I applaud Grangers for looking to take greater care and seeking certification, but from what little I can tell from the Bluesign website, this is essentially an accreditation that no black-listed components are being used in production. And it seems that their 'black list' is based on a review of the applicable legal constraints around the world. So having Bluesign accreditation seems to mean that you comply with a synthesis of all the worldwide legal requirements for chemicals etc.
Now to my mind, that is still some way from being able to say :
"It means we can absolutely guarantee our customers and consumers that we have excluded any chemical substances and processes that could be hazardous to people and the environment."
I say this because the legal framework is based on a slow process of examining evidence (often with a background of very powerful political / financial pressure from the petrochemical industry ) and it can take an awfully long time before we really know how harmful a substance could be to the environment or humans. Grangers use of fluorocarbons might well prove to be harmful; Nikwax certainly think that they should be avoided and point to this report -
http://www.ewg.org/reports/pfcworld
But then they would, wouldn't they!
Whatever the truth about fluorocarbons, it's unwise to say today what you consider will be deemed safe tomorrow! I'm suspect that this group of chemicals would be on Bluesign's 'grey' list of restricted but permissible components. So Grangers could get a nice Bluesign badge and continue to use 'iffy' chemicals.
What would be really interesting to know is whether Grangers was forced to remove something from their process because it was on Bluesign's blacklist. Of course, it might be very bad publicity to admit this; after all they have been selling their range for a long time. But that would at least signify that the new range was less harmful than before.
So as I said at the beginning, it's a noble initiative and Grangers are right to look for industry best practice, but the cynic inside me wonders whether it is another case of greenwash (or bluerinse perhaps ???) for the benefit of the marketing team...
Posted: 28/04/2008 at 14:22
