Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaleditions.com/i/131975
greenkeeper organic chickens take longer to reach the weight for processing than their non-organic counterparts. This means they can potentially have a 50 per cent greater carbon footprint. On the other hand, when animals are fed only organic crops, this results in about half the amount of toxic emissions, mainly from not using fertilisers and pesticides in feedstock production. This example illustrates the need for a trade-off between the environmental aspects of a product, such as weighing up animal wellbeing with carbon emissions, or toxic pollution from pesticides with extensive land use. There are no clear-cut answers to this dilemma. 2. Biofuels have a lower carbon footprint The simplified life cycle of biofuels starts with the source material (plants) absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and then emitting the absorbed carbon when being burnt as fuel, which is then available for biofuel crops to absorb. According to this simplified life cycle, biofuels should have a net zero effect on CO2 levels. However, the picture is more complex and not all biofuels are the same. Some biofuels are produced from cattle fat, and the carbon footprint from cattle farming is significant. Although the argument can be made that cattle are mainly farmed for meat production, a considerable amount of the by-product is allocated for biofuels. Fertilisers and pesticides required for the production of biofuels add to the environmental impacts of biofuels. When considering the full life cycle of biofuels, the lowest environmental impacts are from biofuels produced from waste products. An example of this is used cooking oil being diverted from waste to a fuel source. Biofuels from waste products are better fuel choices than biofuels from crops grown specifically for that purpose, as the latter can have much greater environmental impacts. In fact, biofuels from crops such as canola and corn produce comparable life cycle carbon emissions to conventional fuels. 3. Re-usable is always better than disposable Disposable products that are sent to landfill after one use are generally considered the antithesis of sustainability, and one of the most recognisable is the disposable nappy. Every year, 800 million disposable nappies are dumped in Australian landfills, contributing to five per cent of landfill content. It's commonly assumed that re-usable (cloth) nappies are an environmentally friendlier choice, 84 "Biofuels from waste products are better fuel choices than biofuels from crops grown specifically for that purpose."