So as Soapers; is Palm oil vegan?

[lmosca]

When thinking about palm oil at a small local scale, there are many viable alternatives.
While policing on sustainable palm oil is extremely important, I always try to see the bigger picture.

So, thinking on a worldwide scale, I ask myself, can we switch to a crop that causes lesser problems?
The answer, right now, is No.

Palm oil has the highest yield / acre of any other mass produced oil crop.
We are talking about 3.5x the yield of coconut oil, or almost 7x the yield of soybean oil.
That is, if we wanted to cut out completely palm oil production, we would have to free up 7x more landmass for soy cultivation. Or 3.5x for coconut production. This does not take into account that both coconut and soybean are "cooking oil", while palm oil is mainly a "biofuel oil". This inevitably will cause a shift in prices for food oils, where developing nations will have to pay more for their source of calories, on a long term scale it would be like a dramatic increase in the price of rice (the most consumed source of carbs).

A further reasoning is that soybean oil cannot be cultivated in the tropics, hence, the problem will be transported elsewhere (US, for example), magnified, and leaving other countries without a centuries-long established industry.

So, besides pushing the issue on policing sustainable palm cultivation, boycotting and ranting about the oil palm cultivation is actually the least environmentally-friendly thing somebody could do.
As of now.

In 50 years, maybe, we will switch all of our oil production to algal ponds, with a yield far higher than palm oil, and so there will not be the need to discuss which oil is good or bad.

 

[dixiedragon]

I think vegan has a definition that's pretty cut and dried - does not use animal products. Any other factors regarding sustainability, etc, are not related to the definition of vegan. You could certainly argue that palm oil is not sustainable or animal friendly - but that doesn't make it not vegan.

 

[penelopejane]

, while palm oil is mainly a "biofuel oil". This inevitably will cause a shift in prices for food oils, where developing nations will have to pay more for their source of calories, on a long term scale it would be like a dramatic increase in the price of rice (the most consumed source of carbs).
.

This is not the case. Palm oil is used in Australia for just about all processed foods. “Vegetable oil” in processed food here is generally palm oil. If someone uses something other than palm oil they are at pains to specify it “canola oil” etc.

There is no current requirement to label the type of oil used except to state that it is ‘vegetable oill’

 

[earlene]

This is an interesting link, which lists many things palm oil is used in, as well as listing ingredient names for palm.

http://greenpalm.org/about-palm-oil/what-is-palm-oil/what-is-palm-oil-used-for

 

[toxikon]

I don't have anything to add here, but I just want to say that it's fascinating to read everyone's opinions on this and I love that everyone is being so thoughtful, mature and respectful of other's opinions on a rather delicate subject.

 

[BroknArrw]

Yes I am also pleased to get so much feed back and the respect everyone has for each other. It's been very educating.

 

[lmosca]

This is not the case. Palm oil is used in Australia for just about all processed foods. “Vegetable oil” in processed food here is generally palm oil. If someone uses something other than palm oil they are at pains to specify it “canola oil” etc.

There is no current requirement to label the type of oil used except to state that it is ‘vegetable oill’

It's all a matter of scale, Penelopejane.
While Palm oil is used extensively for food, that is not its main use.
Of the total vegetable oil production, Palm accounts for about a quarter of all the oils, and about 2/3 of the Palm oil is used up by the chemical industry (lubricants, surfactants, fine chemicals, biofuel, etc...). Only 1/3 of the Palm oil is edible palm oil, and roughly half of it goes into livestock feed.

For soybeans and rapeseed oils, the situation is inverted, that is most of them are used for food, and rest by the chemical industry.

This explains how much more complicated the chemical industry is. For example, we could shift the paradigm, and use palm oil only for food. The chemical industry will then consume more soybean and rapeseed oil for themselves, depleting the food uses of those two oils. On the other side, consumers will start complaining about the increased prices of soybean and rapeseed oils and they will look around, trying to find a cheaper alternative...
palm oil. :think:

 

[BrewerGeorge]

I am about to offend some people but I think people that would not use palm in soap but would eat products made with Palm, use cream made with Palm derivatives are just hypocrites. Practice what you preach...

It brought tears to my eyes when I saw what was going on in Indonesia with the Orangutans and that is why I support a foundation like The Masarang Foundation in Indonesia who are doing something about it.

Sometimes I think all this brouhaha! is a 1st world problem. I live in a 3rd world country (Developing Economy I believe we are called now) where people don’t know where their next meal is coming from, where mothers beg on the road to feed their children, where if it a choice between your child dying of hunger or going to work on a palm plantation which would you pick?

I am from a palm producing country and I see first hand the agony and toil that goes into planting all these palm and how a slight deviation in weather, exchange rate or any shift can mean hunger and starvation for many families et alone being able to afford school fees.

I am not excusing those that are killing Orangutans because we definitely don’t kill Orangutans in Nigeria but am guessing with the lands been cleared for agriculture some animals are bound to go so would that mean that a country like Nigeria where like 85% of the population cook with Palm oil should starve?

This is an issue with a wide gray area so...... But to each his own....

Well said! I'm sure I'm about to offend some people, but I think that veganism itself is a 1st world affectation that would fall by the wayside instantly in the face of ANY real deprivation.

...

If folks are going to classify things as non-vegan since animals were killed to grow those vegetables/trees... they are going to run out of anything to eat. Having spent time on farms during plowing/harvesting times... a lot of animals die. Waaay more than you'd think.
...

I came to this thread originally to post something like this. Anybody ever run over a nest of baby rabbits with their lawnmower? It's pretty common. Now multiply that times hundreds of thousands of acres of mice, moles, voles, etc living in the corn fields, bean fields, etc. The idea that no animals are killed for our food is fiction.

...
Palm oil has the highest yield / acre of any other mass produced oil crop.
We are talking about 3.5x the yield of coconut oil, or almost 7x the yield of soybean oil.
That is, if we wanted to cut out completely palm oil production, we would have to free up 7x more landmass for soy cultivation. Or 3.5x for coconut production. ...

That's another awesome point. This is a necessity right now, there is no viable alternative at the world scale.

 

[dixiedragon]

@BrewerGeorge - I read some place that if the rest of the world consumed meat at the same quantity per capita as Americans, we'd have to triple our caloric production just to keep everybody at the same nutrition/food level as now. While I agree that strict vegetarianism is (mostly) a modern practice, our ancestors were pretty close to being vegetarian up until the Industrial Revolution or so, simply because most animals were needed for labor or to produce wool or milk or eggs. Medieval peasants actually had healthier (though not plentiful) diets b/c they were mostly eating plants and the food they ate was very fresh, vs nobility eating meat, milk, etc that was just this side of spoiled (which is why they used a lot of rich sauces).

 

[earlene]

I came to this thread originally to post something like this. Anybody ever run over a nest of baby rabbits with their lawnmower? It's pretty common.

Yes, I have, with our riding lawn mower, and it was horrifying to me the first time it happened. They just seem to run in the wrong direction when they go to run away. I hated that part of mowing here in the midwest. We have lots of rabbits and I love them; don't want to kill them. I used to mow my son's lawn after they moved, but they have tenants now, so I don't have to anymore, thankfully. My husband does our lawn and rarely tells me if there are problems unless a tire goes flat.

 

[BrewerGeorge]

@BrewerGeorge - I read some place that if the rest of the world consumed meat at the same quantity per capita as Americans, we'd have to triple our caloric production just to keep everybody at the same nutrition/food level as now. While I agree that strict vegetarianism is (mostly) a modern practice, our ancestors were pretty close to being vegetarian up until the Industrial Revolution or so, simply because most animals were needed for labor or to produce wool or milk or eggs. Medieval peasants actually had healthier (though not plentiful) diets b/c they were mostly eating plants and the food they ate was very fresh, vs nobility eating meat, milk, etc that was just this side of spoiled (which is why they used a lot of rich sauces).

I don't disagree that lacto-ovo vegetarianism with occasional meat is the best diet. And I have no problem with traditional vegetarianism, either. I'm talking strictly of veganism as it is practiced now. Very telling, to me, is the fact that there are NO traditional vegan diets all throughout history or the world. Even Jains eat dairy. The simple fact is that without modern supplements and/or transportation of foods it is impossible to eat a healthy vegan diet. It simply cannot be done.

And I think you're romanticizing the medieval peasant diet greatly. It is generally agreed that hunter-gatherers ate much more varied and healthy diets than modern man, but agriculture changed that. Variety disappeared to be replaced with staple grains, and the medieval period was the nadir of this phenomenon. I'm talking about maybe your 9th through 14th century European peasant here. From slightly after harvest in the fall through early spring crops coming in, they lived almost exclusively on carbohydrates. Whatever grains grew well in their area, and hopefully some peas for protein if it would grow. The things they were able to salt, pickle or somehow otherwise store helped them maintain some level of vitamins through those months, but things like scurvy and rickets were real dangers.

 

[alatos]

New to the forum,

I have to say I'm impressed at the civility of this thread... may be the most civil thing I've ever read concerning veganism/animal rights online. I see where the OP is coming from: can you really count a product as "vegan" (which usually carries the connotation of putting animal welfare first) that necessitates the killing of many animals to produce? Seems hard to argue with that, because even if it isn't in the "letter of the law" when defining veganism, it's certainly in the spirit of the law for most vegans.

But then, what product would be vegan? Most any vegetable produced on a market scale means measures taken against pests. Pests could be worms, birds, deer, rabbits, beetles, or any other number of animals farmers need to control for. And what about organic fertilizers? Organic fertilizers contain many animal by-products (bone, feces, etc). And what about the countless animals killed when fields are plowed and harvested? It's a very tricky topic. I don't have a good answer, and I'm certainly not accusing anyone of anything here. This has been one of the most "grey-area" topics I've come across.

 

[Primrose]

I think the thing is, regardless of the strict definition of vegan or vegetarian, there are people within these communities that have their own ethics and take it to their own extent. Certainly vegans anyway. I have vegan friends who own and ride horses; other vegans are totally opposed to riding horses. I mentioned on a different thread that I know some vegans who wish to use my goat milk soap, because I own the goats, they know they are looked after and treated well etc. though other vegans wouldn't agree at all, this doesn't make them any less vegans in my mind or theirs. There's also a soapmaker with a blog who is vegetarian, but uses lard (or tallow, I cant quite remember) in her soaps, because its about utilizing every part of the animal, using something that would otherwise be considered a waste product, and the animals are going to be killed anyway for their meat - not slaughtered specifically for their lard.

Definitely a grey area