Showing posts with label processing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label processing. Show all posts

Monday, 13 May 2013

GARBAGE DISPOSAL-NEW INITIATIVES IN CHENNAI

Urban lives in India face the threat of overwhelming garbage accumulation near their dwelling places as most civic bodies do not have functional processing facilities for the huge waste generated day in and day out. While every citizen has a right to get the much needed civic services in return for the taxes paid by him, it is a matter of shame that these "receipts" are misused and mismanaged leading to a situation where the citizens are left to fend for himself whether it is water, power, roads, parking lots, parks or noise pollution or waste clearance. The audacity of the civic body in raising conservancy charges for those generating garbage is really breath taking as Chennai is a city where the all pervasive Coovum river stink hits any visitor who lands there! As the tax payers there are vigorously protesting this arbitrary move by the civic body, they are being asked to set up their own processing facility investing their funds! What a city! Here is a take on this latest development in Chennai and the on-going tussle between the tax payers and the civic body on the garbage issue.  

"Commercial establishments in the city are likely to set up their own bio-gas plants for processing their food waste.The Chennai Corporation, at a meeting in Ripon Buildings with representatives of hotels, marriage halls and other commercial food business operators asked the traders to commission decentralised waste processing facility based on a technology of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). The meeting was organised to resolve a deadlock on the issue of conservancy charges in Chennai. At the meeting, Corporation officials indicated that new conservancy charges levied on these establishments, which had been fiercely opposed by them, would be reduced if the traders' association commissioned their own plants based on such proven technology. A number of food-business operators, including large hotels and marriage halls, had been asked to pay more conservancy charges by the Chennai Corporation. The city has more than 20,000 commercial entities including large food-business operators and marriage halls that generate large amount of municipal solid waste every day. As the commercial establishments did not agree to the increase in conservancy charges by the Chennai Corporation, a series of meetings were organised over the past few months to resolve the deadlock. Commercial establishments that use 1,100 litre bins for conservancy were asked to pay Rs.1.31 lakh to the Chennai Corporation, according to the new proposal. Similarly, the establishments that use 120 litre bins were asked to pay Rs.14,600. The charges for marriage halls with a seating capacity of more than 1,000 were increased from Rs.12,000 to Rs.86,400 per year. BARC had already knocked on the doors of the Chennai Corporation to sell its garbage segregation technology and the civic body has suggested that commercial establishments use the indigenously-developed technology."

Garbage processing technology is readily available but its economic viability depends on the volume of waste generated. While a city with large population will have the wherewithal to invest on large processing plants and set up the infrastructure to distribute the products like power, manure etc, hotels, restaurants, marriage halls etc cannot be expected to generate regular garbage of required volume to sustain economically viable processing units, no matter how efficient the technology is. The Chennai civic body is trying to camouflage its utter inefficiency and lack of planning by passing on the responsibility to the tax payers! It is unfortunate that in a country like India there is no national policy on garbage management in urban townships with each one following its own unimaginative and ad hoc policies putting the tax payers at great disadvantage and inconvenience. It is time that major civic bodies in the country get together and evolve a uniform policy on garbage taxing and processing that is equitable to citizens, commercial establishments and the financial health of the city.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

Saturday, 2 June 2012

HOW NATURAL IS NATURAL? A NEW DILEMMA!

With the consumers disenchanted with the processed foods that dominate the market, food industry seems to be changing its strategy to retain the customer base through new labeling tricks. Every one likes everything that is natural. Right? Here is where the industry finds solace and a new approach in marketing is emerging. It is the fear of the unknown that drives people to natural foods and this is also the basis on which organic food industry is flourishing to day. If the FDA of the US is to be relied upon a food can be called natural if no added color, flavor or synthetic substances but whether such a simplistic view can satisfy the aspirations of the consumer vis-a-vis the term natural. A critical question that begs an answer is what if a natural food undergoes modern day processing when some additives like thickeners, sugar, salt, etc are added? If a natural juice is to be produced what one has to do is just squeezing the edible portion of the fruit to get the juice but to get uniformity of the product, derived from fruits of different sweetness, color and flavor, industry is forced to add certain ingredients, mostly natural substances which does not affect the original quality in any way. While this may be perfectly in order what is being objected to is to use the word "natural" on the label. Why not blend juices of different lots to make the final product really natural with minimum quality variation. In the US where there is a powerful legal lobby, such a situation provides an opportunity to haul the industry to the courts for mislabeling. Here is a take on this subject which provides an interesting insight into the working of food industry in that country.    

"In approximately 20 lawsuits, the first one filed in New Jersey, lawyers claim the company adds chemically engineered "flavor packs" to its juice, making it taste the same year-round. On Thursday, lawyers will come together in Washington to argue before a panel of judges about where the lawsuits should be heard as a group. Tropicana declined to comment but said in a statement that it is committed to full compliance with labeling laws and to producing "great-tasting 100 percent orange juice." The orange juice lawsuits are just the latest disputes over "all natural" claims. Over the past several years, a number of major national brands have been attacked for what consumers have called deceptive labeling. Tostidos, SunChips, Snapple and Ben & Jerry's ice cream have all faced similar attacks. The lawsuits have become common enough that the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which represents more than 300 food and beverage makers, had a panel that discussed the topic as part of a conference in February. Lawyers representing food and beverage companies have told their clients to be wary. Part of the problem, lawyers agree, is that consumers are looking for healthier products, and companies have responded by creating and branding their products as "all natural." The Food and Drug Administration, the agency that oversees packaged food labeling in the United States, has no definition of what counts as "natural." As long as a food labeled "natural" doesn't contain added color, artificial flavor or synthetic substances, the agency doesn't object. That's not enough guidance, some lawyers said. "The whole natural issue is a mess," said Michael Jacobson, the executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a Washington-based food safety and advocacy group that helped get the makers of 7UP and Capri Sun to stop making natural claims about their products. Jacobson and others say the FDA's lack of guidance has left lingering questions. One question has been whether a product with high fructose corn syrup, which is made by processing corn but does not occur naturally, can be labeled natural. That was the issue in a 2007 lawsuit over Snapple drinks. Snapple has said it no longer uses high fructose corn syrup in products marked "all natural," and a New York judge ultimately ruled in Snapple's favor and closed the case last year, but other lawsuits are still questioning the use of the term".

Labeling on front of the package is an important means of informing the consumer about the nature of the contents inside the sealed pack which is a constitutional right of every citizen under freedom of information provision. Consumer reposes so much confidence on the government of the land to protect their rights and violation of this trust ought to be frowned upon. If the industry is allowed to get away with breaking this trust, hauling them before the judiciary is a perfectly valid action. On the other hand allowing the legal attorneys to entice the consumer to go to court to extract fat compensation on silly score also cannot be justified. In the present case one is not sure whether using the term natural on juices without adding water or other unnecessary additives is such a crime deserving judicial intervention. Industry must also introspect as to the need to use the term indiscriminately as long as the product conforms to the standards laid down in the statute books. what the regulators can do is to tighten the standards without giving any scope for misinterpretation by the industry.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com