurement, and a workshop on design thinking applied to composting from the Food Well Alliance.

Traversing more than 8 topics, the flashtalks dove into a diversity of issues. To kick off the meeting, Brenda Platt from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance shared an analysis of the importance of home and community-scale composting in the broader organics recycling context. As a small-scale bike-powered hauler based in Athens, GA, Kristen Baskin of Let Us Compost provided a more personal experience of many of the tenets that Platt discussed and shared how Let Us Compost has experimented with loss leaders and creative pricing for commercial clients.
Pivoting towards topics relating to compostable packaging, Camilo Ferro of Renew Packaging discussed a host of challenges that compostable packaging face nationwide. Namely, Ferro highlighted the reality that as “bag bans” have been passed in cities and counties across the country, compostable film bags are often unintentionally subject to restrictions or fees intended for conventional plastic film bags. Lynn Dyer with the Foodservice Packaging Institutecontinued the dialogue on compostable packaging in her flashtalk, sharing high-level results of their recent study that examined the current state of composting infrastructure capable of diverting both food scraps and compostable packaging.
Ending flashtalks on the note of the critical role that measurement and data play, Nora Goldstein, BioCycle editor and Composting Collaborative founding partner, led the group through the most impactful findings discovered in BioCycle’s State of Organics Recycling in the U.S. Report, funded in part by a grant from the U.S. EPA to the Composting Collaborative. Beyond the interesting and valuable findings concerning the number of composting facilities, the size of active facilities, and the materials that they are processing, learnings from the data collection process were perhaps most revealing.
Unfortunately, over the course of multiple large-scale efforts by BioCycle to collect organics recycling data, it has become apparent that the ability for states to collect and synthesize organics recycling information is decreasing, despite the fact that residential organics collection programs and quantity of households with access to organics recycling are on the rise nationwide.
In brainstorming the metrics most important to different stakeholders in the composting supply chain, the Composting Collaborative laid groundwork for much of the organics measurement work slated for 2018, including facilitating discussions among state-level professionals responsible for reporting to better understand gaps, standardize definitions, and determine where data collection breaks down. This conversation will continue at the February 27-March 1 Measurement Matters Summit in Chattanooga, Tennessee and onward into spring and summer 2018 in Collaborative forums.
After exploring the influence of thoughtfully structured organics measurement, the Food Well Alliance’s presentation and workshop about applying design thinking to composting systems was a natural transition. Also based in Atlanta, the Food Well Alliance’s Will Sellers and Britni Burkhardsmeier walked meeting attendees through their unique process of using learning tables, working tables, and design tables that aim to facilitate collaboration between stakeholders and accelerate the process of precise interventions for a resilient food system.
In particular, Sellers and Burkhardsmeier shared the twists and turns throughout the evolution of the design and implementation of a composting pilot that intends to collect food scraps from multi-family buildings, diverting them to decentralized community-scale composting in the immediate local area. Keeping equity, resilience, and healthy food in the front of mind, this pilot is in an early stage of implementation and promises to be a fascinating and scalable case study.

In turn, the the Food Well Alliance’s intuitive inclusion of composting in a larger discussion about fresh food sparked a meaningful discussion about whether this strategy of nesting food waste composting within the broader context surrounding closed loop food systems could be effective on a large scale. With a majority of attendees in consensus that capitalizing on the momentum evident in sustainable food today, reframing food waste composting as one portion of this cycle, rather than a solid waste management strategy, could provide a more accessible engagement strategy to individuals, commercial entities, and governments widely.

Sustainability Tools

Measuring responsible forest management at the landscape-level is another perfect tool to add to the toolbox

Post author By user
Post date November 17, 2016
No Comments on Measuring responsible forest management at the landscape-level is another perfect tool to add to the toolbox

Thanks to Sarah Crow at the American Forest Foundation for her help in writing this article.

Many companies with sustainable packaging goals use procurement policies and requirements as a strategy to meet these goals. For wood fiber-based packaging, this often means sourcing pulp and paper products certified by a credible third-party audited system such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), American Tree Farm System (ATFS), or combinations of each. Access to certified fiber, however, is often limited and many companies face a difficult challenge of how to meet responsible sourcing goals when certified fiber is not an option.
GreenBlue’s Forest Products Working Group (FPWG) and the American Forest Foundation (AFF) have been working together to address this challenge. With input from a wide range of stakeholders, including companies, brands, NGOs, family woodland owners and state and federal agencies, FPWG and AFF are exploring the development of a resource that uses a landscape-based evaluation – rather than by parcel – to provide visibility into wood baskets and demonstrate the outcomes of sustainable forest management, at scale.
This proposed landscape-based model aggregates a suite of different available data flows into a context that brand owners can use to inform their wood-fiber sourcing goals. The model focuses on woodlands owned by families and individuals, who collectively own 35% of forestland in the United States and supply more than 50% of material flow to the forest products industry including packaging. The system recognizes and supports the existing forest certification and related systems as important indicators of sustainability. A landscape model can help showcase areas where certification has had clear sustainability benefits and highlight opportunities to further engage family landowners to drive positive conservation impacts.

Just recently the FPWG and AFF met at HAVI, a supply chain and logistics firm, in Downers Grove, IL with the goal of further shaping the concept. Leadership companies including Staples, Mars Incorporated, McDonald’s, HAVI, Target, Sappi North America, Catalyst, Domtar Corporation, Georgia-Pacific, Evergreen Packaging, WestRock, and International Paper have participated in a number of discussions to discuss key considerations necessary for such an ambitious endeavor.
Drawing on input from the stakeholders, AFF and the FPWG used the meeting at HAVI to answer key questions:

What is the best strategy for the landscape model to align with and support existing certification systems?
What sustainability indicators can and should be included?
What is the most effective strategy for evaluating sustainability?
How do we continue to work effectively with a broad group of stakeholders?

Acknowledging that developing a landscape model is a significant undertaking, the group was able to gain consensus and make progress in several key areas. A recurring theme throughout the conversations has been the need to provide a narrative and context to any presented data and analyses at the landscape level. As one member stated, “We know a lot is happening and being measured now and we want to show the results in a way where we can determine what is contributing to forest health.”
While there is a recognition that development of such a model is an ambitious endeavor, there is a great deal of enthusiasm and support for the effort. Drawing on strides made at the meeting, the next steps in the model’s development include further engagement of ENGOs and data experts, identifying data sources and refinement of the indicators within the wider framework. Refined sketches of the model are expected later this year.

Tags Forest management

Sustainability Tools

Farms in Transition: How Can Consumers Support Farms in Transition to Organic?

Post author By user
Post date October 13, 2016
No Comments on Farms in Transition: How Can Consumers Support Farms in Transition to Organic?

What do you do with a farm that is in transition? For a farm to join the ranks of USDA Organic-certified, there are a few steps that a farmer must take. First is time. It takes 3 years for a conventional farm to qualify as organic. During that time, a farm might need to invest in new infrastructure, create new farm management plans, have conversations with their bank, all the while not being able to sell their crops.
Farms currently cannot sell crops as organic during the transitional phase, even if they are following all tenants of USDA Organic certification. Kashi saw an opportunity to change that. Why can’t we support farms in that transitional period and still get their products to market? Kashi Company CEO David Denholm said in his SXSW Eco session, “1% is Not Enough. Increasing Access to Organics.”
“Farmers need financial security, they need a market for crops in transition because they are following organic farming practices, just not certified yet,” Denholm said.
So in order to provide a way for consumers to directly support those farms working to get organic certification, Kashi partnered with Quality Assurance International, a USDA accredited organic certification body. The organizations created a standard for so-called “transitional” farmers and created a mark that could be used on packages for products from farms transitioning from conventional to organic.
“The label is a movement, because it’s a chance for consumers to vote and support the transition from conventional to organic,” Denholm said. “We believe consumers play a critical role in helping support farms moving to organic.”
ct-logo_lg The label is currently on Kashi products that source from farmlands that are “certified transitional”. Denholm said that they are getting inquiries from other companies that want to use the label, both food and non-food companies like fashion labels.
Denholm said that Kashi spearheaded this movement because the current organic farming landscape is working on a shaky economic foundation.
“Companies are buying out organic farms or are putting in place long-term contracts for supply of organic ingredients. It’s an example of market failure,” Denholm said.
He believes that the best path forward is an open source economy, which is based on collaboration. He hopes to spread awareness of the label through media, other brands and organic outreach.
“The demand for organic food products has increased by a lot since the 1990s, but the supply hasn’t increased to meet that. We hope this is one way to support an increase in organic agriculture moving forward,” Denholm said.

Recover More Sustainability Tools

It’s Not Easy Being Green

Post author By user
Post date October 7, 2016
No Comments on It’s Not Easy Being Green

Seattle says non-compostable plastic bags cannot be colored green or brown any longer in an aim to reduce confusion

On Monday, October 3rd Seattle’s passed a new measure prohibiting non-compostable bags to be tinted green or brown. This is a groundbreaking development in the quest to clarify end-of-use options for packaging and create harmonization of compostable labeling practices.
how2compost_rgb Non-compostable plastic bags that are tinted green, mostly used in produce and carry-out bags, are often used in an attempt to connect the green color with a green message. Unfortunately, these items, as Seattle has found, pollute the local compost. When plastic bags are put in compost, they not only produce unsightly litter at the compost facility, they can also produce macro and micro fragments when they begin to break down that contaminate the finished compost.
Polyethylene bags are accepted at many retail locations for recycling, and recovery of these valuable materials remains important. However, not only does a green tint make the bags more likely to be mistaken for compostable, but also misleading language, terms such as “biodegradable,” or “degradable” and “decomposable” further confuse the messaging. Seattle’s forward-thinking new ordinance will eliminate these practices that contribute to the problem of contaminated compost that increases costs and lowers the value of finished compost.
The How2Recycle label website helps clarify the differences between compostable and recyclable. Recently, GreenBlue launched the How2Compost label, an on-package label that verifies that packaging is certified compostable. The label design includes the BPI logo and a link to a website with additional information.. Compostable bags can use the How2Compost Label and be tinted green or brown, while non-compostable bags can use the How2Recycle “Store Drop-Off” label and ideally be clear or another color not easily confused with compostables. Seattle’s new law will move the country in the right direction!

Tags Bag Bans, compostable, Recycling

Recover More Sustainability Tools

Recycling programs and the curious case of inconsistent language

Post author By user
Post date July 19, 2016
No Comments on Recycling programs and the curious case of inconsistent language

This article originally was published in Packaging Digest Magazine
Recycling programs do their best to communicate the items they want to collect. They should do better.
That’s one of many conclusions we’ve drawn from our soon-to-be-released Centralized Study on Availability of Recycling. The study examined recycling programs in more than 2,000 communities across the United States andgathered a yes/no for the acceptance of nearly 50 types of packaging and containers. For many of the packaging types studied, that yes/no determination is straightforward. For many other types of packaging, however, it is not.
This is something that can, and must, be improved.
This type of national study of recycling programs can be conducted from two angles. Angle one is behind the scenes, learning from program administrators which items the program intends to collect. Angle two is from the eye of the public, examining the recycling collection instructions and guidance offered by the recycling program and seeking a mention of each item under the “accepted” or “prohibited” headers. Our study used the latter methodology. This data serves to substantiate consumer-facing claims of recyclability, so it’s most important to determine the items that the consumer understands to be accepted in their recycling programs.
Unfortunately, the recycling program instructions offered to consumers are frustratingly inconsistent. The number of phrases that are consistently used across programs can probably be counted on one hand. Newspaper. Phone books. From a strict linguistic standpoint, that’s probably it.
Even an item so ubiquitously accepted as the aluminum beverage can is not referred to with consistent wording. Beverage cans. Aluminum cans. Cans. Metal cans. Food and beverage cans. This example may sound harebrained because the average consumer should, surely, be expected to understand any of these phrases to refer to the aluminum beverage can, but think about how it muddies the waters for aerosol cans.
When a locality says they accept “aluminum cans,” does the consumer understand whether or not aluminum aerosol cans are acceptable? One step further—does the consumer know how to tell the difference between a steel aerosol and an aluminum aerosol? No, they don’t. If they read “food and beverage cans,” does this mean that aerosol cans for whipped cream and cooking spray are acceptable, while other aerosols for other types of products aren’t?
The point to be made here is that programs should be specific. If a program wants aluminum beverage cans but not aerosols, it should say “aluminum beverage cans only.” Or if that program also wants aerosol cans—and we hope this fictitious program would—then it should mention aerosol cans.
Specificity does have a limit. We operate in a world where the recyclability of packaging is much, much more nuanced than its basic material type and format. Fiber structure with polycoat on one side? Fine (probably). Polycoat on both sides? Not so recyclable. PET clamshell? Great. PET clamshell laden with adhesive? Nope.
This level of nuance cannot be conveyed to the general public. It’s tempting to think it should be, but we would be swiftly served with a reality check. For consumers to not be overwhelmed with technical nuance and overloaded with jargon, recycling programs must paint their acceptance guidelines with broad strokes. That’s okay. A lot can be communicated in broad strokes.

But they must strive to hit the right balance, being as specific as possible while also remaining conscious of the consequences of broadly stated acceptance. Some unrecyclable items will be stated as acceptable in the program. Conversely, some perfectly recyclable items will be prohibited. Many will still be plainly ambiguous. The goal is to reduce as much ambiguity as possible without plummeting terribly far in the weeds, and our study findings suggest American recycling programs have a way to go before we approach the right side of this balance.
The end result of our study is what we believe to be the most robust and comprehensive picture of the acceptance of packaging in recycling programs across America. Beside their utility to substantiate thousands, perhaps millions, of recyclability claims, the national acceptance rates calculated from this data will serve as an important baseline from which change can be measured. And the detail of the national figures will give us important insight into the specificity—and ambiguity—of recycling collection guidelines.
Now, if we initiate a concerted effort to unify and harmonize recycling program instructions, we can hope to see a decrease in ambiguity and non-mentions of recyclable packaging and an increase in our confidence of knowing what’s accepted and what’s prohibited. Our industry’s conversations around improving recycling systems tend to entail things like building new infrastructure, implementing new technologies and developing new infrastructure—all with frightening price tags and seemingly insurmountable obstacles.
The opportunity for improvement ought to be a breath of fresh air. We need to change some words. This can be done now.

Recover More Sustainability Tools

Making Zero Net Waste a Reality for the Plastics Industry

Post author By user
Post date March 21, 2016
No Comments on Making Zero Net Waste a Reality for the Plastics Industry

“Zero Waste.” Not too long ago that phrase seemed a lofty and unattainable idea. And yet, today many companies are increasingly finding success in diverting waste from landfills and finding the best and most efficient use for the resources. Companies publicly committing to zero waste are, in fact, becoming quite commonplace.
As companies like Toyota, Unilever, and Hershey reach their goal of sending zero waste to a landfill, it’s very likely they will begin to expect the same from upstream suppliers. In fact, as a brand owner or processor, you might have the same goals and expectations of your supply chain. Recognizing that responsibly managing material in the manufacturing phase is an increasing priority for industry, SPI launched the Zero Net Waste Program after an 18-month development process.
This program is a groundbreaking recognition program and tool that helps members decrease the impact of waste in manufacturing by evaluating waste-reducing opportunities and maximizing diversion from landfill. The ZNW program provides plastics companies a concrete set of resources they can use to pursue, and achieve, zero net waste in their facilities and offices. It also recognizes participants for these achievements once facilities demonstrate their progress.
The idea of the program came from the SPI Recycling Committee’s Emerging Trends Subcommittee, chaired by Kathy Xuan, CEO of PARC Corp, and was developed by a broad stakeholder workgroup of SPI members.
“As chair of the subcommittee and a recycler who provides zero landfill services, we feel this program will be instrumental in providing tools and resources to accelerate the industry’s pursuit of zero waste,” said Xuan.
Why Zero Net Waste?
People will notice that SPI’s program didn’t just adopt the phrase “Zero Waste” to define the program. The phrase “zero waste”, in its purest interpretation, does not allow for diversion through energy recovery. While SPI recognizes energy recovery as a valuable solid waste management tool, we believe that energy recovery should only be used as an end-of-life management strategy for materials that cannot be mechanically recycled. For materials that cannot be mechanically recycled, we believe that responsibly recovering value through energy is the second best end-of-life management option. The SPI workgroup felt that the term “Zero Net Waste” was a better embodiment of the widely accepted “reduce, reuse, recycle, and recover” waste management hierarchy.
Guiding Members to Success
The cornerstone of the Zero Net Waste program is the manual, which includes real world, step-by-step tools and resources for companies throughout the plastics value chain to ensure that plastic materials and other byproducts of manufacturing are put to their highest and best use. From building the business case for pursuing zero net waste, to educating employees and offering practical guidance on finding the right service providers, the ZNW program manual is designed to enable companies of all sizes to take immediate steps to begin pursuing zero waste in their facilities.
Companies who participate in the program, and meet requirements of the two-step qualification and verification process will be recognized for their efforts and are allowed to use the Zero Net Waste logo. For those companies that go on to pursue third-party certification for their landfill reduction achievements, embarking on this program will align them for success in eventual certification.
“The Zero Net Waste Program isn’t just for companies looking for zero waste certification,” said Robert Flores, director of sustainability for Berry Plastics. “The accompanying manual is applicable to a wide variety of companies and provides the basics for how get started, as well as how to enhance existing programs that a company already may have in place.”
The Benefits of Zero Net Waste
There are a host of benefits that companies can enjoy from their zero net waste activities, both environmental and economic. On the environmental side, companies who reduce what they send to landfill are reducing their operational footprint. They are also being good community members by helping to extend the life of the landfill. The process of citing a new landfill once the old one reaches capacity can be an arduous process. Many communities emphasize the importance of recycling as a tool to extend the life of landfills. Through maximum diversion, our members can help communities achieve this.
The economic benefits of zero net waste can also be numerous. Many companies have not only found success dramatically cutting their garbage and landfill costs, but in some cases, are generating revenue from the sale of scrap materials. Other companies are using their landfill diversion success as a green marketing opportunity and market differentiator. This can translate to strengthening customer relationships and generating new business. In addition, companies that make sustainability initiatives a priority report higher, on average, levels of employee satisfaction and retention. People like working for companies that they feel are good stewards of their communities and the environment. This is a particular priority for millennials entering the workforce today.
The Right Direction For the Plastics Industry
Lastly, zero net waste efforts fit in with larger waste management goals nationally and globally. Calls for meaningful change in the way our industry manages our products throughout their life cycle have been building, reaching a crescendo recently at the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos earlier this year. During that meeting, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation released the report “The New Plastics Economy – Rethinking the Future of Plastics”, which contended that by 2050, the world’s oceans will have more plastic than fish, by weight. The report calls for “a shared sense of direction, to spark a wave of innovation and to move the plastics value chain into a positive spiral of value capture, stronger economics, and better environmental outcomes.”
This move toward a circular economy and sustainable material management (SMM) thinking is very much in line with SPI values and the reason why SPI has developed the ZNW program.
“These are values being driven by many of the major brand owners in our industry today,” notes Nina Goodrich, Executive Director of GreenBlue. “GreenBlue and the Sustainable Packaging Coalition support SPI’s Zero Net Waste Program. Providing companies the tools and resources to demonstrate leadership in landfill diversion is an important step toward reducing carbon emissions and developing a circular economy.”
While the immediate goal of the program is to drive the plastics industry toward maximizing diversion of resources into the proper recovery channels, it is our larger goal to challenge the supply chain to think more broadly about the disposition of all plastic products, from production all the way through end-of-life. Furthermore, this program seeks to strengthen the link between the makers of plastic products and recyclers, which we believe can lead to more conversations about using recycled plastics, not just recovery of scrap plastics. SPI believes the ZNW program can be a vehicle for further strengthening the role of recycling as a pillar of the plastics industry.
To learn more about the Zero Net Waste program, please visit www.plasticsindustry.org/znw.

Tags SPI, Zero Waste

Recover More Sustainability Tools

Ways to avoid food waste over Thanksgiving

Post author By user
Post date November 23, 2015
No Comments on Ways to avoid food waste over Thanksgiving

In the United States, 40 percent of food goes to waste. Thanksgiving is a celebration of family, football, and most of all, food. While we prepare for the feast, it’s also important to consider the amount of food wasted on this particular holiday. Natural Resources Defense Council’s Staff Scientist Dana Gunders explains, “During the holidays, people are often confronted with more food than they can eat, meaning food gets wasted.” Fortunately, there are many ways that you can limit the amount of food wasted at your house on Thursday.
There are many good reasons to avoid wasting food. Besides the wasted money on food that goes straight to the trash, The EPA elegantly explains all the great things that reducing food waste does for the environment:

Saves resources – Wasted food wastes the water, gasoline, energy, labor, pesticides, land, and fertilizers used to make the food. When we throw food in the trash, we’re throwing away much more than food.
Reduces methane from landfills – When food goes to the landfill, it’s similar to tying food in a plastic bag. The nutrients in the food never return to the soil. The wasted food rots and produces methane gas. Methane is a strong greenhouse gas with more than 21 times the global warming potential compared to carbon dioxide.
Returns nutrients to the soil – If you can’t prevent, reduce, or donate wasted food, you can compost. By sending food scraps to a composting facility instead of to a landfill or composting at home, you’re helping make healthy soils. Adding compost to gardens, highway construction sites, and poor soils makes great things happen. Properly composted organics (wasted food and yard waste) improve soil health and structure, improve water retention, support more native plants, and reduce the need for fertilizers and pesticides.

So as part of showing thanks to our American food bounty, consider the following strategies to help you avoid wasting it this year on Thanksgiving.

Ways to reduce food waste while planning your Thanksgiving meal

While you don’t have to get get too stressed out, it can be helpful to plan your menu more thoughtfully.

Coordinate recipes with friends and family so you don’t end up with 3 green bean casseroles (unless if you want 3 green bean casseroles!). Setting up a shared Google Doc is a great way to simultaneously plan the meal with the friends and family you’re sharing the day with.
Prepare less by cutting recipes in half. If you can’t have Thanksgiving without sweet potato casserole, but like me also “need” to make at least five other traditional side dishes, consider making a half recipe for one or all dishes, instead of full recipes. Tips for halving recipes can be found here and here.
Only buy the ingredients you need for your recipes. Buying in bulk is only really efficient when you actually need something in bulk. It’s hard to resist a two pound bag of pecans in the heat of the moment at Costco, so maybe remember ahead of time that you can get nuts by the scoop from your smaller grocery store.
Avoid impulse purchases; I don’t really need a pre-baked apple pie from the bakery section when I know we already have pecan and pumpkin pies in the works!
Understand measurement conversions for your recipes before you go to the store. If you need 10 cups of flour for all your dinner roll and pie crust recipes, remember that bags of all purpose flour are sold by the pound. So if you plan ahead by understanding any relevant measurement conversions, you can avoid buying two bags of flour “just in case.”

Consider selecting vegan or vegetarian recipes. Avoiding actual food wastage is only one part of a sustainable food system; in order to support global food security for the future, societal shifts in dietary preferences are important to consider. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) anticipates that “food production must increase by 70 percent by 2050 to feed an expected global population of 9.1 billion people with increasingly meat-dependent diets.” That’s because “animal products require 4 to 40 times the calories to produce than they provide in nutrition when eaten, mainly due to the crops they consume.” This creamy no bake pumpkin pie could be a great way to experiment if you’ve never made something vegan for Thanksgiving.
Save a turkey! Instead of eating a turkey as the main course, consider adopting one from Farm Sanctuary! The Natural Resources Defense Council estimated in 2013 that $277 million worth of turkey ended up in the trash after Thanksgiving. The resources wasted from all that turkey is “equivalent to the amount of water needed to supply New York City for 100 days and greenhouse gases equal to 800,000 car trips from San Francisco to New York.”

Ways to reduce food waste while cooking your Thanksgiving meal

Rethink how you peel and trim fruit and vegetables. It’s a tradition of French cooking to cut away the ‘unsightly’ bits of foods, such as trimming off the knob at the top of a beet or getting rid of the tops of green onions. However, this is often just a matter of aesthetics; you don’t actually have to peel everything. For example, it’s okay to leave the skins on root vegetables such as as carrots, beets, and potatoes. But you’ll likely still need to peel or trim thick squash and pumpkins, because they probably won’t soften enough during cooking. Changing these practices can decrease the amount of food that goes in the bin.
Keep an eye on your food while it’s cooking and set timers; this way, the food is less likely to burn and thus less likely to get thrown out.
Use up ingredients you may already have in your refrigerator before buying more. Sometimes, I forget I have a bag of celery buried in my vegetable crisper. If I buy more to make stuffing, I’ll be sure to use up the older bag first.
If you are using ingredients you already have on hand, remember that expiration dates on labels don’t always relate to food safety. They often are the food producer’s suggestions for peak quality. If food smells, looks and tastes okay, it probably is.
Freeze vegetable and meat scrapsto make homemade stock or broth at a later date.
If you can’t make use of scraps,compost them. The EPA has a great home composting reference here to set up a compost pile in your backyard. It’s easier than you think! Some communities also have composting facilities so you can put compostables in a bin at home to be picked up, or you can drop off your food scraps at a specific location.

Ways to avoid food waste in the dining room

Perhaps the best way to avoid food waste is to serve smaller portions. If you start with less food on your plate, you can always go back for seconds. This way, you can avoid throwing out the food left behind on your plate when you’re done. Michael Pollan says, “Most of us eat what’s put in front of us, ignoring signals of satiety; the only possible outcomes are either overeating or food waste… So if you’re serving yourself, take no more than you know you can finish; err on the side of serving yourself too little, since you can always go back for seconds.”

Reducing your food waste after the great meal is over

Get creative with leftovers so that you’re more likely to eat them. You may appreciate recipes for a Thanksgiving burrito, waffles made of stuffing, David Chang’s mashed potato spring rolls and sweet potato and cornbread hash.
If you don’t want to eat all your leftovers right away, try freezing them so you can have them anytime you want later on.
Maybe give your animal companion a special treat instead of her or his usual meal (be cautious: in addition to chocolate, dogs don’t digest onions and garlic well, and grapes are poisonous).
Donate shelf stable food items you don’t end up using. Food banks covet holiday-related canned food like cranberry sauce.
Compost your leftovers if they spoil, or if you can’t stand the sight of them any longer (most leftovers should stay fresh until Sunday or Monday).

Honor the food that feeds your family on this holiday about gratitude. We’re so fortunate to be able to avoid waste in the first place!
Happy Thanksgiving

Tags Composting, Food Waste, Thanksgiving

Recover More Sustainability Tools

EPA’s Sustainable Materials Management goals align with SPC’s goals

Post author By user
Post date November 18, 2015
No Comments on EPA’s Sustainable Materials Management goals align with SPC’s goals

The EPA has just released their new Sustainable Materials Management Program (SMM) Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2017 -2022. We think it’s a great plan and look forward to working with EPA to achieve their goals.
There are three main strategic priorities. They are:
1.)   The built environment — conserve materials and develop community resiliency to climate change through improvements to construction, maintenance, and end-of-life management of our nation’s roads, buildings, and infrastructure
2.)   Sustainable food management —focus on reducing food loss and waste
3.)   Sustainable packaging —increase the quantity and quality of materials recovered from municipal solid waste and develop critically important collection and processing infrastructure. (provide link or attach document here)
SPC’s food waste and sustainable packaging priorities link very closely with EPA’s.
In the food waste category, EPA’s Action Area 1 is:
Develop an infrastructure to support alternatives to landfill disposal of wasted food.

The SPC has been presenting recently on food and packaging waste composting strategies. We believe that composting packaging and food together will allow more effective collection of waste in food service situations and provide a next life option for products like single serve coffee pods. We believe that SPC’s role is to insure that as we develop organic infrastructure to capture food waste, we must insure that packaging is included. Current trends indicate that composting infrastructure will continue to grow while packaging will be excluded .This could limit the effectiveness of capturing food waste and reaching the landfill diversion goals.
Contamination by non-compostable packaging is a valid concern for composters. The SPC’s consumer facing How2Compost Label will be a great tool to help fight contamination and provide important composting education. SPC is working with BPI and member companies to develop the How2Compost label, an offshoot of the successful How2Recycle Label.
We recently completed a project in Charlotte, NC funded by EPA Region 4 where the goals of the project were two-fold: 1) to promote food and packaging waste (F&PW) recovery, and 2) to generate a list of lessons learned and fundamental guidance to stimulate much broader and more extensive organics and packaging composting programs nationwide.
This final report forms the framework for scaling up composting for a variety of sectors through lessons learned, best practices, and accessible guidance.
In the sustainable packaging arena, EPA’s Action Area 1 is about: Convening and partnerships: infrastructure.
One of the ideas that came out of the wrap up session at SPC Advance 2015 was Sego Jackson’s (City of Seattle) suggestion to help the MRFs get the materials they want and need. This conversation came shortly after the New York Times article “Reign of Recycling” ignited a flurry of conversations about our recycling infrastructure. Scott Mouw (North Carolina DENR) recently shared information at a Resource Recycling Conference that showed that even in established recycling markets we still aren’t getting the materials that are available for collection. From the total of what is available in specific markets for PET, Mixed Paper, and HDPE, more is going in the waste stream than is being recycled. These are easy materials to collect and recycle with established markets.
Accordingly, the How2Recycle team will be developing a campaign for “getting the MRFs what they want and need”. The idea is that we try and get brands to put the How2Recycle label on what we think are “obvious” desired materials including PET bottles, cereal boxes, laundry detergent bottles, soup cans, etc.
We are looking forward to working with our members and EPA to meet their goals in sustainable food management and sustainable packaging.

Tags Composting, EPA, sustainable materials management

Eliminate Toxicity Sustainability Tools

Safer Choice and CleanGredients – 10 years of greener chemistry

Post author By user
Post date November 11, 2015
No Comments on Safer Choice and CleanGredients – 10 years of greener chemistry

This year marks the tenth year that CleanGredients has been in operation, supporting the adoption and use of EPA’s Safer Choice Standard and product labeling program. It seems appropriate to reflect on the past and to take some stock in how far we’ve come.

When EPA first launched its partnership program in 1997, and then later the Safer Product Labeling Program, there were only a few resources available to provide trusted, third party verified information to institutional purchasers, facilities managers, and consumers about the safety of chemicals used in cleaning products. In the 1990s and early 2000s, organizations with a mission to promote formulated products with greener chemistries were focused on drafting criteria and methodologies for evaluating chemicals so that it was possible to define exactly what a “greener” chemical is. The norm at the time was for manufacturers to make claims that their products were “environmentally friendly,” “safe,” or “non-toxic” or “free of” a particular chemical, but there was little or no information to substantiate these claims. There was also no consensus among manufacturers, government, NGOs, or academia about what exactly constituted safer or greener chemicals, much less products worthy of those labels.

EPA’s Design for Environment program made a significant advancement in defining the term “safer” chemicals when they published their Master Criteria, a methodology for evaluating the inherent hazard characteristics of chemicals and what constitutes the minimum or floor criteria for meeting Safer Choice product labeling requirements. On top of this baseline screen, EPA developed criteria to help formulators and their suppliers identify chemicals with the lowest hazard within specific functional classes.

The original CleanGredients logo

By 2004 it became clear that formulators seeking EPA’s label would benefit from having greater access to information about ingredient level products that would help them meet labeling requirements. GreenBlue responded to this need in the market by working with the EPA to create CleanGredients, a database of supplier’s products that have been “pre-approved” by third party experts to meet Safer Choice criteria. The goal was to guarantee a successful outcome for formulators while making it easier, faster, and cheaper to get their products labeled.

Since 2006, EPA’s program has grown significantly, representing more than 2,000 products in six major product categories and created the Safer Chemical Ingredient List (SCIL) to provide specific guidance about the chemicals that are eligible for use in Safer Choice products. CleanGredients has also grown during that time from representing four functional classes of products to now offering suppliers the opportunity to market their products in 16 functional classes. Since 2006, the number of suppliers listing Safer Choice approved products has grown significantly as has the number of formulators using the database to shop for these preferable ingredients.

The interest and demand for safer formulated products is only increasing as evidenced by leading retailers like Walmart, Target, Staples, and Wegmans who are implementing their own chemicals policies, seeking to offer more Safer Choice labeled products to their customers.

The future of green chemistry and the Safer Choice label as an exemplary application of the principles of green chemistry look very promising and CleanGredients will be there to support the growth and success of both.