I’ve just re-read the ‘Labels Round 1’ post, and apart from being a little surprised that I wrote it so very long ago (the day job and life in general having taken a busy turn), I’m pleased to say that we’ve now sorted the labelling out. We’ve negotiated the price, done a test design, and are waiting for our sample labels to arrive. We did consider dropping labels altogether, but as we’re not planning to do much in the way of

conventional advertising we need some way of letting people know that what they are looking at is just so brilliant compared with everything else out there. It’s hard to see how we could alert people to our brilliance in any other way. Plus our coconut tags will do a good job of alerting people to how natural our stuff is.

Branding has been around for a very long time, and it’s how most of the world shops. We call each other by name, and we also need to name our products – I’m not quite sure I get the anti-branding thing, it doesn’t make much sense to me when you analyse it logically. Where would we draw the line? Would we stop giving our children names? Or our T-shirts? Or just the companies and people who make our T-shirts?

But I digress: having received lots of samples and information we decided to not to go with any of the options we looked at in Labels Round 1, and here’s why:

The leather labels were by far the most controversial. Even though I found examples of organic leather products on the internet, actually getting hold of any organic leather proved impossible. Neither I nor the leather label guy could find any in the UK. Added to this, although embossed leather labels were the absolute initial winners in terms of looks, application and wear and tear, in the end the controversy of the meat and animal farming industry wasn’t something we wanted to get tangled up with. As animal farming apparently accounts for between 14 – 22% of the world’s green house gas emissions, leather, even as a by-product, would be the least eco-friendly option available. (Take a look at Meatless Monday Campaign for interesting environmental statistics – Paul McCartney has also recently launched Meat Free Mondays the UK.)
Vegan ‘leather’ is still not an option because it’s just synthetic plastic, nothing remotely natural or environmentally friendly about it.

The other leather option, E-leather, proved to be a surprising dead end as well. I couldn’t get anyone at the end of their mailbox to give me any real information about E-leather. Although it can be embossed and someone is apparently making labels from it, the recycled leather is re-coloured with a PU (polyurethane) coating. Whether this is ‘good‘ PU or not, or how the colouring works, I‘ll never know because I couldn’t get any information about, well, anything really, despite a good few emails. All things considered, we can’t work with anyone who doesn’t want to be transparent, and although recycling should in principle be a good thing in this case it appears to result in something that is highly processed and chemically heavy: the chemicals already present in the leather off-cuts are still present after recycling, the recycling itself requires intensive processing, and finally it is PU coated. This means that neither the leather itself nor the PU coating would fulfil one of our main criteria – to have as small a chemical footprint as possible.

As we’re well on our way to achieving a zero toxic product, we need to make sure we don’t mess this up with the packaging and labelling. This isn’t some arbitrary requirement; we believe it’s going to become a very real necessity in the future.
To reduce the heavy environmental burden of heating and cooling inefficient houses, building regulations require houses to be more insulated and ‘sealed’ than ever before. The building regulations proposed for 2012 in the UK will mean that new houses will be almost completely sealed, with proper passive air exchange units to keep the air clean and fresh. Houses in Germany are already being built like this, and although this is good in terms of heat efficiency, carbon footprint and oxygenated rooms (assuming you‘ve installed the necessary passive heat/air exchanger), it means we all will need to be a lot more careful about the toxic off-gas of furniture, fireproofed furnishings, paint, plastics, treated wood etc. The most energy (and cost) efficient way of heating or cooling a house is to use a lot of good insulation, seal it as best you can, and install a low-energy air replacement unit (not an air conditioning unit, but a unit that draws fresh air in, heated or cooled to room temperature, to replace the old stale air). Houses being build like this in Germany need little or no extra heating even during harsh winters. The air quality can, however, become polluted by the toxic off-gas from the objects in your house. Although this is happening in your home right now, it’s not as easy to notice if you have a leaky house. Chemicals in the paints you use, the fireproofing on almost all the furnishings you buy, and the chemical compounds in everyday plastics and fabrics all emit a toxic gas-off. Walk into any newly refurbished shop or aeroplane and take a deep breath. What can you smell? Mmmm, lovely toxins. We associate this smell so much now with things that are new and nice, that we even like the smell.
Even if you don‘t understand the need to reduce the chemical footprint of all the stuff we make and use for the sake of the planet (and the fish, the bees, the bears etc…), it’s easy to understand why we need to reduce the toxicity of things for the sake of our health. As our world becomes ever more toxic, the resultant build up of toxins in our body due to prolonged exposure is slowly undermining our immunity to disease. Is there any wonder that cancers and the like are on the increase?

Anyhow, back to the labels…

The best labels from Labels Round 1 proved to be the organic cotton woven labels. We can get unbleached undyed organic cotton for the base, with the information woven in recycled polyester. We’re leaving these as our back-up in case something goes horribly wrong with coconuts.

After an unbelievable amount of research and a little bit of inspired thinking we have settled on coconuts as our raw material of choice. The coconut tags aren’t completely perfect because we were looking for a sew-able label and not a swing tag, but as they tick all the other boxes it’s a compromise we’ll most likely make. They look great, visually they ‘fit’, and they emphasise at a glance that our products are completely natural. From what we can tell, and the patient label-maker has been very happy to answer all my intense questioning, we have a swing tag that is completely natural, doesn’t have to be ‘made’ as such, and is a by-product that would usually go to landfill. It’s easy to cut and doesn’t require any ’finishing’ other than polishing. He’s sending us some samples of our logo on different coconut shells so we can choose if we prefer them smoother or rougher; lighter or darker.

Did I mention – they look really good!

Whilst waiting for some product samples to arrive, I started looking at labelling – we’ll need some. As a way of branding they cannot be surpassed: an instant reminder of who made your stuff. Labelling must also be the least invasive and most cost effective form of advertising there is, and we all know everything needs some advertising – from the timetable of the local yoga classes to how much life Coke adds.

Ideally labels should last as long as the product (which in our case could be difficult to accomplish as our stuff will last generations), and they should somehow ‘fit’ the product.

“Labels can’t be a big deal” I think, naively as it turns out.

I begin by sending out an email to about 15 woven label producers in the UK quite specifically asking if they make organic labels, and if so, could they please email some details to me. Better still, could they send me a sample of one of their organic labels. I received in the post 15 batches of labels, none of which were even made of natural fibres, let along being organic.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt I emailed them back thanking them for the samples, and asking if they had any organic ones. I discovered that no-one is doing woven labels from natural fibres in the UK as the machines are gauged to take a stronger polyester thread. (If they mislead me please let me know…). A few said they could silk screen onto organic fabric, if I could supply the fabric. As I’ve silk-screened before I know that ‘natural’ inks aren’t going to last very long, and so would defeat the purpose of labelling in the first place. However at the back of my mind I wondered if soy ink would print on to organic cotton, and how long it would last.

Instead of panicking, we agreed on a label of last resort, and started a second wave of google searching (remaining mindful that each Google search apparently uses half the energy as boiling a kettle of water (7 grams of CO2), although the official Google blog claims it’s closer to 0.2 grams).

Our fall back label wasn’t really anything novel or remotely ethical, just an ordinary posh natural-looking synthetic fibre woven label that would stand up to lots of wear.
Then chance led us to consider a radically different solution: leather. After all it’s natural. The idea of an ethical company using leather? I knew there would be a few challenges to the idea, but as I’m not shy of debate I thought I‘d test the idea.

My dad was recently in Turkey where they visited a leather factory, and because the factory used vegetable dyes (more on vegetable dyes later…), they were led to believe this was an environmentally friendly factory. My dad loves leaving the beaten track to discover what people are hiding, and so he walked down the river next to the factory. He found toxic waste all along the riverbank, effluent running directly out of the factory. Alarmingly people were still using the river (where else could they go), children were playing in it, and animals were drinking from it (except for the dead animals that is). Water pollution is one of my bugbears, and my personal reason for trying to be as organic as much as possible (no – its got nothing to do with the taste, its got to do with the pollution…)

It appears that even if leather is dyed using vegetable dyes, tanning leather is hugely toxic. Assuming the leather comes from a country with some health and safety policies in place (although most of our leather does not) one can assume that the animals have been killed humanely (if one leaves aside the question of whether growing animals for slaughter is humane in the first place), and one would also assume that there are some guidelines in place to prevent toxic pollution of the environment. However even with these regulations in place it appears the land around tanneries cannot be used for agriculture when the tannery closes. And we all know, what starts on the land ends up in the water, and then rains down upon us.

Here is the list of ingredients typically used to turn leather from skin to hide. To remove the hair sodium sulfide, sodium hydroxide, sodium hydrosulfite, arsenic sulfide, calcium hydrosulfide, dimethylamine and sodium sulphydrate is used. To prepare for tanning sodium chloride and sulphuric acid is used. To prevent bacterial growth biocides such as pentachlorophenol are used, and then the actual tanning uses chromium sulfate (chromium).

Leather, it seems, is far from natural.

Disposing your worn out leather is just as dangerous as making it. Old leather when burnt in council incinerators produce highly toxic and carcinogenic chrome +6 levels. If sent to landfill it will not decompose, and the chromium leaks into the soil.
Some facts to ponder as you put your shoes on: A leather jacket bought recently on the UK high street was found to contain over 50% of the recommended level of chromium. Studies have shown that cases of leukaemia among residents near tanneries are up to five times greater than what is considered to be normal. According to one study (although I cannot find who did the study), more than half of all testicular cancer victims work in tanneries. (Still feel like wearing those leather jeans?)

So ordinary leather is out of the question – no matter how hard wearing it may be.

Given that leather used to be tanned with smoke, I wondered if there was such a thing as smoke-tanned leather, and brilliant, there is! It’s called organic leather.

It appears that organic leather has none of these toxic by-products. Apparently you can eat it (although it might be tough). Organic leather is always a by-product from animals raised organically. It is then cured with smoke and/or tannins occurring naturally in plants and trees instead of chromium and other minerals. A slower but nicer process.

There is very little certified organic leather available, so this might be an expensive option, and I’d be interested to go to an organic tannery and look into the process before I believe there is no toxic output (having been caught out before when believing vegetable dyes meant there were no toxins involved).

In the interest of animals I also looked into vegan leather, but found that it’s made of things like acrylics, polyamides and PVC. Good for animals, but no good for the environment (and therefore surely no good for animals).

If I follow the motto: reduce, reuse and recycle before creating anything brand new, e-leather looks like an interesting option. It’s a process created by a British inventor and entrepreneur that re-uses old leather and tannery leather waste by shredding the fibres and then rebinding them over canvas. Their website claims they use an environmentally friendly process (for which they have received all kinds of eco-awards), that reuses the steam produced to run the process. However although I get that this is better than landfill or burning, I wonder if those chemicals remain in the new product, or if they are released in the fibre-making process. And from their website it seems the e-leather is all re-dyed. So, a good idea for recycling, but perhaps not for us. The only way to be sure is to get some fact sheets and samples and have a look. Whilst e-leather email’s me back, I’ll try to find one of these (elusive) organic leather producers. The leather route is obviously going to be slow process.

I’m not sure if leather labels are going to ‘fit’ our very environmentally and animal friendly products, and so you may wonder (as indeed some of my friends have) why I haven’t already given up on the leather option. My reason is that in terms of its chemical and carbon footprint organic leather in small amounts may be a far more environmentally and indeed animal friendly option than organic cotton. There is an argument some use regarding the meat industry that animals killed in the production of food is essentially inhumane and must be avoided. However, as they are happy to eat vegetables, it appears that killing countless millions of animals (known as pests) in the raising of vegetables is fine. In my mind the size of the animal being killed surely can’t be a factor. Ethically speaking an aphid has as much of a right to life as a cow. We appear to have a bias towards some animals (panda bear charities raise far more money than snake charities, and no-one is particularly concerned for the health of rats). Although producing organic cotton is unquestionably better than producing toxic non-organic cotton, the production and delivery of it still creates a carbon and toxic footprint that ends up polluting habitats and water systems, and in so doing destroys the homes and lives of countless animals. It simply moves the killing out of sight, it doesn‘t prevent it. Not looking at all of this thoroughly for fear of upsetting people would be to apply a green-wash, or a compassion-wash. (ok, relax, that’s my rant over…).

As it happens while looking into pesticide use I found a label company that has made the kind of machinery necessary to weave organic cotton labels, and they also make labels from recycled polyester. They are a pretty big company so trusting them isn’t easy, but I guess that also means they have the money for ‘good’ R&D. They also do biodegradable plastic, reforestation and use ‘eco-processes‘ whatever that might mean. They’re sending some samples and fact sheets as well.

So, no decision as yet, I’ll wait for the new wave of samples and fact sheets to arrive, try to find an elusive organic leather producer (Google has proved unhelpful) and see how the discussion unfolds. I’m interested to see if anyone who would usually avoid leather would be swayed by my arguments that the out-of-sight and ’unintentional’ killing of small animals is no better than outright killing of larger animals. Not just in theory, but in practice. Leave comments below…

I’ll take it all into account, and let you know what unfolds in ‘labels round 2’

To be continued…