I shall be giving a presentation in May at the upcoming World Tea Expo
entitled “Tea’s Carbon Footprint – Saint of Sinner?” touching on for
example: sustainability of production, greenhouse gas emissions from
fertilizer use and manufacture type, use of renewable energy, energy
efficiency, food miles, etc. This talk is pitched mainly at the tea
trade itself –- but I am curious to know how much this aspect is also
of interest to well informed tea consumers and whether it would ever
influence your choice of tea type or origin? So, how far would you
sacrifice your green tea to be green?

Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 2, 9:06*am, Nigel > wrote:
> I shall be giving a presentation in May at the upcoming World Tea Expo
> entitled “Tea’s Carbon Footprint – Saint of Sinner?” touching on for
> example: sustainability of production, greenhouse gas emissions from
> fertilizer use and manufacture type, use of renewable energy, energy
> efficiency, food miles, etc. *This talk is pitched mainly at the tea
> trade itself –- but I am curious to know how much this aspect is also
> of interest to well informed tea consumers and whether it would ever
> influence your choice of tea type or origin? *So, how far would you
> sacrifice your green tea to be green?
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

I pretty much have already shifted to organic tea, not so much for my
own sake as for the sake of the workers in the field. Does this
make sense? Toci

my guide: if i like the flavor i drink/buy it

Nigel > writes:

> I shall be giving a presentation in May at the upcoming World Tea
> Expo entitled “Tea’s Carbon Footprint – Saint of
> Sinner?” touching on for example: sustainability of production,
> greenhouse gas emissions from fertilizer use and manufacture type,
> use of renewable energy, energy efficiency, food miles, etc. This
> talk is pitched mainly at the tea trade itself –- but I am
> curious to know how much this aspect is also of interest to well
> informed tea consumers and whether it would ever influence your
> choice of tea type or origin? So, how far would you sacrifice your
> green tea to be green?

I can't quantify how much I would sacrifice, but I'm interested in the
issue(s). In general, I'm relieved to know that the stuff I'm
obsessed with is dehydrated near the source and doesn't need to be
shipped by air. Do you intend to make your presentation generally
available at some point?

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

I view tea as an agricultural crop. Its been around so long I think
most of the factors you mention have been optimized. I dont see
anyway around the most expensive cost food miles to me in the US. I
understand the term Fair Trade which seems to be more of an Indian
issue than other countries. I dont buy into the term Organic which
means most likely no pesticides on plant but includes herbicides on
ground. Most of my puers have the European import standards printed
somewhere. I think none of this means much to the commercial tea
consumer. To the extent I care it wouldnt make much difference in
what I buy. I see a new paradigm emerging, direct to consumer. In
China nothing is more than a China Post shipment away. Even third
world countries have good postal infrastructure. I see native
commerce sites like TaoBao springing up that can handle international
payment which is the biggest weakness of TaoBao. I really cant
believe in the carbon footprint because there are too many people. We
can postpone but the world cant even handle the crappers of people
when it levels off at 10 billion even if we read by candlelight let
alone the other necessities.

PS Im old school, the less mechanization involved the better. I saw
DLH All In This Tea castinate Chinese tea producers they dont need
workers picking through the grade. Id be a lot happier with my teas
if I knew they were hand produced.

On Mar 2, 8:06 am, Nigel > wrote:
> I shall be giving a presentation in May at the upcoming World Tea Expo
> entitled “Tea’s Carbon Footprint – Saint of Sinner?” touching on for
> example: sustainability of production, greenhouse gas emissions from
> fertilizer use and manufacture type, use of renewable energy, energy
> efficiency, food miles, etc. This talk is pitched mainly at the tea
> trade itself –- but I am curious to know how much this aspect is also
> of interest to well informed tea consumers and whether it would ever
> influence your choice of tea type or origin? So, how far would you
> sacrifice your green tea to be green?
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 2, 10:06*am, Nigel > wrote:
> I shall be giving a presentation in May at the upcoming World Tea Expo
> entitled “Tea’s Carbon Footprint – Saint of Sinner?” touching on for
> example: sustainability of production, greenhouse gas emissions from
> fertilizer use and manufacture type, use of renewable energy, energy
> efficiency, food miles, etc. *This talk is pitched mainly at the tea
> trade itself –- but I am curious to know how much this aspect is also
> of interest to well informed tea consumers and whether it would ever
> influence your choice of tea type or origin? *So, how far would you
> sacrifice your green tea to be green?
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

Good question, and one I do to some extent care about... but my answer
would be little to none. It's not because I don't want to be "green"
it is because I think too much has been made of many small areas (like
this) and the big, most important areas get by scott free.

As for fertilizers and manufacturing, I would like it to be totally
safe and non-toxic. That doesn't necessarily mean "organic." The
entire process of tea has been around for a long time and is about as
green as it gets as-is. Being essentially dehydrated it is very light
and easily transported, with little impact.

I'm an avid outdoorsman, I love nature and I make as little impact on
nature as possible when hiking/camping. I don't care about trendy
labels and movements though that are mostly a combination of "rich"
guilt and fad... I care about real impact. Like continuing to sell
Yukon XL's or Hummers (well maybe not much longer), like not utilizing
natural gas effectively, like letting companies off with a small fine
instead of requiring action... to name a few. Tea is about as natural
and refined as it gets for the most part, even today.

- Dominic

Thanks group. Some good views and good ideas and some muddled
thinking and illogical wish fulfulment. It is the latter ones that
are particularly helpful in focusing my thoughts.
How about these as further thought provokers?
1. To any who believes tea tends to be intrinsically natural and
environmentally friendly; in Sri Lanka "about 7.1kWh of energy is
required to produce one kg of black tea - more than the energy
requirement of steel production at 6.3 kWh/kg". (quoted from Small and
Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy and Environment - Tea Sector.
Asian Inst of Technol 2002.)
2. To devotees of burning renewable wood fuel instead of coal and oil
(this includes myself): Sri Lankan tea factories emit 26,000 tons of
SO2 annually due to the burning of rubber wood as fuel - at a rate of
0.1g SO2 per kg of tea. India emits only 0.02 g/kg despite large use
of coal.
3. Nitrous oxide (NO2) is a 300x more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
It is principally produced by nitrification of fertilizer by soil
fungi and bacteria. Fertlizer Nitrogen loss as NO2 is positively
correlated with soil moisture (tea likes it wet) and dose rate.
Application of N fertilizer on African tea is approximately 100
units. Typical application on Japanese tea is 800 to 1,000 units.

Nigel at Teacraft

Here is my thought provoker. Tata makes so much money on Indian teas
they now make the worlds cheapest car. Its more profitable to expand
than reinvest.

Jim

PS I now know the reason Japanese teas make me so lightheaded.

On Mar 3, 1:13 am, Nigel > wrote:
> Thanks group. Some good views and good ideas and some muddled
> thinking and illogical wish fulfulment. It is the latter ones that
> are particularly helpful in focusing my thoughts.
> How about these as further thought provokers?
> 1. To any who believes tea tends to be intrinsically natural and
> environmentally friendly; in Sri Lanka "about 7.1kWh of energy is
> required to produce one kg of black tea - more than the energy
> requirement of steel production at 6.3 kWh/kg". (quoted from Small and
> Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy and Environment - Tea Sector.
> Asian Inst of Technol 2002.)
> 2. To devotees of burning renewable wood fuel instead of coal and oil
> (this includes myself): Sri Lankan tea factories emit 26,000 tons of
> SO2 annually due to the burning of rubber wood as fuel - at a rate of
> 0.1g SO2 per kg of tea. India emits only 0.02 g/kg despite large use
> of coal.
> 3. Nitrous oxide (NO2) is a 300x more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
> It is principally produced by nitrification of fertilizer by soil
> fungi and bacteria. Fertlizer Nitrogen loss as NO2 is positively
> correlated with soil moisture (tea likes it wet) and dose rate.
> Application of N fertilizer on African tea is approximately 100
> units. Typical application on Japanese tea is 800 to 1,000 units.
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 3, 1:13*am, Nigel > wrote:
> Thanks group. *Some good views and good ideas and some muddled
> thinking and illogical wish fulfulment. *It is the latter ones that
> are particularly helpful in focusing my thoughts.
> How about these as further thought provokers?
> 1. To any who believes tea tends to be intrinsically natural and
> environmentally friendly; in Sri Lanka "about 7.1kWh of energy is
> required to produce one kg of black tea - more than the energy
> requirement of steel production at 6.3 kWh/kg". (quoted from Small and
> Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy and Environment - Tea Sector.
> Asian Inst of Technol 2002.)
> 2. To devotees of burning renewable wood fuel instead of coal and oil
> (this includes myself): Sri Lankan tea factories emit 26,000 tons of
> SO2 annually due to the burning of rubber wood as fuel - at a rate of
> 0.1g SO2 per kg of tea. *India emits only 0.02 g/kg despite large use
> of coal.
> 3. Nitrous oxide (NO2) is a 300x more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
> It is principally produced by nitrification of fertilizer by soil
> fungi and bacteria. *Fertlizer Nitrogen loss as NO2 is positively
> correlated with soil moisture (tea likes it wet) and dose rate.
> Application of N fertilizer on African tea is approximately 100
> units. *Typical application on Japanese tea is 800 to 1,000 units.
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

Hey if everyone agreed then there would be little to discuss

I actually did not know those stats you mentioned, and I fully respect
and trust your information. I'm sure modern methods to produce the
maximum amount of tea do employ many wasteful and harmful tactics.
Those I am fine with stopping or curtailing as I stated initially, I
also understand though that it can't all be hand processed as it was
(and is in some cases). There is a balance point, and I believe that
"greening" it all up is just taking it a step too far. A baby step of
maybe slightly reducing waste or changing processes where easily cost
effective and with appreciable, fast, ROI would be my suggestion. To
expect a massive overhaul would do little but to burden or put out of
business the smaller guys who cannot afford to make huge changes so
someone a continent or two away can feel a bit better about themselves
while they happily drive the SUV to Walmart to buy some peaches in the
middle of winter. My statement was more about taking on the bigger
issues with deeper pockets first. I'm sure much more steel is produced
much more wastefully than tea each year.

I was not angered or trying to be dismissive, I hope it didn't come
off that way. And best of luck with the talk!

- Dominic

On Mar 3, 2:13*am, Nigel > wrote:
> Thanks group. *Some good views and good ideas and some muddled
> thinking and illogical wish fulfulment. *It is the latter ones that
> are particularly helpful in focusing my thoughts.
> How about these as further thought provokers?
> 1. To any who believes tea tends to be intrinsically natural and
> environmentally friendly; in Sri Lanka "about 7.1kWh of energy is
> required to produce one kg of black tea - more than the energy
> requirement of steel production at 6.3 kWh/kg". (quoted from Small and
> Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy and Environment - Tea Sector.
> Asian Inst of Technol 2002.)
> 2. To devotees of burning renewable wood fuel instead of coal and oil
> (this includes myself): Sri Lankan tea factories emit 26,000 tons of
> SO2 annually due to the burning of rubber wood as fuel - at a rate of
> 0.1g SO2 per kg of tea. *India emits only 0.02 g/kg despite large use
> of coal.
> 3. Nitrous oxide (NO2) is a 300x more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
> It is principally produced by nitrification of fertilizer by soil
> fungi and bacteria. *Fertlizer Nitrogen loss as NO2 is positively
> correlated with soil moisture (tea likes it wet) and dose rate.
> Application of N fertilizer on African tea is approximately 100
> units. *Typical application on Japanese tea is 800 to 1,000 units.
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

Can I get from this that Indian and African tea is better
environmentally than Japanese and Ceylonese tea? And that this is
true for all estates? Toci

On 3 Mar, 15:05, dxt178 > wrote:

> Hey if everyone agreed then there would be little to discuss
>
> I was not angered or trying to be dismissive, I hope it didn't come
> off that way. And best of luck with the talk!

Dominic, absolutely no offence taken. At this stage I am but blotting
paper, compiling viewpoints and opinions. All are welcome.

Nigel at Teacraft

Between tea origins there are huge differences in their environmental
credentials - be they defined by measures of "sustainability" or
"carbon footprint" or "corporate responsibility". Similarly there is
a very big range, good to bad, between estates. Certainly broad
country averages hide the real picture revealed when you get down to
the nitty gritty of the supply chain "footprint" company by company.

Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 3, 3:26*pm, toci > wrote:

> Can I get from this that Indian and African tea is better
> environmentally than Japanese and Ceylonese tea? *And that this is
> true for all estates? * * Toci- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Mar 5, 3:54*am, Nigel > wrote:
> Between tea origins there are huge differences in their environmental
> credentials - be they defined by measures of "sustainability" or
> "carbon footprint" or "corporate responsibility". *Similarly there is
> a very big range, good to bad, between estates. Certainly broad
> country averages hide the real picture revealed when you get down to
> the nitty gritty of the supply chain "footprint" company by company.
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

One major question I have that I didn't have time to get into until
now is about exactly this and the previous statement about the massive
energy consumption, etc. I'd imagine that the huge energy cost has to
actually be about as efficient as could be in reality, why would a
fairly low-margin product being produced in less economic areas choose
to simply waste large amounts of anything (energy, pesticide,
resources, etc.)? It would seem logical that they would do just enough
to process it and ensure a solid yield and no more. I can't see the
point or benefit of excess here.

Sustainability I think is built in. To me that is a non-issue for the
most part with tea. Carbon footprints don't mean much to me, that's
just a buzzword with little behind it... the rain forest has a huge
carbon footprint by definition. The concept is flawed at best IMO.
Corporate responsibility is another that in this frame of reference
does little for me. The huge conglomerates I can see, but estates or
small growers have very little to do with any of this.

I'd love to see tea produced with no toxic chemicals in any part of
the chain, actually no additives at all for color or any other reason.
I'd like to trust I'm not just steeping out every last drop of some
pesticide along with my gong fu. Outside of that I think my biggest
concern is for the actual workers. I'm much more interested in them
being paid fairly, worked fairly, and treated fairly which is an area
I could see as being exploitable in any range from conglomerate to
small grower. If those two things were assured, I'd be perfectly happy
with the "greenness" of my cup.

- Dominic

On Mar 6, 6:34*am, dxt178 > wrote:
> On Mar 5, 3:54*am, Nigel > wrote:
>
> > Between tea origins there are huge differences in their environmental
> > credentials - be they defined by measures of "sustainability" or
> > "carbon footprint" or "corporate responsibility". *Similarly there is
> > a very big range, good to bad, between estates. Certainly broad
> > country averages hide the real picture revealed when you get down to
> > the nitty gritty of the supply chain "footprint" company by company.
>
> > Nigel at Teacraft
>
> One major question I have that I didn't have time to get into until
> now is about exactly this and the previous statement about the massive
> energy consumption, etc. I'd imagine that the huge energy cost has to
> actually be about as efficient as could be in reality, why would a
> fairly low-margin product being produced in less economic areas choose
> to simply waste large amounts of anything (energy, pesticide,
> resources, etc.)? It would seem logical that they would do just enough
> to process it and ensure a solid yield and no more. I can't see the
> point or benefit of excess here.
>
> Sustainability I think is built in. To me that is a non-issue for the
> most part with tea. Carbon footprints don't mean much to me, that's
> just a buzzword with little behind it... the rain forest has a huge
> carbon footprint by definition. The concept is flawed at best IMO.
> Corporate responsibility is another that in this frame of reference
> does little for me. The huge conglomerates I can see, but estates or
> small growers have very little to do with any of this.
>
> I'd love to see tea produced with no toxic chemicals in any part of
> the chain, actually no additives at all for color or any other reason.
> I'd like to trust I'm not just steeping out every last drop of some
> pesticide along with my gong fu. Outside of that I think my biggest
> concern is for the actual workers. I'm much more interested in them
> being paid fairly, worked fairly, and treated fairly which is an area
> I could see as being exploitable in any range from conglomerate to
> small grower. If those two things were assured, I'd be perfectly happy
> with the "greenness" of my cup.
>
> - Dominic

Nigel, Dominic, et all,

I have been reading the discussion with interest, but could not manage
time earlier to post.
The issues raise by you are indeed nobel, and thought provoking. May I
add a few facts and put up a few questions, which may be of interest.
These are all based on the Indian Tea Industry, which please note:-

Each hectare of Tea Plantation gives an yeild of 2000 Kgs. of Tea
(Average).

The quantity of Nitrogenous fertilizer applied to field is directly
proportional to the crop harvested per hectare. Only what is removed
by harvesting is added back, and no more. Phosphorous is @ half the
amount of Nitrogen and Potash is applied only after testing the
available potash status in the soil.

In a well maintained plantation, there is vrtually no sunlight
penetrating to the ground, so no weeds, and thus, no or minimum
herbicides.

Only pesticides recommended by the Tea Research Asociation or UPASI,
at recommended dilutions, and harvesting holiday is clearly defined
for each pesticide.

Each hectare of Tea has a population of 16000 Plants (Average) : Can
its contribution to the environment be calculated?

Each hectare also has nearly 600 Shade Trees, which are essentially
Leguminous, and thus fixes nitrogen in the soil: Can its contribution
to the environment be calculated?

Where ever wood is used for burning in the driers (very rare), it is
grown on the estates, and is continously replanted.

Estates which burn Coal use 1 Kg Coal per Kg of Tea produced. However,
many estaes in Assam now have piped natural gas.

The Axial Flow fans of the Withering Troughs, Rolling Tables,
Rotorvanes / BLC, CTC machines, Fermenting Machines and the Driers are
indeed power guzzelers, but can not be avoided. In my experience, the
Sorting machines use the minimum power. Yet, this is not the true
reason for high power consumption. Each estate needs to supply power
to Water Pumps, Irrigation facilities, Staff and Labour Quarter,
School, Bungalows, Hospital, Street Lights, and leave a provision for
theft of Power. The Governmental supply is at best a standby in most
of the Tea growing areas. Some estates do not have any government
supply at all, even today. Hence, heavy Gen Sets are the only answer.


Tea Cheers!
Jayesh S Pandya

Jayesh

Many thanks for the data and views for the Indian tea industry. The
footprint of even adjacent gardens can differ widely - foe example if
one uses coal and the other managed timber (replaced one for one),
even if one use NO3 fertilizer and the other uses NH4 fertilizer. I
am looking toward making a tea carbon footrpint model that can take
all the various inputs a garden or company is using - to produce an
overall measure. From this result to recommend mitigation by way of
energy efficiency or adjusted agronomy. I hope you - and others -
will continue to contribute data, ideas, views and criticism.

For those interested in vox pop polls I have one ongoing at:
http://polls.linkedin.com/poll-results/23100/xoptm

Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 6, 1:26*pm, teapandya > wrote:
>
> Nigel, Dominic, et all,
>
> I have been reading the discussion with interest, but could not manage
> time earlier to post.
> The issues raise by you are indeed nobel, and thought provoking. May I
> add a few facts and put up a few questions, which may be of interest.
> These are all based on the Indian Tea Industry, which please note:-
>
> Each hectare of Tea Plantation gives an yeild of 2000 Kgs. of Tea
> (Average).
>
> The quantity of Nitrogenous fertilizer applied to field is directly
> proportional to the crop harvested per hectare. Only what is removed
> by harvesting is added back, and no more. Phosphorous is @ half the
> amount of Nitrogen and Potash is applied only after testing the
> available potash status in the soil.
>
> In a well maintained plantation, there is vrtually no sunlight
> penetrating to the ground, so no weeds, and thus, no or minimum
> herbicides.
>
> Only pesticides recommended by the Tea Research Asociation or UPASI,
> at recommended dilutions, and harvesting holiday is clearly defined
> for each pesticide.
>
> Each hectare of Tea has a population of 16000 Plants (Average) : Can
> its contribution to the environment be calculated?
>
> Each hectare also has nearly 600 Shade Trees, which are essentially
> Leguminous, and thus fixes nitrogen in the soil: Can its contribution
> to the environment be calculated?
>
> Where ever wood is used for burning in the driers (very rare), it is
> grown on the estates, and is continously replanted.
>
> Estates which burn Coal use 1 Kg Coal per Kg of Tea produced. However,
> many estaes in Assam now have piped natural gas.
>
> The Axial Flow fans of the Withering Troughs, Rolling Tables,
> Rotorvanes / BLC, CTC machines, Fermenting Machines and the Driers are
> indeed power guzzelers, but can not be avoided. In my experience, the
> Sorting machines use the minimum power. Yet, this is not the true
> reason for high power consumption. Each estate needs to supply power
> to Water Pumps, Irrigation facilities, Staff and Labour Quarter,
> School, Bungalows, Hospital, Street Lights, and leave a provision for
> theft of Power. The Governmental supply is at best a standby in most
> of the Tea growing areas. Some estates do not have any government
> supply at all, even today. Hence, heavy Gen Sets are the only answer.
>
> Tea Cheers!
> Jayesh S Pandya- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The Ex-Brit who owns my local tea shoppe says he signed up for your
presentation. I know he goes to the Tea Expo every year so I
mentioned you. He seemed surprised. I get the feeling he knows you
somehow.

Jim

On Mar 2, 8:06 am, Nigel > wrote:
> I shall be giving a presentation in May at the upcoming World Tea Expo
> entitled “Tea’s Carbon Footprint – Saint of Sinner?” touching on for
> example: sustainability of production, greenhouse gas emissions from
> fertilizer use and manufacture type, use of renewable energy, energy
> efficiency, food miles, etc. This talk is pitched mainly at the tea
> trade itself –- but I am curious to know how much this aspect is also
> of interest to well informed tea consumers and whether it would ever
> influence your choice of tea type or origin? So, how far would you
> sacrifice your green tea to be green?
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 7, 2:14*pm, wrote:
> The Ex-Brit who owns my local tea shoppe says he signed up for your
> presentation. *I know he goes to the Tea Expo every year so I
> mentioned you. *He seemed surprised. *I get the feeling he knows you
> somehow.

Yep, it's a small island!

Nigel at Teacraft

On Mar 2, 5:19*pm, toci > wrote:
>
> I pretty much have already shifted to organic tea, not so much for my
> own sake as for the sake of the workers in the field. * * * Does this
> make sense? * *

Organic tea is not necessarily sustainably produced. Organic tea
could also have a much larger carbon footprint than an unashamedly non-
organic sustainable tea. Given the choice between organic and
sustainable I take the latter -ism every time - sustainability being
defined simply as “ensuring that our current use of resources does not
compromise the ability of future generations to meet their needs”

Nigel at Teacraft

On Apr 3, 8:38*am, Nigel > wrote:
> On Mar 2, 5:19*pm, toci > wrote:
>
>
>
> > I pretty much have already shifted to organic tea, not so much for my
> > own sake as for the sake of the workers in the field. * * * Does this
> > make sense? * *
>
> Organic tea is not necessarily sustainably produced. *Organic tea
> could also have a much larger carbon footprint than an unashamedly non-
> organic sustainable tea. *Given the choice between organic and
> sustainable I take the latter -ism every time - sustainability being
> defined simply as “ensuring that our current use of resources does not
> compromise the ability of future generations to meet their needs”
>
> Nigel at Teacraft

Sounds good, but I know what's labelled organic, which I assume bears
some positive relationship to what is, in fact, organic. I haven't a
clue into what's sustainable. Toci