When I first embarked on attempting to live sustainably, the biggest problem I encountered was that there was a never-ending list of confusing sustainability terms. To help combat this, I wrote an earlier blog post explaining what sustainability is. With that being said, there are new, confusing sustainability terms popping up all the time, and greenwashing is everywhere.
This post will break down ALL the confusing sustainability terms, so that next time a brand claims to be sustainable, you know EXACTLY what all the terms mean.
Biodegradable
According to the Oxford dictionary, the official definition of biodegradable is “any substance or object [that is] capable of being decomposed by bacteria or other living organisms”.
Here’s where the definition of biodegradable gets tricky. Most materials are naturally biodegradable, even if they take hundreds of thousands of years to break down.
Let’s take cotton. Traditional, non-organic cotton takes up to 5 months to biodegrade. But here’s the tricky part. When a cotton t-shirt ends up in a landfill, it will not biodegrade. That is because nothing in landfills biodegrade. The biodegrading process requires sunlight and oxygen. What actually ends up happening to that “biodegradable” cotton t-shirt in landfills is that your cotton t-shirt will become mummified. HOW CRAZY IS THAT?!
Biodegradable is a commonly-used term for companies that are greenwashing. What does this mean? Companies can promote their products as “biodegradable”, making you think that it will naturally decompose in the landfill. In reality, it will not biodegrade and simply become mummified.
Compostable
The best way I’ve seen compostable described is “controlled biodegradation outside of a landfill”, according to the Biodegradable Products Institute. This is what this means. Any product marked as compostable is able to be broken down by 90% within 90 days at a commercial compost facility.
At these facilities, compostable materials are broken down to create organic, plant-based materials. An example of this is how the NYC Department of Sanitation will use the finished compost to nourish the soil.
So why isn’t everything compostable? And why isn’t everyone composting?
The simple answer is lack of access. For example, composting in NYC is notoriously difficult. Curbside composting has finally come back to NYC after a long hiatus, but it’s still not available for everyone. Using my apartment building in Hudson Yards as an example, although I signed up for curbside composting, composting isn’t available because “not enough people signed up”. The only other option for New Yorkers to compost is to drop off their composting at a facility, which may not be the most convenient thing when you’re dragging around your food waste on the subway.
One possibility for easy access to composting comes in the form of “smart” garbage disposals that have a composting feature. However, not all materials can be composted through these at-home garbage disposals.
So what is the bottom line? Composting is incredibly important and a great way to reduce landfill waste. The biggest problem is the lack of access for the average person.
Cruelty-Free
Cruelty-free is arguably the most misunderstood and confusing sustainability term. From what I have seen, it’s also one of the first “phrases” that have been abused by companies trying to be more sustainable and ethical than they actually are.
Cruelty-free products mean that the products are not tested on animals. However, here’s the very important caveat: products are not cruelty-free if products are sold in countries that mandate animal testing by law. On a lot of cosmetic companies’ websites, they might state they “do not test on animals unless required by law”. This is a corporate-speak for “we sell our products in countries that require animal testing, but we want to pretend that we are still cruelty-free”.
The most commonly known country that requires animal testing is China. Although improvements have been made in Chinese law to reduce animal testing, animal testing is by no means gone in China. Any company selling products in China is not cruelty-free.
The even more annoying part of this situation with brands falsely advertising themselves as cruelty-free is that within the cruelty-free beauty community, it is well-known that PETA’s Cruelty-Free label cannot be trusted. The certification that I trust is the Leaping Bunny certification, but of course, there are some brands that are not certified but still cruelty-free.
It’s also important to note that companies are constantly adjusting their policy. One company that might be cruelty-free one year might decide to sell in China the next year. For me, I love following along with cruelty-free Instagram accounts that are constantly monitoring the status of brands. I also like to double-check before I repurchase any makeup or skincare.
Organic
Perhaps the most commonly heard phrase, organic actually can apply to non-food products. According to the Oxford dictionary, anything is organic if it’s “produced or involving production without the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or other artificial agents”.
Although this definition typically refers to how food is grown, this definition is very much applicable to other products as well. For example, cotton that is grown without the use of chemical fertilizers or pesticides can be considered organic. However, the biggest downfall of the usage of “organic” when it comes to non-food products is that it is not regulated. The USDA organic label only applies to agricultural products.
What does that mean? That means that any brand can falsely claim that their products are organic without fear of getting in trouble with government authorities. For example, the Food and Drug Administration oversees all cosmetic products, but they’re not policing how cosmetic companies might use the phrase “organic”.
This is why transparency is key when it comes to sustainability. The lack of regulation around all these confusing sustainability terms creates the perfect scenario for brands to participate in greenwashing. Don’t fall into that trap!
Recyclable
Most people won’t get confused by the term, recyclable. However, actually practicing recycling gets super confusing. It’s so confusing that I have a whole blog post dedicated to recycling, and that still doesn’t begin to cover everything.
If you know nothing else about recycling, then know this: not all products with the recycling symbol are recyclable. My mind was blown when I first discovered this. I was completely shook. And here is the other big key thing to know: recycling rules are completely different depending on what city you live in. For example, New York City will have its own rules for recycling, and anyone living in Jersey City will need to look for local guidance on how to recycle.
With that being said, there are still some basic rules of recycling to also keep in mind.
- Recycle bottles, cans, paper and cardboard.
- Any recyclable products with food or liquids on it cannot be recycled.
- Loose plastic bags cannot be recycled, and your recyclables should never be bagged.
For more guides and rules to recycling, check out your local sanitation department website and also refer to this helpful online guide by Waste Management.
Reef-Safe
There are very few times when I judge other people for their personal choices, but something that always irks me is when we choose to jump into the ocean without wearing reef-safe sunscreen. Reef-safe is pretty high on the list in terms of how confusing it is, but it is arguably one of the most important, confusing sustainability terms to clarify because our oceans and marine wildlife are dying.
Here’s what reef-safe traditionally means: “the term reef safe typically means that [a] sunscreen contains only mineral UV-blocking ingredients like oxide and titanium dioxide”. This basically means that any sunscreen that has physical UVA and UVB active ingredients rather than chemical ones can be reef-safe because chemical active ingredients contribute to the coral reef deterioration.
Thanks to Save the Reef, here is a list of all active ingredients to avoid:
- Oxybenzone
- Octinoxate
- Octocrylene
- Homosalate
- 4-methylbenzylidene camphor
- PABA
- Parabens
- Triclosan
- Any nanoparticles or “nano-sized” zinc or titanium (if it doesn’t explicitly say “micro-sized” or “non-nano” and it can rub in, it’s probably nano-sized)
- Any form of microplastic, such as “exfoliating beads”
When we choose to use any sunscreen with the above ingredients in it, we are literally killing the coral reefs and actively contributing to killing the ocean and marine life. I also like to extend the concept of reef-safe past simply sunscreen to all skincare products I am using. If I am going into the ocean, even for 0.00001 seconds, any product I am using cannot have any ingredients in the above list. Otherwise, these ingredients will kill the ocean.
If you’re curious about how the ocean is crucial to our survival as humans, check out this blog post.
PS the term reef-safe is not regulated. This means that any company can appropriate this phrase without fear of pushback from government authorities. That’s why you should always do your research on the product ingredients rather than relying on brands’ marketing!
Zero-Waste
Here comes another confusing sustainability term that has been commonly misunderstood: zero-waste. Not only is the phrase zero-waste not regulated, but there are also many ways to interpret zero-waste.
Living a zero-waste lifestyle can mean that you’re simply not throwing anything away into the landfill, but it can mean that you might partake in composting. For some cosmetic brands, they might use the phrase zero-waste when referring to a recycling program for customers to send back their empty bottles, but they might still have a lot of waste in the manufacturing process. Even the EPA has acknowledged how different cities choose to define zero-waste differently.
Something to keep in mind when brands or even influencers are claiming to be zero-waste is to think about the entire supply chain. For example, there is a popular trend on Instagram to promote home cleaning products or self-care products that comes in the form of a tablet to reduce plastic. However, this isn’t truly zero-waste because there could be a lot of waste in the manufacturing of the tablet. The packaging that the tablet comes in is not zero-waste, and the shipping process to get this tablet from the manufacturing facility to you is not zero-waste.
This is why I don’t believe being “zero-waste” is the perfect standard to ascribe to. There are simply too many ways that this phrase is being misappropriated, even in someone’s personal lifestyle. I believe in minimizing and being mindful of our consumption instead.
Are there other confusing sustainability terms that I missed?
There are so many confusing phrases out there. If there’s another phrase that you feel is commonly misunderstood or confusing, leave them down in the comments below! Be sure to save this post to your bookmarks or save this to Pinterest or other social media platforms to share or reference for the future!
