1. Nsae
    24th November 2018 @ 4:34 am

    Hi guys, thanks for the refreshing perspective. Despite me fully agreeing I have to add, that it cant be a simple efficiency calculation to choose palm oil over others. It must be one of geography. If agriculturaly produced oils are used and thus consumed its production should preferebly be as close to the consumer as possible even if less efficient. Because if you follow that logic we would need to transfer allmost all agriculture to few products and to few locations.

    But nature thrives through diversity, with other words having a mixed agricultural geography world wide, then not only will the commodity chain be shorter and plant and ecosystem diversity be supported. But most off all use of land will be more spread out, even if in sum using more than if highly centralized by efficient palm oil.

    It is a resposibility to see and make our consumption impact ideally our most immediate environment, get a direct feedback and not dump the burden, but rather share the space equally for more or less efficient oil production.


  2. Sandra Jean McPhee
    11th October 2018 @ 8:15 am


  3. Simon Validzic
    2nd October 2018 @ 7:06 am

    Although oil palms might produce 5 times more oil per hectare than sunflowers, oil palms require the destruction of tropical forests which mean killing, possibly, 100 times more animals and plants (in terms of both individuals and species) than does the destruction of a hectare of the temperate land on which sunflowers can be grown. I live in Croatia and about 1/7 of the country is abandoned agricultural land. I find it unacceptable when I see beans from Argentina in supermarkets or when products specify that they contain cane sugar (which is grown in countries with bad ecological and indigenous peoples’ rights records) when Croatia produces a surplus of beet sugar. I also avoid bananas, avocados, quinoa, and so on; but I do drink coffee because I work night shifts and it helps keep me awake. Ironically, I also buy several daily newspapers with the intention of writing the occasional ‘letter to the editor’ on ecological issues (because they reach many more people than do online comments); I tried digital subscriptions but they would expire before I get to read them since I also follow a lot of electronic media. Regarding biofuels – I can only ‘sign’ petitions asking governments in Europe to stop mandating them. Rooftop solar photovoltaic cells and using them to produce hydrogen (if a gas is required) seem like a better alternative. I do not drive a car but I do work at air traffic control. Population is a major problem and governments should stop offering financial incentives (such as one-off baby payments and family allowances) for people to breed, especially if they already have 2 children.


  4. Paula
    11th August 2018 @ 5:24 am

    I enjoy what you guys are usually up too. Such clever work and coverage! Keep up the amazing works guys I’ve incorporated you guys to my blogroll.


  5. Dee
    17th July 2018 @ 11:37 pm

    Your agrument about going vegan is not helpful because tons of vegan food as palm oil in it (earth balance, justin’s, back to nature , etc). These companies should be ashamed of their hypocrisy . The only way I see it is for vegans to stop buying from these companies and call them out on their error.


    • Elise
      24th July 2018 @ 10:36 am

      Did you even read the whole article? Boycotting palm oil is not a good idea..


  6. A Vegan Perspective on Palm Oil – Scent of A Vegan
    10th June 2018 @ 11:01 am

    […] companies to seek alternatives to replace it, all of which are far less sustainable. As noted by The Green Vegans the issue is not palm oil itself but rather “the huge demand for vegetable oils and the lack […]


  7. soren impey
    13th February 2018 @ 10:38 pm

    RSPO was always an industry-led group so it’s unclear why would focus on its false claims.

    Palm oil grown on non-clear-cut land that is fully traceable and does not involve the extinction of non-human persons is *widely* available:



    • Alex
      17th February 2018 @ 12:54 pm

      @soren impey

      If RSPO already doesn’t mean much and many companies get the certificate without even adhering to the rules, then why should people believe that POIG, a group that also includes many palm oil companies, is any more trustworthy?

      Sure, it is good to work towards a more sustainable palm oil industry as it’s unlikely the world is going 100% palm oil free, but research has shown that the RSPO is not much of an improvement and not exactly reliable and I don’t see why another group that includes many of the same people and says to support RSPO would be more trustworthy.


Leave a Reply