General Mills Adopts Sustainable Palm Oil Policy Out Of Concern For Rain Forests

JAKARTA, Indonesia — Environmentalists on Friday praised a decision by U.S. food-maker General Mills to stop buying palm oil from companies accused of rain forest destruction – the latest in a string of multinationals to announce policy reversals.

The Minnesota-based maker of popular brands like Cheerios, Betty Crocker and Hamburger Helper said this week it would try to procure all of its palm oil from "responsible and sustainable sources" by 2015.

"We are concerned about the role of palm oil expansion in the deforestation of the world's rain forests," the company announced on its website.

Indonesia and neighboring Malaysia are the two largest producers of palm oil, used for everything from frying food to making cosmetics, candy and – when mixed with diesel – cleaner burning fuel for cars.

In recent years, advocacy groups in the United States and Europe have warned that the rapidly growing industry is destroying large tracts of forests and encroaching on the habitats of orangutans and other endangered species.

Rainforest Action Network, an environmental group that has been pushing for change, applauded General Mills' decision, saying it hoped it would "serve as a wake-up call for others in the food industry."

Already, U.S. companies Unilever, Nestle, Kraft and Burger King have announced similar shifts in policy, breaking ties with the Indonesian-based palm oil producer, PT Sinar Mas Agro Resources and Technology.

Barry Furqon, who heads the local environmental group, Walhi, said growing awareness by multinationals about the negative impact of the industry was "a slap in the face of the government."

"International consumers are expressing concern about the protection of our environment," he said. "But the government could care less."

Comments

[Nola Pellegrini]

11:22 AM on 11/10/2010

Perhaps they should just use lard. Much if it goes to waste these days while we till up land and promote monoculture with all of these vegetable oils that we use. Using lard yields better flavor and in moceration is actually healthy. Fat

[Mattjoe3]

11:51 PM on 09/27/2010

"We are concerned about the role of palm oil expansion in the deforestation of the world's rain forests,"

Shouldn't the first concern be the role of palm oil plugging the arteries of the people who ingest it?

The "government could care less" about neither.

[ngstores]

06:22 AM on 09/27/2010

Will be back often to check up on new stuff you post!
Thank you.Thermosense

[J in Seattle]

05:10 PM on 09/24/2010

great, maybe next they can stop using genetically modified grain and help preserve farm land.

[HazelPethigFan]

08:50 PM on 09/24/2010

GM preserves farmland. It allows for notill farming. Notill reduces erosion. 93% in one study (yes people study this stuff). People probably don't see too much notill while sipping cappuccinos in a very urban Seattle Starbucks.

The inefficient, labor intensive, erosion prone, dust bowl style farming that HuffPost and the rest of the left wing promotes would be a financial and environmental disaster. Why? It's all becuase the left thinks GM "may" be unhealthy. Truely one of the most bizarre stances the left has ever taken.

[jsarets]

10:12 PM on 09/24/2010

I'm not against GMO in general, but the use of GMO to engineer herbicide resistance is misguided solution to a problem exacerbated by massive monoculture.  

Weeds are already developing resistance to glyphosate, so it won't be long before the most common GMO application is rendered ineffective.  

Eventually we'll have to either abandon massive monoculture for most crops (excluding particularly hardy crops such as hemp) or revert to the irresponsible tilling techniques that cause topsoil erosion.

One possible solution is the Argentine pasture/crop rotation, in which land is alternated between 5-10 years of perennial grass pasture for livestock grazing and 5-10 years of annual crop rotation.  The grazing builds up soil organic matter so that the land can better tolerate any tilling that might be required, while reducing or eliminating the need for nitrogen fertilizer.

We can also choose more effective commodity crops, such as replacing soy with hemp, which rarely has any problems with weeds (no pun intended).  In many respects, dent corn can be replaced with oats, which among cereal grains are particularly good at choking out weeds, while also being considerably more nutritious than corn.

[Galong]

11:42 PM on 09/24/2010

Nice stereotype of all liberals, Level 1 moderator.

GM is NOT the prerequisite for no-till farming, nice try. Why don't you supply a scientific article to prove your point. Please, no articles from Monsanto. I found nothing online that said ONLY GM crops were suitable for no-till farming.

[Progress08]

01:44 PM on 09/24/2010

I'll pay 10 extra cents for my cheerios if it helps stop the destruction of the rainforest.

[janie@atthelake]

03:52 PM on 09/25/2010

Me too!

[KarlaElisa]

12:46 PM on 09/24/2010

I dont know man....is the jury really 'in' on Palm Oil, a saturated fat? The body metabolizes these differently.

Anybody have any science based info on this?

[Progress08]

01:47 PM on 09/24/2010

Dunno, but Palmitic fatty acid (44% of palm oil) is also found in cheeses and butter and we all know the good and bad of those.

[jsarets]

11:31 PM on 09/24/2010

Saturated fat is still an open debate, but the scientific consensus has been moving in the direction of considering it less harmful than previously thought.  

Many negative conclusions about saturated fat and cholesterol were erroneously extrapolated from blood serum analyses to dietary guidance.  Recent studies suggest that this link is not as straightforward as previously believed.  

The consumption of fructose/sucrose and ethanol have been shown to have stronger correlations to blood serum triglycerides and cholesterol than the consumption of saturated fats and cholesterol themselves, and the metabolic pathways for these phenomena have been identified.

Furthermore, saturated fats are immune from the oxidation which affects unsaturated fats and causes the formation of cancer-promoting free radicals.  In particular, the excessive consumption of omega-6 linoleic acid from certain seeds oils such as corn, soybean, sunflower, safflower, cottonseed, and grapeseed oils has been correlated with cancer.

The more we learn, the more it seems that saturated fat is not as bad as we thought, and sugar is even worse than we've ever thought.  

We've also learned that the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids is perhaps the most significant nutritional guideline for consuming fats.  The ideal ratio is 2-4 times as much omega-6 as omega-3, but typical American diets have ratios from 10 to 50.  

Unfortunately, the breakdown of polyunsaturated fats into omega-6 and omega-3 components is rarely provided on Nutritional Facts labeling, so it's very difficult for consumers to make practical use of this latest understanding of fat metabolism.

Besides fats that are high in saturates (meat, eggs, dairy, palm, coconut) or monounsaturates (olive, avocado, canola, peanut), some highly polyunsaturated seed oils contain favorable w6/w3 ratios: flaxseed, hempseed, borage seed, and walnut, while canola also has a very good ratio.

I stock butter and canola oil (baking/frying), extra virgin olive oil and hempseed oil (salads/flavor), avocado oil (high-temp stir-fries), and sometimes lard (biscuits/crusts/tamales).  

Lard has a particularly unfortunate reputation.  It has less saturated fat than butter (for what itsworth) and is actually similar in composition to palm oil.  Lard can be used in shelf-stable baked goods just like palm oil (or partially hydrogenated soybean oil), but pigs and their feed aren't grown in rainforests.  Today, most of America's lard production is used for making soap, but it's making a comeback among educated "foodies" (I hate that term!) such as myself.

[KarlaElisa]

12:31 AM on 09/25/2010

Fascinating. Thank you for this in depth reply to my question. Very useful info here.

[plzchuteme]

09:14 AM on 09/25/2010

Unfortunately, the lard marketed today is not the lard of your grandma's pantry. The manufacturers "mess," with it to the point that it is no better than shortening.