ECO-FRIENDLY INGREDIENTS – WHY IT MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE

Reminiscing about a classic TV show from many years ago, I would like to pose a hypothetical question to the members of this panel: We have asked 100 people: “What is a defining quality of an eco-friendly ingredient?” – What do you reckon would be the most common answer?

I am certain you will hear something about biodegradability, and many will argue along the lines of “made from renewable resources”, upcycling, circularity or “made with green chemistry”. With the diverse assortment of buzzwords you would get as answers, it would be difficult to find a handy definition of the term that would satisfy everybody. In fact, it appears to be easier to define what an eco-friendly ingredient should NOT be: petrochemically-derived for sure, but also toxic, produced with objectionable resources such as GMO materials, and certainly we would not distinguish persistent pollutants with this label.

But what happens when some of these concepts which we so instinctively place on opposing sites of the argument are in fact not in disagreement? Let me suggest some scenarios, which call into question some of our established beliefs on the topic:

1. Imagine there is a most valuable substance found in the leaves of a certain tree. The substance possesses a highly intricate molecular structure – one of the kind giving chemistry students headaches on the night before the exam, and one where a research group specialized on natural ingredient synthesis spends years on crafting a synthetic pathway, only to end up with 100 milligrams of the substance in question. Now suppose that this substance can be extracted from the leaves in different fashions:
   • Using petrochemically derived hexane, which can be recycled and reused
   • Using biobased ethanol, but due to low solubility the amount needed is tenfold that of hexane
   • Using supercritical carbon dioxide, which first requires the resources to build a CO2 generator and then copious amounts of energy to run it
   • Using energy intensive steam distillation, which unfortunately destroys 70% of this heat sensitive compound in the process

Which extraction method would you deem the most eco-friendly?

2. In a second scenario, assume that an ingredient is manufactured from materials of 100% plant origin by means of green chemistry principles. Undoubtedly we already visualize a good marketing angle, but are these facts already enough to call the ingredient eco-friendly? As it so happens, the chemical modifications may have drastically changed the properties of the molecule, leading to the charming classification of “Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects” or similar. And as if this would not be enough, imaging the modifications also had a detrimental effect on biodegradability, making the ingredient a persistent chemical in our ecosystems.
3. While not being decidedly denounced “unsustainable”, the skepticism towards GMO organisms is deeply rooted within the eco-conscious community. But what if we entertain the thought that an ingredient made from GMO bacteria can not only be perfectly safe – but in fact the GMO-based process may also possess the lowest carbon footprint of all possible manufacturing pathways leading towards this substance. Would this not make the genetically modified bacterium the tool of choice for making this ingredient in the most eco-friendly way possible?

Answers to these questions are not always as black-and-white (or in this case: green-and-grey) as we would hope them to be, and the eco-labels who issue certifications for sustainable ingredients do not always offer the flexibility needed to allow for a useful evaluation. The nuances matter – and in a world where simple answers are a most sought-after currency, it is high time we acknowledge the complexity of the terms eco-friendly, sustainable, and the like, which roll off our tongues effortlessly, and slip into our marketing dossiers so easily these days.