Whole Foods rejects Tar Sands oil

US Fortune 500 companies - Whole Foods and Bed, Bath & Beyond - reject Tar Sands oil from their transportation fuel

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, Feb. 10 /CNW/ - Major US grocery chain Whole Foods Market today announced that it will no longer buy transportation fuel linked to Canada's Tar Sands and has already switched suppliers in favour of a less dirty fuel source. Bed Bath & Beyond, a home accessories retailer, also released a new policy encouraging transportation providers to avoid high impact fuels such as those from refineries using Tar Sands.

These are the first corporate responses to ForestEthics United States-based Tar Sands campaign, which launched six months ago with a letter to Fortune 500 companies warning that continued use of transportation fuels from Canada's Tar Sands puts their brands at risk.

"Here is a clear sign that corporate America is starting to turn its back on dirty oil from the Tar Sands," said Nikki Skuce of ForestEthics, a North American environmental group known for convincing Victoria's Secret to stop sourcing its paper from Canada's endangered forests. "This is yet another example of the world embracing cleaner energy while Canada is expanding, investing in and heavily promoting Tar Sands oil."

Whole Foods, which has hundreds of outlets across the United States, was able to track its supply chain for transportation fuels and found Tar Sands oil was being used in its fuel supply. The total vehicle miles driven by Whole Foods' internal fleet each year is approximately 21,615,000. Fuel moved to a new Tar Sands free supplier accounts for about 10 per cent of that amount.

"The issue here is that major US retailers want to do right by their increasingly green-minded consumers and protect their brands," added Skuce.

According to Whole Foods' new policy, "Whole Foods Market is committed to working towards the elimination where possible of its use of fuels produced by refineries that use feedstock from Canada's Tar Sands. This decision has already led to a change in the fuel Whole Foods Market uses for one of its distribution centers."

According to Bed Bath & Beyond's new policy, "Of current and particular concern, in light of this policy statement and these objectives, are fuels produced by refineries taking feedstocks from the Canadian Tar Sands. Fuels from these refineries are deemed to have higher than normal GHG footprints and environmental and social impacts. We will be following up with our service providers on this issue, through our bid process and those that we have update meetings with to continue to remind them of our position and concern."

Eating healthy is overrated

Eating healthy is overrated



The funny business of making you eat more greens, while charging you more green for the privilege.

Admittedly, I'm a weak person.

I'm big on making plans, not so great at follow through. I always make New Year's resolutions, and my track record is spotty. This year I resolved to no longer text while driving, (lasted 34 days!) and not to use bad words (still doing well on this one).

Lent starts a week from today. I was raised Lutheran, and I always try to find something to give up for 40 days to show some sort of sacrifice to help me ponder the meaning of the season. This year I plan to give up snarkiness. I will begin a quest for my own Holy Grail —positive sarcasm.

Does it even exist? Wish me luck.

I may be forced into silence until Palm Sunday, which might not be such a bad thing.

The odds of me succeeding aren't good. For example, in a pre-Lenten run-up, I decided to go five days this week without any caffeine, alcohol, dairy, sugar, or refined flour, as a sort of "cleanse".

I know, insane.

Here in California, I'm surrounded by businesses promoting the benefits of healthy eating. Friends who've foresworn all but the purest, most organic foods rave about how much better they feel, how great their skin is, their energy level, blah blah blah, though I notice some of them catch colds a lot. Entire industries are built up to support this health kick. Just look at Whole Foods' [WFMI 28.65 0.41 (+1.45%) ] stock, up over 150 percent in a year.

So last weekend I went to Whole Foods and spent $230 buying out the produce section along with a bunch of other organic stuff. As I loaded a head of cabbage into the shopping cart, my husband quipped, "I bet half of this stuff gets thrown out." I went home and made homemade vegetable stock. I baked bread without sugar, butter, eggs, or white flour. I soaked beans, made stew, and made a plan of attack.

Monday morning, I brewed myself a cup of herbal green tea, had a few pieces of pineapple, and a slice of homemade bread with some organic peanut butter.

It was a complete and utter failure.

Like people who buy the "Abs of Steel" DVDs which get used once (uh, that would be me), I discovered that eating healthy is overrated. Bravo to the businesses that convince us to give it a go, only to fail and move onto the next fix-it program.

How quickly did I cave? How morose, angry and dull did I become? The journey was chronicled on Twitter:

7:30a Feb. 8th: Day 1 no caffeine. Miserable.

8:27a Feb. 8th from @BrianSozzi: (Jane) say it ain't so :( Just concluded the daily Starbucks iced venti redeye.

8:28a Feb. 8th: @briansozzi hate you.

3:41p Feb. 8th: No coffee. No booze. I'm at Lassen's Nat. Foods. "I'll have a plate of alfalfa sprouts & a side of mashed yeast"--Alvy Singer "Annie Hall"

3:43p from @PattyEdwards: Jane, I'll offer the same deal to you that I offer to pregnant friends: I can be your designated drinker.

3:46: @pattyedwards hate you.

4:46p Feb. 8th: At the gym. Feeling like Betty White.

2p Feb. 9th: No caffeine/alcohol/dairy/refined makes my tweets REALLY BORING. Pretty soon I'll be talking about bid-asks on Alcoa.

3p Feb. 9th: @debsmith doing no sugar and no dairy. made my own bread. i hate myself.

5p Feb. 9th: Ok. I'm done. I can't take it. Gonna have a Jersey Mike's sub and a beer. Tomorrow: coffee. My 5-day healthy eating plan lasted 41 hrs.

6:30p Feb. 9th: That is much better.

6a Feb. 10th: Coffee. Coffee coffee coffee coffee coffee. Mmmmmmmm.

The spectacular collapse was even noticed by WebNewser.

So, what did we learn?

One, it's not very smart to give up everything at once.

Two, Jane is pretty weak—five days really isn't that long when you consider some poor guy survived 27 days in earthquake rubble in Haiti.

Third, what's wrong with a little coffee and wine? Plus, coffee and wine are full of antioxidants, right? They're actually good for you, right?

As one Twitter follower told me, everything in moderation, including moderation.

Anyone want a head of cabbage?

Nutrition, obesity, and vending machines

Nutrition, obesity, and vending machines


Federal push to get rid of junk food from school menus and vending machines
By Billy Loftin
Tuesday, February 09, 2010 at 10:42 p.m.


AMARILLO, TEXAS -- As a part of the First Lady Michelle Obama's "Lets Move" campaign she calls for better nutrition in schools. Recently the Administration and Congress have began to work on banning low nutrition items from school menus and vending machines.

Texas has been infamous when it comes to obesity levels across the state, but it turns out we may be a little ahead of the nation when it comes to eliminating junk food from school vending machines.

Locally, several school districts including Amarillo I.S.D., Panhandle, Bushland, and Pampa have all pulled these items from menus and vending machines.

The Texas Department of Agriculture took the lead back in 2004 by starting a four year program to get rid of the junk food.

At that point Amarillo school nutrition officials started looking into the issue very seriously and took action.

"We decided as a nutrition department a couple of years ago to take out things like candy bars, things that weren't as nutritionally as sound as other things and replace those with more healthy options," said Brent Hoover, Food Service Director at A.I.S.D.

I also spoke to a child care expert and nutritionist to see how important it is for parents to extend the healthy habits started at school and provide healthy nutritious food at home.

"I think parents set the example, they need to set the example of eating healthy foods making those healthy choices because the kids learn by seeing their parents," said Katie Green, Child Care Administrator YMCA.

The nutritionists we spoke with said that snacking is inevitable; you don't have to ban sweets, but allow them in moderation.

Focus on stocking healthy options like yogurt, pretzels, and peanut butter. They also encourage exercise and family activities along with a healthier diet to help take a bite out of obesity.

For more information on the nutrition programs for the state of Texas, check out the link provided below for the Texas Square Meals website.

Related Links

Food safety regulations eat away at small farmer wallets

Food safety regulations eat away at small farmer wallets

Recent outbreaks of foodborne illnesses have some grocery stores demanding tougher safety regulations, but the standards may make it more difficult for East Tennessee farmers to stay in business.

"We're trying to get ready for this food safety on fruits and vegetables," Steve Longmire said, pointing to construction on a new packing facility for his Grainger County tomatoes.

Longmire remembers growing tomatoes with his grandfather.

His family has been in the tomato growing business since the 1940s, but a lot has changed since then.

"All the plugs we do out there need to be this kind - weatherproof," Longmire said.

That's because the facility needs to be hosed down daily in order to pass a food safety audit now required by one of the vendors where Longmire sells his tomatoes.

Another requirement is that produce cannot be exposed to open air once it's packed.

"What they're doing on the front of the dock is enclosing it to where the trucks, when they back up, won't be loaded into open air," Longmire added.

The food safety audits are becoming a common requirement for major grocery stores, following outbreaks of E. coli and salmonella.

The audits don't differentiate between large industrial farms and small family farms like Longmire's, so small farmers are having to make major changes to the way they've grown, packed, and sold their produce for years.

"They're looking at every single section of their operation and basically having to change it," said Grainger County UT Extension Agent Anthony Carver said.

For Longmire, it's coming at a baseline cost of $150,000, which doesn't include hiring a new employee to oversee all the paperwork that's required.

"We're going to do whatever it takes to get in line with it, but it's hard," Longmire said. "For years and years, we've looked after our stuff. We're getting classified the same as a guy who grows 500 or 1,000 acres. Here we are growing 15 acres. To the best of my knowledge, no one's gotten sick off our product and same with Grainger County."

Right now, all the work is a choice, but it may soon become mandatory for everyone.

Both the U.S. House and the Senate are working on legislation that would make food safety audits mandatory for everyone who sells produce.

"If this comes down to the small producers, they'll stop producing, because they will not go into debt hundreds of thousands of dollars to comply. They can't afford to do so and continue to be a farmer," Carver said.

EU squabbles about farm subsdidies

EU New Member States complain about agricultural subsidies From USDA FAS

As the debate about future levels of farm support in Europe intensifies over the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget after 2013, the new member states face stiff competition for their own domestic markets from more heavily subsidized commodities from Western Europe. This fact has brought the EU's Eastern partners together to advocate for equality in the CAP and Eastern EU member state agricultural ministers met in Poland February 5 to discuss an action plan. If anything, the movement points to a trend of support for a higher CAP budget overall in Europe as the more heavily subsidized Western nations may not part willingly with their farm payments so equalization will mean more cash for farming.

Latest plan to cut farm subsidies likely dead - AP

Latest plan to cut farm subsidies likely dead - AP

By STEVE KARNOWSKI (AP) – 2 hours ago

MINNEAPOLIS — If history and the political lineup are any guides, President Barack Obama's latest effort to cut subsidies for wealthy farmers likely will fare no better than his first try — or his predecessor's attempt.

Congress twice overrode President George W. Bush's veto of the 2008 Farm Bill. When Obama tried reforming the system last year, his proposal was dead on arrival on Capitol Hill, where farm state lawmakers largely control the agriculture committees.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said he'd oppose significant changes to the current Farm Bill. To Peterson, most criticism of subsidies is based more on ideology — whether it be small-farms-are-better or free trade — than sound policy considerations.

"We're not smart enough to decide how big a farm should be, even on the ag committee," Peterson said. "And that's really not our job. Our job is to make sure we have an affordable, abundant food supply in this country."

Others, though, said as federal deficits soar above $1 trillion a year, it's time to take another look.

"Farm subsidies are America's largest corporate welfare program," said Brian Riedl, an analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Critics argue subsidies to wealthy farmers aren't justified, especially when crop prices are relatively high and farmers' incomes tend to be higher than the national average. And they ask why federal money flows primarily to growers of five crops — corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice — while livestock, poultry and produce farmers get by without subsidy checks.

Peterson said he plans to hold hearings on the 2012 Farm Bill starting as early as next month, but he downplayed the likelihood of radical changes to subsidy policy.

Like most subsidy backers, Peterson said food production requires farms of all sizes, and that farmers need a safety net to protect their investments against unpredictable markets and weather.

Congress hasn't tried to significantly wean farmers off subsidies since the ill-fated Freedom to Farm bill of 1996. After commodity prices fell and caused a crisis, Congress returned to a more traditional approach with the 2002 Farm Bill, which also provided the framework for the 2008 legislation.

The 2008 bill prohibited all subsidies to anyone whose non-farm adjusted gross income exceeds $500,000. They also ended a major "direct payments" program for anyone with more than $750,000 in adjusted gross income from farming.

And the Agriculture Department recently said it will work with the Internal Revenue Service to stop payments to people who exceed the income limits after learning 2,702 millionaires received farm payments from 2003 to 2006 and were probably ineligible.

But critics say the 2008 bill largely maintained the status quo. Steve Ellis, spokesman for Taxpayers for Common Sense, called the lower income limits a "Swiss cheese cap," easy to avoid with accounting changes.

The 2009 crop is the first subject to the new rules, and data aren't available on whether the changes have significantly altered who gets subsidies.

The Environmental Working Group maintains a searchable database detailing how 75 percent of farm subsidies have gone to 10 percent of the beneficiaries in recent years, though the data goes only through 2007. Ken Cook, the research group's president, said he's skeptical the 2009 data will show much change.

"We thought it was a pretty phony reform," Cook said.

But Rob Joslin, president of the American Soybean Association, said the income caps affect many family farms, especially those including livestock operations.

"I think we need to let this Farm Bill run its course," Joslin said.

The Obama administration said its proposed farm subsidy cuts would save $2.3 billion over 10 years. Its new budget proposal would lower the cap on direct payments from $40,000 per person per year to $30,000. It would also reduce income eligibility limits over three years to $250,000 for non-farm adjusted gross income and $500,000 for farm adjusted gross income.

But most think the proposal is dead.

Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., said farmers have already based their business decisions on the existing legislation.

"Changing the rules in the middle of the game would be detrimental to their operations and would cost us even more jobs in rural America," Lincoln said.

Still, some critics said the deficits and changing political winds could give them an opening.

Sallie James, an analyst with the libertarian Cato Institute, said it will be interesting to see whether anti-Washington sentiment, shown by the rise of the Tea Party movement, helps turn farmers against government supports.

"If subsidies were eliminated markets would adjust," the Heritage Foundation's Riedl said. "Nobody would starve and farmers would stay in business. Obviously people aren't going to stop buying food."