MinBane

I write what I like.

Archive for the tag “Consumer”

Opinion: Why is there so little sanction on Corrupt behaviour and why don’t the donors stop the funds?

corruption-1

We should question the ability of certain leaders to be able to squander away government funds, donor-funding while keeping their citizens in poverty and neglect the civil service, the state functions and keeping the state fragile; so that the Executive can brown envelope the Members of Parliament and that other civil servants to get paid, instead of government salaries depend on being paid under table for government delivery.

This is not one nation problem, this is not a one continent problem, and this is a worldwide problem. Not only government acts like this organizations, multi-lateral organizations and businesses. Corporations and other LLCs are also misusing their fortunes and ability to generate wealth for their stakeholders through intricate and complex banking structure that fixes the profits away from the countries we’re they earn high profits; while squandering away the profits so that the owners and stakeholders gain massive funds and leave the consumers, workers and the nations as they keep the funds away from the State of real business.

Tax Avoidance

Why can I address the neglect of government in the same regard as tax-avoidance in modern business, because the same ethics and norms are made and regulated by the Parliaments, Executive Power and by the interests of politicians; that needs funds and create business in their constituency as they earn currency on opening business there. So with that in mind, the way the business is set-up and regulated are by admission from the political framework and laws, not to talk about tax-regulations together with multi-lateral agreements that either opens or closes doors for tax-fugitives from the profitable country.

The Government are the Sovereign Power, the ones that represent and distribute the resources and funds to their citizens through departments, ministries, institutions and programs that are sufficient to make sure of education, security and development of the country. That happens as they can either use their taxes, aid and loans to fund the government work. Well, they could if they wanted to represent the people who paid the tax and elected them.

One key reason for the maladministration and mismanagement from the government are that they are responsible for sham elections and rigging themselves in power; worst case scenario the government and executive took the power with the gun; so the responsibility is more on the ammunition instead of the transparency and accountability towards the citizens. The citizens are supposed to have safe-guards from corrupt behaviour and alleged graft; as the Auditor General and Ombudsman are supposed see through the files and budgets, together with registered procurements, so that the actual facts are the same as the planned efforts from the State.

That is why the breaking figures and knowledge of squandered monies from the funds. Something that shouldn’t be that easy to do or get away with; as so many leaders and executives have saved giant bank-accounts in Swiss Banks and in Tax-Havens. So the humble men from villages all of sudden own 30 luxury cars, 4 mansions and have a wife who spends a ministries months salaries on exclusive clothing and shoes in Paris and London. While the taxpayer are struggling to eat and feed their families, which is an issue that shouldn’t be there when the Executive and wife can have a cortege of 25 cars driving from their State House to their Ranch without any consideration.

Obama Stockholm

The worrying sign is that the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and other Multi-lateral organizations don’t sufficiently sanction this kind of activities or even punish the countries with this behaviour; except when the nations are on their back hunting wild goose. The United Nations and European Union, other Pacts doesn’t even sanction much either. The diplomatic tensions and the wish for resources sometimes stop the knowledge of the thievery, if not to save face of both parties as they doesn’t want the public of the nation importing to know about the maladministration.

What I am wondering with all the corruption scandals, with the rich executives and the haemorrhaging of monies from the state and businesses; It happens daily while the begging for funds from international community and also getting investors from the exterior to invest in business. These businessmen are set in function with civil servant and government officials that are corrupting the state; something that the world knows… and still keeps it going around.

Certainly the knowledge of this isn’t something in the shadow, some places all of this is in the spotlight and expected by the officials, as a second way of getting add-ons on their meagre salaries as the government doesn’t pay enough or on time for the Police Officers and Teachers to secure pay to pay for food and even rent. Therefore the system generate where the Government can’t even supplement funds for their own, while their leaders eat the most delicious stakes. This should be a warning, but the world moves on.

quote-the-givers-of-most-of-the-corruption-in-africa-are-from-outside-africa-olusegun-obasanjo-88-15-33

What worries me… is how this keep on happening with different names, different places and with different funds, while the sanctions and the stopping of funding from the communities doesn’t stop; while the massive overload of stolen monies are hidden and the ability to use this banked currency in developing the state and nation, instead lost in trail of lies and deceit where the accountability got dropped in the ocean.

We should question these transactions and not accept these facts of life, this is the ones that steal the development and progress, steal foreign taxpayer’s monies into personal bank-accounts and private business of elites instead of the public functions as they we’re supposed to go.

I am just writing in frustration… and tired of seeing and hearing about the scandal after scandal… While the ones dishing it out are silent, while the punishment is not happening and the characters who are behind the thieving is walking like kings and queens in main-streets of capitals all around the world. That is what is bugging me. It shouldn’t be like this and the behaviour should be tormented, questioned and also charged for their stolen cash. This cash we’re not automatically made for and created for the Executive’s and their Elites; which isn’t justified. So why does it seem that some people are allowed to steal a country, steal a national treasury and the foreign exchange funds are walking scotch-free while hanging around the mayors and government-officials; but when a pocket-thief or a man stealing a goat, gets detained and not hired again.

The rules for this is provable not equal, not for all men are equal under god, except if you like shrimp. Well, that is not the case in this matter, there are too set of standards, the Executives and their Elites; while the citizens and public are a disgrace and can be disregarded easily, but the rich can get-a-way-jail-free-card! Peace.   

Advertisements

Nation Media Group closes QTV, QFM and Nation FM (Youtube-Clip)

“The Nation Media Group has announced the rationalisation of its broadcasting division, in a move aimed at implementing the company’s new strategic direction. The rationalisation will involve the scaling down of the radio divisions in Kenya and Rwanda, as well as the consolidation of the television business in Kenya” (Daily Nation, 2016).

DNB Nor plan of setting up a Carlson Funds as a “Societe Anonyme” (S.A.) to initially save taxes and write of their subsidiary in Luxemburg; they might claim differently to save face, but the agreement with Luxemburg Authorities says otherwise!

Biathlon Ad Vital DNB

The Company in Scandinavia famous for getting George Clooney to be parts of their commercials and being synonymous with the Norwegian National Team of biathlon, making Ole Einar Bjørndalen wearing a Vital hat to the races and competition as a display of one of the main sponsors of the National Team. That is ordinary in sports, and is ordinary in the time we live in. So that a big bank is supporting a National Team is everyday event, but that is not what I will write about and discuss. As I got to read one of the papers in the Panama Papers leak. Here it is and hope you can see how DNB Nor ASA used the opportunities for meager taxation and higher earning for their subsidiary.

Before you continue her is a classy ad from the company:

Now we will see how the Norwegian Company can also be a little greedy and trying to avoid taxes in Norway, but still earning the profits and having accounts, but using the PriceWaterCoopers (PWC) offer for a Shell Company in Luxemburg to save taxes and still keep the funds in safety in Luxemburg. That is the grand DNB Nor who is the largest bank group in Norway.

Here is how they do it, and it is epic ways of using the shell-companies to avoid Norwegian tax regime and use a Corporate Fund that is a S.A. “Societe Anonyme” as financial company in Luxemburg to simply benefit from the specific tax status for a company in Luxemburg instead of the Norwegian one. Let me take you for a ride!

What is the Carlson Fund Management Company S.A.:

“Carlson is a Luxembourg resident company incorporated on August 14, 1990 as a limited company (“Societe Anonyme”) in order to develop the German and other European markets” (…) “Carlson is a company of DnB Nor group (hereafter the “Group”). The Group is Norway’s largest financial services group with total combined assets of NOK 1,834 billion. It includes strong brands such as DnB NOR, Vital, Nordlandsbanken, Cresco, Postbank.en, DnB NORD and Carlson” (…)”Carlson is part of the life and asset management branch of activities of the Group, DnB NOR Asset Management. It is Norway’s largest fund manager and has a leading position within discretionary asset management for institutional clients in Norway and Sweden” (…)”Until July 28, 2006, the purpose of Carlson was the creation, management and administration of a unique fund, Carlson Fund, created in Luxembourg on August 31, 1990. In this respect, based on the Luxembourg law on UCis, Carlson benefited from a specific tax status exempting the company from Luxembourg corporate income tax, municipal business tax and net wealth tax”.

You think that is saga in the making just see what more they did to secure lesser tax in Norway and close to none in Luxemburg, because corporate greed is what makes the world run like Ussain Bolt!

“By resolution of the Extraordinary General Meeting (“EGM”) held on July 28, 2006, Carlson has amended its by-laws in order to comply with the law of December 20, 2002 transposing the UCITS III Directive 85/611/EEC into Luxembourg law. Since the EGM, Carlson has been responsible for the management and administration of several investment funds. Carlson currently manages a portfolio of funds under 3 fund umbrellas: Carlson Fund, DnB NOR Fund and more recently DnB NOR Part II Fund since February l, 2008 (hereafter the “Funds”)” (…) “As from the date of the EGM (i.e. July 28, 2006), Carlson became subject to an unlimited tax liability and is considered as a newly incorporated entity for tax purposes”.

DNB Bankkort

You think that is bad and telling how the Carlson entity of Luxemburg, which funds and fueling money from the DNB Nor and their subsidies and banks in Norway. As he Tax is high here for any profitable business, this kind of transaction and order clears lots of funds from the Company and banks, which gives higher profits, because of less tax as they follows through consultation to follow the exemptions laws in the tax-haven. Here we go!

How do they secure the tax-exemption with the laws in Luxemburg?  

“Based on article 35 (4) of the Luxembourg Income Tax Law (“LITL”), when a company becomes taxable, all its assets and liabilities have to be valuated, at the time of the conversion, at their fair market value The assets and liabilities concerned are those “contributed” to the fully taxable entity, including intangible assets (article 59 (2) LITL)” (…)”the tax balance sheet has to take into account all the assets and liabilities of Carlson (i.e. the whole assets and liabilities whose, by nature, intend to serve the activity of the company2) including the valuation of the management contract. The administrative doctrine precises that is assimilated as an asset all the potential assets that can be exploited in the context of the activity of the company and with an individual economic value” (…)”Carlson has to revalue its capital in its opening tax balance sheet. The revalued capital includes the share capital of the formerly tax exempt company, the reserves accumulated by Carlson until the moment of the conversion, as well as the revaluation reserves resulting from the step-up at the moment of the conversion. The revalued capital is treated as “fiscal capital” in the hands of Carlson from a tax point of view. Any repayment (of part) of this “capital” to Carlson’s shareholders will therefore not be subject to withholding tax in line with the provisions of article 97 (3) b LITL”.

Now we have seen how the DNB Nord have put a S.A. Society Anonyme with the Carlson Funds to drop money into the Tax-Haven of Luxemburg as the DNB thinks the suits of Luxemburg to perfection and wondered if Barney Stinson bought suits made for Luxemburg.

DNB set up the Society Anonyme is set up with a new “EMG” to get unlimited tax-liability in Luxemburg. So the advice made the funds from the company under the Carlson from the time of the board-meeting by law of the 28. July 2006. The continued thing they did was to take their assets and monies fueled into the Carlson Funds, so the liabilities together with all of contracted value and management in the tax-balance sheet. So there fueling of moneys into the Fund is also fiscal capital and because of the status of the S.A. hide more in the secret company there.

DNB Nor

Then the control of Carlson Funds is by all means controlled by DNB Nord as written here:

“As an example, a major part of the support activities (e.g. accounting) is done in close collaboration with the members of the Group located in Sweden/Norway. Moreover, the members of the team managing Carlson in Luxembourg are all senior officers originated from the Group. Consequently, the distribution of the Funds in Luxembourg is mainly performed thanks to the support of the Group”.

Here is what the group is supposed to pay in tax:

“Taking into account the total 2006 and 2007 value of the business compared to the total 2006 and 2007 annual profit before tax, Carlson will pay an annual and arm’s length remuneration in accordance with articles 56 and 164 (3) LITL to the Group for its support representing 65,92% of its annual profit before tax” (…) “Carlson will benefit from such retrocession of fees over a period of 10 years. As the taxable activity of the Company started in 2006, we propose to recognize such retrocession as from August I, 2006 until the financial year 2016” (…)”The computation of the percentage of notional retrocession of fees will be subject to a supervision period of 4 years (2006-2010). In case of significant/major changes in the business in Luxembourg, Carlson commits itself to inform the Luxembourg tax authorities of any significant changes that would modify its business and/or its tax position in order to agree on the more appropriate tax treatment”.

If you wonder what retrocession means that is planned underwritings of the earnings of the company. Underwritings or retrocession is usually a volunteer act of a company to return property or ceding property, though usually by request and not by forced transaction. Also the underwriting is also done to diversifying assets by consolidating them amongst the stakeholders. That means the last one the percentage of the company which is 65 % of the profits of DNB NORD’s Carlson Funds will dived 65% of the funds to the stakeholders of the company. Initially meaning that the Stakeholders or the Owners  of the DNB NORD and that before any tax in Luxemburg, which is beautiful business model for the Stakeholders and for the ones owning DNB, and by literal controlling Carlos Funds.

The Company found another way to dodge a little more tax:

Net Wealth Tax: As no intangible asset is recognized in the tax balance sheet of the Company, there is no increase of the unitary value of Carlson for net wealth tax purposes”.

This is initially saying that since they have not written any assets of value when they started to operate, therefore they does not have assets or monies worth to be classified for the Wealth Tax Purposes in Luxemburg. Here was yet another way of using the loopholes in Luxemburg to get even less taxation and a favorable way of using the tax-system there.

This article in the middle of the charter of Carlson Funds says the truth of the company:

The purpose of the corporation is the creation, administration and management of one or several Luxembourg and/or foreign collective investment funds in transferable securities authorized according to the Directive 85/611/EEC, as amended (”UCITS”) and of other Luxembourg and foreign collective investment funds not covered by trus Directive (“UCI”) (all together the “Funds”) on behalf of their unitholders or shareholders in accordance with the provisions of chapter 13 of the Luxembow-g law of December 20, 2002 on undertakings for collective investment, as it may be amended from time to time (the “2002 Law”) , and the issue of certificates or statements of confirmation evidencing undivided co-ownership interests in such Funds. The corporation shall manage any activities connected with the management, administration and promotion of the Funds. It may on behalf of the Funds, enter into any contracts, proceed to any registrations and transfers in its nam~ or jn third parties’ names in the register of shares or debentures of any Luxembourg or foreign companies, and exercise on behalf of the Funds and the holders of certificates of the Funds, all rights and privileges, especially all voting rights attached to the securities constituting assets of the Funds. The foregoing powers shall not be considered as exhaustive, but only as declaratory”.

EuroOK

This here says enough of the practices of the Norwegian Banking group of DNB Nor or DNB Nord ASA had a subsidiary for recess their tax-operation and use the lucrative opportunities for keeping the profit without having issues with the Tax-regime in Norway. As the Norwegian rules and tax-regulation without studying them is stricter and has to be stricter than this. Because the end of the Tax contract with Luxemburg disclose the information where they are planning not to pay for their “Net Wealth Tax Due”. So even if the funds grow massively and the monies invested in the Carlson Funds, the opportunity to underwrite 65 % before the tax on its profit and that is possible with the “underwriting” method. In that sense the taxation of the will always is 10% on very little part of the funds, as the stakeholders can theatrically take 65 Euros on the 100 euros. Leave behind 35 Euros of it profit and pay 3, 5 Euro on the 100 Euros of Profit, that is a beautiful operations. If it wasn’t for the underwriting of the revenue then the company would have by the standard tax of Luxemburg paid 10 Euros of tax. 10 Euros is not much of a profit of 100 Euros, but still vastly more than 3, 5 Euros, the difference by quick calculation is 6, 5 euros. That is nearly a price of a Big-Mac Combo-menu that cost around 8 Euros in Luxemburg.

That is because of the technic of underwriting and sharing that with the shareholders and stakeholders of the Carlos Funds S.A. in Luxemburg which is their subsidiary. As written so nicely to the Luxemburg Department of Tax Collection in 2nd July 2008:

“on behalf of our client Carlson Fund Management Company S.A. (hereafter also referred to as “Carlson”), we respectfully request you to confirm, in writing, the content of this letter as to the Luxembourg tax treatment applicable to the situation described herein”.

That the Carlson was supposed to get the reasonable Tax Treatment for the company so there was a hashed plan from the get-go together with the Company of PriceWaterCooper. The plan was made an acted upon. This would not been possible if the DNB Nor did not use the guidance and setting up the charter after the laws there and follow the guidelines of the company setting it up for making sure of having less tax.

As explained with the 100 Euros scenario. The certainty is not any excuse from the DNB Nor can tell away.  As they explained in 2016 to the Norwegian Press:

“No, DNB Luxemburg does not help the costumers to avoid tax. The Advisors function as discussion and talking-partners when it comes to financial questions, which offers legal and legitimate tax-plan for the costumers who live abroad. It could for example be about advice about financial-solution, cross-border transactions, complicated inheritance-regulation and other taxing environment that would be different from the ones who are living in Norway” (…)”DNB does not operate in Luxemburg because of taxation (Foss, 2016).

Well, I have already explained there operation and how they get to pay as little tax as possible through their operation. So DNB Nor had or still have the Carlson Fund Management Company S.A. in Luxemburg to save taxes and earn more monies in their operation and company there. Something they would be able to do in Norway or under Norwegian taxing regulation. Peace.

Reference:

MF I/ECCi/ AEGN/C21108001 M-PEWR – “Carlson Fund Management Company S.A. – Identification tax number: 2006 2240 378- Recognition of a license fee for tax purposes” (02.07.2008) – PriceWaterCooper (PWC)

Foss, Andres Bakke – ‘DNB i redegjørelse i 2014: DNB Luxembourg hjelper ikke kundene med å unndra skatt’ (08.04.2016) link: http://www.aftenposten.no/okonomi/DNB-i-redegjorelse-i-2014-DNB-Luxembourg-hjelper-ikke-kundene-med-a-unndra-skatt-8422413.html#xtor=RSS-3

UBOS Press Release: Uganda – Consumer Price Index – November 2015

UBOS November 2015

A look into the Coke’s BioPET-PlantBottle™ 1.0 – Is it really Green or is it Greenwashing?

cokeadwall

We live in a time where big multinational companies who do what they can do their business. Buy for one, sell for two. That is capitalism and the dream of getting wealth and generating it. We live in a day and age where multinational companies have vast powers and can use it whatever way they like. They can if wanting to make as much of wealth to circus of companies and hide the earnings in a tax-haven in the Caribbean or in Lichtenstein. But this article or blog will be about that. It’s about another possibility that they can do.

greenwash-noun

Milking a special type of cow:

Something that isn’t right. Companies can if they feel tell stories and express themselves as they please. Until a certain extent they can if they want to make them look extra good, but if so they shouldn’t play in-between reality and fiction. Especially not portraying stories about their products – they can make their milk being squeezed out a most beautiful cow ever. Even if wasn’t most purebred highland cattle from the western islands of Scotland. Instead it’s made with some lame ass country cow. If a Milk producing company said their entire product was made from Highland Cattle, we as consumer expect the product to be that, right? So if the pieces of production and process is made with fractions of other milking cow it want be pure Highland. It will be milk, but not as promised. Some people would be devastated. Some people would call it fraud. And partly it is, even if pieces of it made with the milk. This piece here will be about similar way of acting one way, and acting another. While telling the public something else. This here is a kind of way to make something greener then it really is. It isn’t really green, but said so. In a way that mislead the public. Some people calls that way of acting for Greenwashing. It’s a nice way to express them in similar incidence. First certain words will be translated like PEF, PET, PTA and LRB. So that people will know what they are. After that I will show what a certain company called the Coca-Cola Company makes which a famous Bottle the famous PlantBottle™.

Words to know:

  • polyethylene furanoate (PEF)
  • polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
  • purified terephthalic acid (PTA).
  • liquid refreshment beverages (LRB)

PETPlantbottleProcess2PETPlantbottleProcess2

Bio-Plastic information:

The first information is that it’s renewable made from Sugercane-polyethylene which has the ability to replace 30% of the petroleum that would have been used for making certain type of plastic. The other good piece of using bio-plastic will be lower-carbon footprint (Sugercane.org).

Hitachi company explains what PTA is: “Purified terephthalic acid (PTA) is made by causing a reaction between the secondary petroleum product paraxylene (PX) and acetic acid”. When Hitachi describes PET its like this: “Polyethylene terephthalate(PET) is a general-purpose plastic made through polycondensation of PTA with ethylene glycol (EG). This material has many outstanding properties: resistance to both heat and cold, transparency, electrical qualities, chemical proof and abrasion proof” (Hitachi).

infographicplastic

How Coca-Cola endeavors to make the PlantBottle™:

Here is how it has gone from 2011, when Gevo made an agreement with the Coca-Cola Company to make the second generation plant-bottle with Isobutanol.  Further commenting on the important factor between Coca-Cola and GEVO: “The global market for PET is approximately 50 million metric tons and has a value of $100 billion, with approximately 30 percent used for plastic bottles. In this next generation of PlantBottle™ packaging, Coca-Cola plans to produce plastic beverage bottles made entirely from renewable raw materials” (Gevo, 2011).

PlantBottle-productline

In the same year (2011) Coca-Cola Company made already a deal with Virent: “signing multi-year, multi-million dollar Joint Development and Supply Agreements to scale-up Virent’s plant-based Paraxylene (PX), trademarked BioFormPX, as a route to commercially viable, 100% renewable, 100% recyclable PlantBottle PET resin. In the past, Coca Cola’s PlantBottles have included only 30% plant-based plastic. Virent’s chemical allows the remaining 70% of the bottle to be plant-based” (…) “Virent is one of three companies working with Coca-Cola on PlantBottle technology. The others are Colorado-based Gevo and Avantium, which is based in the Netherlands” (Lane, 2014).

In South Africa in Wadeville outside of Johannesburg, South Africa there is coming a new bottle-plant. This is Africa’s first: “Coca-Cola approved technology for carbonated soft drink bottles thus enabling the closure of the loop in the biggest sector in the beverage market. The 3000m2 Phoenix PET plant, equipped with Starlinger technology, will supply an additional 14 000 tonnes of PET resin per year to the PET packaging industry. It will eventually divert an additional 22 000 tonnes of post-consumer PET bottles from landfills each year, reducing resource consumption, creating jobs and assisting industry in meeting its target of a 50% recycling rate for 2015” (Parkes, 2015).

Later JBF Industries and Coca-Cola went into a partnership in 2012 to produce bio-glycol that will be used in the new plant-bottle. This will end up with a deal and an agreement that will do this: “Construction on the new facility is expected to begin at the end of this year and will last 24 months. At full capacity, it is estimated the facility will produce 500,000 metric tons of material per year. By using plant-based materials instead of nonrenewable materials, the facility will remove the equivalent of 690,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide, or the equivalent of consuming more than 1.5 million barrels of oil each year” (Mohan, 2012).

corn to plastics poster

The Dreams of Coca-Cola Company and their PlantBottle™ 2.0:

A spokesman for Coke Scott Vitters commented in 2014 this: “Coca-Cola introduced the world to PlantBottle in 2009. The technology uses natural sugars found in plants to make ingredients identical to the fossil based ones traditionally used in polyester fiber and resins. PlantBottle packaging looks, functions and importantly recycles just like traditional polyester (or PET) plastic, but with a lower dependence on fossil fuels and a lighter environmental footprint on the planet” (…) “Today our first generation PlantBottle technology replaces one of the two ingredients that make PET plastic. Our long-term target is to realize a 100% renewable, fully recyclable plastic bottle. To realize this goal, Coca-Cola is investing millions in local technology companies – companies like Virent in Madison, Wisconsin; Gevo in Englewood, Colorado and Avantium in Amsterdam, the Netherlands” (Vitters, 2014).

“Continuing in rigid high-barrier packaging, polyethylene furanoate (PEF) bottle development remains on track. Avantium has entered into an agreement with ALPLA for development of PEF bottles, with the first bottles targeted to reach market by 2016. Avantium has also partnered with Coca-Cola and Danone in the development of PEF bottles”. (…) ”PEF is a next-generation, bio-based, recyclable polyester developed by Avantium on the basis of furanics technology. According to Avantium, PEF has 50-60 percent lower carbon footprint compared to petroleum-based PET” (Rosato, 2014).

Right now the Coca-Cola Company together with other industry packaging companies as Virent, Gevo and Avantium has made this possible: “The PlantBottle 2.0 represents an upgrade to the existing bio-based PlantBottle the beverage company already uses for some of its drinks. This substitute for polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles has a 30% bio-based content, principally derived from Brazilian sugar cane supplied by Braskem”. In the future the same companies hope for “The 100% bioplastic bottle is the result of collaboration between Coca-Cola, Geno and Virent to perfect bio-purified terephthalic acid (PTA). Commercial rollout of PlantBottle 2.0 will take place over the next five years, culminating in a full replacement in 2020” (SustPack).

Ringier Plastics commented this: “From traditional PET to recyclable (also known as R-PET) to bio-based PET, technology and environmental properties have come a long way. PET generally consists of 70% terephthalic acid and 30% monoethylene glycol (MEG). But now it is quite possible to produce bio-based MEG from renewable raw materials instead of fossils. Coca-Cola is a pioneer is adopting bio-PET packaging with its PlantBottle™, producing the first ever fully-recyclable PET plastic beverage bottle using 30% of non-fossil material and resulting in less carbon footprint. Coca-Cola aims to convert all its plastic packaging to PlantBottle by 2020 and entered into a partnership with H.J. Heinz Co. to produce ketchup bottles using PlantBottle material” (Ringier Plastics, 2015).

SuccessPBCokeSuccessPBCoke2SuccessPBCoke.CriteriaJPG

The Marketing Companies making PlantBottle™ what it is:

“Fahrenheit 212 worked with Coca-Cola’s global packaging team to translate a complex and contentious advance in polymer production into a clear and compelling consumer proposition.  The PlantBottle brand name evolved from the concept development and strategic positioning work undertaken by Fahrenheit 212 and the PlantBottle icon, which has been now been featured on over 10 billion packages since its launch in 2010, was conceived and created by our in-house design team” (…) “In its first year, PlantBottle was launched in nine global markets, including Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Sweden and the United States across brands such as Coca-Cola, Sprite, Dasani and vitaminwater”  (Fahrenheit 212). The other marketing plan of Coca-Cola company was merged with another agency they did this: “Ogilvy & Mather’s campaign uses Coca-Cola’s iconic red and white color scheme and optical illusions to create intriguing images for the new bottle. The print ads all emphasize a way that plants make us happy, followed by the message that Coca-Cola’s PlantBottle is “Up to 30% made from plants” and “100% recyclable.”“ (Oster, 2014). One of Ogilvy & Mather’s ads just below.

plantbottle_posters_Page_4

It all sound beautiful doesn’t it. Mixing PEF and PET like its nothing? Plastic turned fantastic from petroleum based sort of bottle into plant heaven, right? Is there a reason why it just sounds so magnificent! If so, why does it for the last five years show up a dirty dozens of similar quotes from Scott Vitters in all kind of outlets from the Guardian to the New Zealand Scumbag post? That makes a brother like me curious. Especially when they been cooking this for so long.

ethics-sda

Well, there isn’t everybody who has a piece of pay from Coca-Cola Company. This reports I come with now haven’t a clear connection or are in business with the Company. They are separated from it and are on their own. So you should see what their saying and be fascinated.

There many ways of telling how it really is: “Coke invented the Plant Bottle.  The Plant Bottle is made from sugarcane, a food source.  The Plant Bottle is a PET plastic bottle.  The Plant bottle is 100% PET, 70% made from oil and 30% from sugarcane.  The Plant Bottle is not biodegradable and lasts as long as the petroleum-based PET however a large segment of the population believes that the Plant Bottle is, in fact, biodegradable” (…) “Coke has invested heavily in rPET bottle-to-bottle recycling.  Coke is a large buyer of rPET pellets in China and reputedly is putting rPET in small” (…) “The largest producer of rPET pellets in China is tripling its capacity in 2011” (…) “Krones, one of the world’s largest developers and supplies of machinery to the bottling industry is introducing a series of super efficient PET washing and flaking recycling equipment.  rPET flakes and pellets can be manufactured at prices less than virgin PET” (N.Michaels).

Another example of renewable resources usage are PET bottles – called Plant Bottle. Those bottles are composed of PET, produced from terephthalic acid (70 % of mass) and ethylene glycol (30 % of mass). Terephthalic acid comes from oil, whereas glycol is produced from ethanol (deriving from fermentation of vegetable feedstock). Such bottles can be easily recycled, and they can be collected with other (classical) PET bottles. This partially bio-based PET saves global fossil resources and also reduces CO2 emissions. Plant Bottle is 20 % biobased (20 % of the carbon present in the material comes from renewable resources) and 30 % bio-massed (30 % of the mass of the material comes from renewable resources) and a simple scheme on figure 12 shows how the Plant Bottle is made (Plastice).

beyond-greenwash-the-state-of-play-2-638
Gendell said in 2012 this about the PlantBottle: “The first complexity is that only a portion is plant-based, so the PET is also composed of some things that ought to stay within a technological closed loop” (…) “The other complexity is that there must be a mechanism by which the plant-based material may return to nature and participate in the biological cycle. Even if the first complexity were resolved by making PET entirely from plant-based materials (which is not truly possible today, considering all the catalysts and polymer chemistry whatsits that are not made from plants), the PET would still be an inherently non-biodegradable material” (Gendell, 2012).

In Denmark a Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe is a Danish Consumer Ombudsman says this: “criticized Coke’s use of several marketing ploys, including the use of the word “plant,” excessive green colors and a circular-arrow logo inspired by the familiar symbol for recyclability. The ombudsman also noted a lack of documentation to support Coke’s claim that PlantBottle is “environmentally friendly” or has a “reduced carbon footprint.”” (…) “the bottle contains only a maximum of 15 percent plant material — a percentage he said hardly justifies the designation “PlantBottle.”” (…) “The Consumer Ombudsman requested the trader to indicate the minimum percentage of plant material in the bottle or to explain more clearly why the plant material proportion of the bottle was specified as ‘up to 15 percent” (Zara, 2013).

PETPlantbottleProcess

The issue with getting a 100% Bio-PET bottle is a big issue for Coca-Cola Company. Ordinary PET or 30% Bio-PET bottle has Petroleum-based component considering the bio-based in PEF. The Plastic Packaging Expert Gordon Bockner: “PEF molecule is a contaminant in the existing PET stream. A very small amount of PEF will (a) reduce the performance characteristic of the resulting PET/PEF blend and (b) neither will the blend be crystal clear and glossy, which are two of the key (marketing) attributes OPET. It is, therefore, not realistic to suggest that the two resins might be successfully blended to make a commodity LRB packaging resin” (Pierce, 2014).

Liz Baird the Environmental Consultant has said this about the PlantBottle:”When a company uses their marketing to appeal to the eco-conscious consumer, but they are spending more money marketing than they spend on being green, it’s called greenwashing” (…) “For example, there are some companies who tout their products as green, but if you look at the list of ingredients, palm oil is one of them. Harvesting palm oil is extremely dangerous to the orangutans” (EcoDaily, 2015).

GPC Cycle

After thought:

This here story here is about the 30% Bio Sugarcane based PET Resin and the rest of the bottle 70%. Not the newly released bottle that is supposable 100% BioBased Plant bottle. It hasn’t been addressed yet because I don’t see how it’s made possible and there aren’t reports or scientific how the whole PET resin is made. Therefore I won’t address it today. This here is just a full case on how Coca-Cola Company has described the infamous Plantbottle™. So since this original Plantbottle™ 1.0 is 30%. And call all natural you get the feel of a greenwash perception scheme. That isn’t fair for the consumer or society. It even got a Danish Ombudsman on the tail, but the same scenario and drop hasn’t made a fuzz where else it has been released, this is something about the leniency towards the Coca-Cola Company in these countries that has this specific bottle. That you have many companies on all sides of the globe focusing on how to make a Sugarcane bottle instead of a petroleum-based one, the first step was using 30% of the Bio PET resin. If they will fix it and make it, also make sure that it can contain the material that it’s talking about. It can’t be either or. Has to been made for a certain type of PET-Resin to make it hard enough to be a bottle for production-line and to contain the sugar-caffeine-carbonated-liquid called Coke from Coca-Cola Company.

Wonder how it will be 100% compared to the 1.0 type of bottle. That will be another story. Would be another story to see how the produce and production of Plantbottle 2.0 who supposed to be 100% made of sugarcane. And I might go into detail about that if I get the hold of that information. I can’t write it out of the thin air. Got to taste the carbonated sugar-water and then get the feel of the flavors and ways. Peace.

Reference:

EcoDaily – ‘It’s Not Easy Being Green – Labeling Can Be A Guise’ (01.07.2015) Link: http://ecodaily.org/its-not-easy-being-green-labeling-can-be-a-guise/

Parkes, Lisa – ‘Africa’s first Bottle-2-Bottle Plastic Recycling Plant Opens its Doors in Wadeville’ (13.05.2015) Link: http://www.petco.co.za/ag3nt/system/about_petco_dynamic_blog.php

Oster, Erik – ‘Ogilvy & Mather NY Introduces PlantBottle for Coca-Cola’ (09.06.2015) Link: http://www.adweek.com/agencyspy/ogilvy-mather-ny-launches-plants-make-us-happy-for-coca-cola/67789

Mohan, Anne Marie – ‘Coca-Cola enters partnership to expand PlantBottle production’ (27.09.2012) Link: http://www.greenerpackage.com/bioplastics/coca-cola_enters_partnership_expand_plantbottle_production

Fahrenheit 212 – ‘Coca-Cola PlantBottle – Defining the Consumer Proposition for Bio-PET’ Link: http://www.fahrenheit-212.com/coca-cola-plantbottle/

Rosato, Don – ‘Green plastic barrier packaging material and process advances’ (28.07.2014) Link: http://exclusive.multibriefs.com/content/green-plastic-barrier-packaging-material-and-process-advances/food-beverage

Pierce, Lisa McTigue – ‘PEF will not oust PET for beverage bottles anytime soon’ (25.07.2014) Link: http://www.packagingdigest.com/resins/pef-will-not-oust-pet-for-beverage-bottles-anytime-soon140724

N.Michaels: ‘Why and When will Bottle-to-Bottle rPET Technology Dominate?’ (03.12.2010) Link: http://theplanetbottle.net/news/2010/12/why-and-when-will-bottle-to-bottle-rpet-technology-dominate/#sthash.QksuvCPg.dpuf

Lane, Isabel – ‘Coke invests further in scaling Virent’s paraxylene production for PlantBottle’ (09.09.2014) link: http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2014/09/09/coke-invests-further-in-scaling-virents-paraxylene-production-for-plantbottle/

Gendell, Adam – ‘The catch behind Coca-Cola’s switch to plant-based bottles’ (10.10.2012) Link: http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2012/10/10/catch-behind-coca-colas-switch-plant-based-bottles

Ringier Plastics – ‘Bio-based PET shows the way forward’ (07.05.2015) Link: http://www.industrysourcing.com/article/bio-based-pet-shows-way-forward

Vitters, Scott – ‘Statement of Scott Vitters General Manager, PlantBottle Innovation Platform The Coca-Cola Company United States Senate Committee on Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry United States Senate June 17, 2014’

PTA – ‘Production process for purified terephthalic acid (PTA)’ Link: http://www.hitachi.com/businesses/infrastructure/product_site/ip/process/pta.html

PET – ‘Production process for polyethylene terephthalate (PET)’ Link: http://www.hitachi.com/businesses/infrastructure/product_site/ip/process/pet.html

Sugarcane.org – ‘Bioplastics’ Link: http://sugarcane.org/sugarcane-products/bioplastics

SustPack – ‘Coca-Cola Gives Expo Debut To 100% Bio-Based PlantBottle’ Link: http://www.sustainability-in-packaging.com/news/coca-cola-gives-expo-debut-to-100-bio-based-plantb

Gevo – ‘Bio-based Isobutanol to Enable Coca-Cola to Develop Second Generation PlantBottle™ Packaging’ link: http://www.gevo.com/?casestudy=bio-based-isobutanol-to-enable-coca-cola-to-develop-second-generation-plantbottle-packaging

Zara, Christopher – ‘Coca-Cola Company (KO) Busted For ‘Greenwashing’: PlantBottle Marketing Exaggerated Environmental Benefits, Says Consumer Report’ (03.09.2013) Link: http://www.ibtimes.com/coca-cola-company-ko-busted-greenwashing-plantbottle-marketing-exaggerated-environmental-benefits

Patent – ‘Method of making a bottle made of fdca and diol monomers and apparatus for implementing such method’ (31.08.2012): http://www.google.com/patents/WO2014032731A1?cl=en

Plastice – ‘Bioplastics – Opportunity for the Future’ (2013) Link: http://www.central2013.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Downloads/outputlib/Plastice_Bioplastics_Opportunity_for_the_Future_web.pdf

EU-US TTIP Negotiations: Draft Proposal (23.12.2014)

TTIPTTIP2TTIP3TTIP4TTIP5TTIP6TTIP7TTIP8TTIP9TTIP10

Buy your identity…

Today I will discuss something that has been on my mind a while, but I haven’t penned down on anything, because well, I been naturally busy with ordinary life and moving, which makes a guy out of his safe space, get rid of old stuff and get something else to his new place.

Therefore a brother naturally thinks about a lot of matters while moving certain chairs, furniture and books from one place to another. I am seeing this advertisements, commercials and companies spending fortunes applying themselves into our daily lives.

Buy your identity! That is not what their saying directly but indirectly. Indirectly I mean is that you’re to prove yourself and who you are. Because the JEANS you got will tell who you are and who you want to be. The soda you drink will either tell your old house-mom or athletic sports fanatic who eager to live life in a rush. The car you’re pushing from A to B you own it either because you’re a anglophile or just a guy who needs a vehicle to drive in. And this could go on and on.

Buy your identity! What a lie it is. You can have a lot of stuff, house and car. You can buy the whole kitchen shop but that doesn’t make you a gourmet chef. If you drink PEPSI or COLA doesn’t mean bigger then you got a pretense for taste or your living somewhere where the either is sweater taste then the other one. There is nothing else really, if you want to add more to it than you’re making assumption on your own.

Buy your identity! When you see a fine woman smiling on a poster selling any kind of products as a man you look at it and glimpse at it. Even in the day and age when you’re told that photo-shopped model isn’t in the real world looking like that, but somewhere close. We all should in those matters think more about what ideals we want in society and where we want to go? Is this a healthy look upon the human body and with it standards and natural defects that most of us A4 persons develop, and even those models must have them? Right! There must be another route to generate interest that beneficial for the companies and for us citizens to look upon ourselves then get into a state where the body is just a skeleton and a minute after the Frankenstein’s monster arriving and eating your flesh.

Buy your identity! I am just waiting to share more of the joy that the fantastic and evolutionary toothbrush will make my smile as white as the teeth of Tom Cruise, but until then Colgate and Solidox wouldn’t be the magic to save my face this time either.

Nevertheless, we all need stuff, we all need to eat, have clothes, cars and houses. How much they make our identity and our soul is based upon how much place in our life we give them. If we give them nothing more space then we need, then is okay. But when we’re going to the point that we got to have a certain brand and label for everything in life, than we should sit down and think about moves. Because for certainty, that must be a wet dream for a marketer to know that there a person’s discussing and choosing certain products on the base of not quality, price or needs. But for the matter of personal gain and who they are.

As a man, I been there and done this without thinking and is not proud. But your there and wondering after if you were quoting the adverts for the company instead of making your own mind. Here are some examples:

–          Adidas VS Puma: Brothers who compete for making the best sportswear and all over the world people still discuss who is best and who fits best for you.

–          Coca-Cola VS Pepsi: Soda wars that never stops and in the modern way its discussing the difference flavors of the sugarless versions (Zero/Light VS Max). Drink them all just with joy.

–          Heinz VS Local Version Ketchup: The taste-buds you have, doesn’t necessary have to be the same as your friend. Get over it and eat.

–          Apple VS Microsoft Computers: Old discussion and also fight of hardware VS design and just how you feel. Both sides became anchors of identity.

–          Playstation VS Xbox VS Nintendo: Game wars that has put and set identity of both what kind of gamer you are and what kind of controller that fits you. Wonder when this is dying.

I could have made a longer list, but I won’t bore you to death. And I got a life myself so I quit while the game is good.

What I am trying to say is that don’t let the things make who you are. It’s true we all need stuff to live and make a living. A phone, even a smart one to, a computer to write and check important stuff online, we need transports, a place to stay and food in our belly’s. So here we are, we need companies, producers and they need to sell stuff to us. But that doesn’t mean that they have to sell a thinking of building my identity. They can’t build my identity. They can be a part of it, because I need them for certain, not out of pure joy but the way we have built society and our economic system.

The companies and their products make me check and pick after what I needs and sometimes just buying some random crap from a local business that wasn’t intended. But that is life, we are doing it and we all stand by it and see it happening.

Please, I know you can’t fix or make my identity. Please dear companies don’t sell that to me. I don’t need it and your toaster won’t make feel like Ussain Bolt or feel that when I buy a piece of bread that ‘I am making world peace’. We all know that isn’t happening. I am just buying a piece of bred so I can have some for supper and lunch at work. Nothing with the bread that is fascinating. The cereal isn’t a magical box with the sparkling finesse and supernatural powers to fix your diet. It’s just a measly bowl of cereal that I hope you like the taste of, but it doesn’t build your prestige or honor among people. Your action does so. Your beautiful mind does so. The way you write and discuss matters does so. Not you shoes who you runs with gives you stamina. That is your beating heart and lungs who give you power to run down the pathway, not the Puma or Adidas shoes. Even though they either makes the steps more soft or hard depending on which type of shoes you have.

Please, we can’t buy our identity. We can buy products and collectables. We can buy clothes that make us look different, but we can change them and be perceived differently, but our friends and family will know who we really are underneath the clothes and the front we put into the world we live in.

Peace.

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: