Companies that want to prove they are green are going to have to shell out lots of the other kind of green, say the makers of wheat straw-based paper.
The life cycle study used to prove that Step Forward Paper is better for the environment than traditional, tree-based paper cost Prairie Pulp and Paper about $100,000.
“It’s the best money we’ve ever invested because now you have this proof,” said president Jeff Golfman.
Golfman’s paper is 80 percent tree-free, relying on wheat straw that is pulped and processed in India and then exported to North America.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
He said the goal is to replace tree-based paper and instead use agricultural fibre that has no value to farmers and is a waste product.
The company hopes to introduce 100 percent tree-free paper next year.
It sounds environmentally sound, but Golfman and distributor Andrew Gustyn of Unisource said environmental claims are challenged by both competitors and environmental watchdogs, so they need to be well-documented.
“In a lot of cases, we’ve had criticism levelled against us from other paper companies, North American paper companies, saying you can’t be as green as (one of their products) because of the environmental impact of transporting the product from offshore,” said Gustyn, whose company is Canada’s biggest paper distributor and office supplies provider.
Golfman spent $100,000 on a life cycle study that compared his company’s paper against all of its competitors and alternatives in the market, showing that it is at least as good as 100 percent recycled paper and better than products made directly from trees.
Gustyn said the transportation impact is not as severe as many might believe because plants in India and China are much newer than North American plants and have many efficiencies and emissions controls that don’t exist in most North American plants.
Golfman also said providers of supposedly environmentally beneficial products need to satisfy professional environmentalists that they’re not just “greenwashing” the product with bogus claims.
“If you’re going to do an environmental product, you have to be endorsed by the NGO (non-government organization) community, otherwise you’ll be labelled as a green washer, and you don’t want that,” he said.
“That’s the worst thing that you can have if you are trying to promote an environmentally friendly product.”
Gustyn said Golfman’s life cycle study was top quality and all encompassing, which is why it cost so much.
Many products can be studied for less. Some products that Unisource has assessed have cost only $5,000 to study.
