Wallet Mouth

Where’s the Star power?

Energy Star’s new electricity-saving computer specifications are now in effect, but guess what: only 117 desktop and laptop computers are entitled to sport the sticker, as Floppyhead.com has pointed out. And not one of them is an Apple.

Every single magazine for which I freelance uses Macs. I myself have a Dell Dimension E521, but although Dell has three machines on the list, mine is not one of them. Apparently the Dells, all OptiPlexes, are mostly targeted to the business, education, and government markets.

How disappointing.

Pangea deserves props for unabashed support of fair labor

What a great feeling to find an e-commerce site that states in big letters on its home page that it sells “only goods made in countries where labor laws or unions are in place to protect the workers! We don’t sell any products made in China or other countries known for sweatshops.”

The site is Pangea, a.k.a. the Vegan Store. I’m not a vegan, but I buy vegan shoes (and avoid leather in general) because of my deep antipathy toward industrial cattle operations and their harmful effects on the environment. Plus, quite frankly, I feel bad for the cows.

Pangea sells not only shoes but all sorts of things: cleaning products, pet supplies, cruelty-free cosmetics and body care, etc.

How does it vet its merchandise? I traded email with Pangea employee Phil, who told me that the company’s main source of information is its founder, Shari Kalina. “Over the past 11 years she’s had to do so much research and have so many discussions with various experts that she has probably learned more than can be found at any single website,” he wrote. “For any unfamiliar ingredient, she’ll use the internet as a starting point and then get in touch with as many people as necessary for us to be confident about the ingredient.”

Which tells me that Pangea must be a pretty small operation. But it’s one I’m happy to support. In fact, I’m eyeing a pair of red No Sweat high-tops right now...

Amuse-bouche: bottled water

PepsiCo’s Aquafina to come clean on its source. Link.

Flak jacket

Yesterday I was shopping at my local REI, and I couldn’t help but notice how many of the windbreakers I was trying on were made in China.

Since I’ve been blogging about such issues of late, I decided to ask whether REI uses an auditor to ensure that the Chinese-produced apparel it sells is made in factories that adhere to decent labor standards. The clerk I approached said she thought so but wasn’t sure, so she paged a manager. The manager said yes, there was some type of auditing, but he didn’t know any of the details, like whether REI did it itself or hired an independent certifier. He suggested that I call or email the company to get in touch with someone who worked in the area of social responsibility.

While I was glad that my inquiry didn’t meet with blank stares, it’s a shame that even a retailer that identifies so highly with green and worker-friendly principles doesn’t have structures in place to disseminate this type of information to customers on the floor.

Bull in the China shops

Concerns about sweatshops and ethical-labor practices have been on the contemporary public radar ever since the early to mid-1990s, when the Kathi Lee Gifford child-labor fiasco and other scandals erupted in the mainstream media.

I’ve been learning as much as I can about these issues recently, and I was excited to discover the existence of auditing organizations such as the Institute for Marketecology, Social Accountability International, and Verité that conduct independent inspections of factories and other types of production facilities to ascertain whether certain codes of conduct are being met. If the facility passes muster, it gets a certified stamp of approval.

What a great idea: a way for consumers to ensure that they’re not subsidizing exploitative business practices, and for responsible corporations to put their money where their mouths are. I’ve even started pestering companies to encourage them to take part in such certification programs.

So imagine my dismay when I came across this Business Week article about Chinese factories that deceive auditors in order to be certified. It’s well worth reading in its entirety, but the gist is that nowadays it’s commonplace for factories in China to maintain extra sets of books containing falsified records, and to distribute scripts for workers to recite if they are questioned by inspectors. Not only that, but “a new breed of Chinese consultant has sprung up to assist companies … in evading audits,” the article states.

Pretty depressing, huh? But not entirely surprising.

I’m still digesting the contents of this article, but a few thoughts come to mind. One is that, as much as I sometimes enjoy heaping scorn on big business and calling large companies “evil,” it’s not always as black-and-white as that. After all, big players such as Disney, Nike, and Wal-Mart regularly use auditing organizations, and the large-scale pressure these companies provide has undoubtedly helped check some of the worst abuses. The system is certainly imperfect, but at least these institutions are in place; that’s the first step to meaningful reform.

Another thought is just how much, for me, China represents so many of the complexities, contradictions, and shortcomings of the global economy. I’ll no doubt be thinking about that tonight when I see Manufactured Landscapes, a new documentary about Edward Burtynsky, whose awe-inspiring photographs capture just how massive industry in China is.

Tippling with a conscience

... or, as Mr. Wallet Mouth calls it, “malternative energy.” 

Anyway, my favorite beer is green! The July/August issue of the Sierra Club’s magazine reports that the Sierra Nevada Brewing Company, based in Chico, Calif., is supplementing its hydrogen fuel cells with solar panels that will together generate 75 percent of the brewery’s electricity, along with heat for the beer-making process. Cheers to that!

 

Who’s less evil?

In my last couple of posts, I’ve pondered the relative evilness of Kraft, Kellogg, and Safeway in the context of breakfast cereal. Today I’m going to try to get some clarity on the question by looking at a few resources for data on the companies.

I’ve been meaning to blog about Responsible Shopper for a while now. A project of Co-op America, it summarizes the social and environmental responsibility (or lack thereof) of some 180 companies and brands. While the site doesn’t profile Kraft directly, it does link to a U.S. campaign that calls on consumers to boycott the company and let its executives know about their opposition to its use of GMOs.

Responsible Shopper does profile both Kellogg and Safeway. And GMOs are mentioned in both write-ups. Safeway is also criticized for “maintaining unfair terms of trade” and “its struggle to keep employee benefits at a minimum.” 

                                                    ~~~

Ethiscore, which I’ve blogged about before, actually has a Breakfast Cereal category among its reports (granted, it’s one of the subscriber-only reports, but hey—I’m a subscriber, and I have no qualms about sharing). And unlike Responsible Shopper, it provides numerical ratings.

It just so happens that among the 35 entries in the cereal report are Grape-Nuts and Kellogg’s Breakfast Cereals. Now, personally I think it’s a bit odd to compare one specific cereal with a whole family of cereals (especially since Grape-Nuts is a member of the huge Post family), but I’ll take what I can get. And here’s what I got: Grape-Nuts scores a 4, and Kellogg’s Breakfast Cereals gets a 9. This is on a scale of 1 to 20, mind you, so neither number is very good: 0 to 4 is “very poor,” and 5 to 9 is “poor.” 

Ethiscore gives Grape-Nuts the biggest black marks for environmental reporting, animal rights (“use of gelatin”), workers’ rights (“concerns over Indonesian palm oil supplier”), irresponsible marketing (“marketing unhealthy food to US children”—hmm, I get the feeling it is talking about Kraft, not just Grape Nuts), and political activities (WHO lobbying). It’s also criticized for using genetically engineered ingredients.

Kellogg’s biggest dings are for environmental reporting, irresponsible marketing, and political activities (“possible GMOs” are also mentioned, but keep in mind that Ethiscore is based in the U.K., where GMO restrictions are much stronger than in the U.S.).

                                                    ~~~

Now check out this cool resource I found last week: Covalence SA is a Geneva-based company that plots the ethical reputation of some 200 multinationals over time using inputs from companies, media outlets, and NGOs, consumer organizations, and the like (in fact, anyone can submit data). It does this via its EthicalQuote system, which lets you pick a sector and specific companies within it, and view and compare graphical representations of their reputations. The only drag is that data from the past 12 months isn’t included in the free, public version of EthicalQuote—the up-to-date version will set you back $3,800(!). Warning: I couldn’t get EthicalQuote to work in Firefox, only Internet Explorer.

To get EthicalQuote’s assistance on my cereal quest, I selected the Food & Beverage sector, highlighted Kraft and Kellogg, hit the Draw button and then the Fit button. Bingo: From mid-2002 until mid-2006, the green line representing Kellogg generally follows an upward slope—as opposed to Kraft, which dives way down until early 2005, when it starts heading upward. In the end, Kellogg has clearly beat out Kraft on reputation.

A neat feature of the tool is that if you grab and move the vertical red line over the graph, positive and negative data summaries pop up. So I got to read (among many other items) that in 2004, Ethical Corporation magazine wrote that Kellogg was named in a report by the U.K.’s Consumers’ Association complaining that manufacturers were contributing to diet-related health problems by “lacing” their products with unhealthy ingredients.  

                                                  ~~~

So, to summarize, Responsible Shopper isn’t a fan of Kraft, Kellogg, or Safeway. And since both Ethiscore and EthicalQuote (neither of which mention Safeway) give Kellogg higher ratings than Kraft, I’ll consider Kellogg the less evil company. But that doesn’t mean I think they’re grrrrrreat.
 

Speaking of cereal...

And whatever happened to that Grape-Nuts clone known as 7 in the Morning cereal, made by Kashi, a company with a decidedly more eco-friendly image than Kraft or Safeway? I used to buy it, but it quietly disappeared some time ago.

Time to call another 800 number...

A Kashi customer-service rep named Phil told me that the cereal had been discontinued, because it didn’t have adequate consumer response.

“That’s too bad,” I told him. “I loved it. And now the closest thing to it is Grape-Nuts, which is owned by Altria, which, you know, is Philip Morris. And I don’t really want to give them my money.”

“Well, you should know that we’re owned by Kellogg now.”

“Really?” I asked. “For how long?” 

“About  six years.” 

“Oh.”

I must have sounded crestfallen, because Phil proceeded to let loose with a slew of reassurances: “We operate separately from them. They’re in Michigan, we’re in La Jolla. They let us do our own thing, they respect our core values as a lifestyle company, and we’re not very involved with them at all.

“I mean, they do make some money from us. But we’re allowed to make our own decisions. We are a natural company. All our ingredients are manufactured in the U.S., all our products have our seven whole grains, and we offer three organic products. We are a natural company, and we’re going to keep it that way. Can I send you some coupons?”

Uh, sure.

And so the plot thickens. Ruminations on the independence of smaller companies bought by giant companies to come...

Cereal offenders

Yesterday I woke up with the sinking suspicion that the breakfast cereal I was about to eat contained toxins from China. (I just can’t seem to get off the topic of food lately.) I think it was an aftereffect of hearing Michael Pollan on radio show City Arts & Lectures last month. He related an anecdote about a food producer who had to order flax seeds from China after a bad crop in the U.S. The seeds arrived quite dirty, and the guy decided to test the soil that was collected from the cleaning process. The result? Heavy metals galore.

So before pouring my Grape-Nuts onto my Straus yogurt, I called Post’s 800 number and asked whether any of the cereal’s ingredients were non-domestic, and if so, where they came from. Nope, they’re all domestic, and the company has a policy of listing any foreign ingredients on the box.

Well, that’s a relief. But I still feel uneasy about having Grape-Nuts on my shelf, because Post is such a huge company. It’s gotta be evil in some way, right? In fact, Post isn’t even a real company anymore. It’s owned by Kraft, which is a subsidiary of Altria, formerly known as Philip Morris. Definitely some evil to be found in there.

Truth be told, having Grape-Nuts on my shelf is a bit of a fluke; I usually buy Safeway’s less-expensive version of the cereal, which bears the unfortunate name of Crunchy Nuggets. But Safeway is also huge. How do I know it’s any less evil than Kraft/Altria? 

Nonprofit nails tuna companies with fishy practices

Have you ever bought Dolores brand canned tuna? If so, you may have unwittingly subsidized dolphin-killing fishing practices. Not that you would have known, because the product would have had a “Dolphin Safe” label on it.

An article in the latest issue of Earth Island Journal details a case of illegal non-dolphin-safe tuna importation and fake labeling on the part of PINSA, Mexico’s largest tuna processor. Cans of the fish ended up on the shelves of supermarket chain Food Lion.

Thankfully, this story has a happy ending. A complaint from the International Marine Mammal Project, an Earth Island Institute project, resulted in the seizure of a truckload of the tuna at the U.S.-Mexican border and a fine to the importing company. Food Lion has stopped selling Dolores tuna and renewed its pledge to buy only dolphin-safe tuna.

The same article describes a similar case in which IMMP monitors found that one of the 382 companies participating in the organization’s Dolphin Safe program was buying tuna from a fleet that didn’t comply with program standards. After an ample warning period, Asiservy cannery was removed from IMMP’s list of dolphin-safe tuna companies. Major importing associations have been advised of its delisting and are expected to stop purchasing the tuna.

It’s a good reminder of the important role nonprofits play in the realm of consumer activism.