Smoke clearing

Tobacco is one of the most environmentally damaging crops on earth - and that’s before it reaches anyone’s lungs. But one in three of the world’s population is a smoker, and it isn’t going to disappear overnight. So Kirsten Denker asks whether it’s possible to have a more sustainable cigarette, and below, in ‘Out of the weed and into the flowers,’ looks at how farmers in Zimbabwe, a country which is heavily dependent on tobacco earnings, are finding a future beyond the weed. A sustainable cigarette? Oh, come on! How could a product that’s responsible for everything from the destruction of forests in Malawi to massive doses of agrichemicals ever be sustainable? Given the fact that smoking kills over 3 million people a year worldwide, it’s a bit like asking if you can have a sustainable land mine. And the tobacco industry’s record of corporate misconduct, unequalled even by the nuclear sector, should surely cast doubts on the abilities of this leopard ever being able to change its loathsome spots.

But a third of the world’s population isn’t likely to stop smoking overnight, so the question must be worth asking: how might it be possible to make a cigarette that wasn’t as bad - for its users or the planet - as those on the market today?.

According to the pressure group Action on Smoking and Health, tobacco companies have got away with producing cigarettes that are far more damaging than they need be. ASH research reveals that companies have taken out patents on numerous technologies that could have saved lives, and then quietly forgotten them.

A leaked memo written by British American Tobacco’s chief executive in 1986 speaks volumes: "In attempting to develop a ‘safe’ cigarette you are, by implication, in danger of being interpreted as accepting that the current product is ‘unsafe’. This is not a position I think we should take." BAT now claims that the reason none of its patents was developed was that they would not be accepted by the public on taste or other grounds, and that there is no public health consensus on what would consitute a safer cigarette.

It seems it would take an imaginary tobacco company indeed to face up to the challenge. So how would they go about it? Drawing on work carried out by health and environmental campaigners, here are some pointers to a more sustainable smoke, from field to... grave.

1. Cut out agrichemicals by going organic.

Very little tobacco is currently grown organically: the Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company sells organic rolling tobacco (though not cigarettes). As a next best step, use the proven array of integrated crop management techniques to massively reduce pesticide and fertiliser use.

2. Don’t use wood for curing.

Alternatives include natural gas, oil and LPG - all used in the States, though none are exactly what you’d call environmentally benign; coal is widely used in China. Some farmers also use crop residues. However, while wood remains a cheap and accessible resource in many developing countries, other fuels present less of an option for low-income farmers. So at the very least, the wood should come from a sustainably managed forest resource.

3. Curb cancer-causing chemicals.

In the US, a two-stage process has been developed using special curing followed by microwaving, to ensure that tobacco is virtually free of nitrosamines (a key class of carcinogens.) The curing barn costs $30,000 to build - though health campaigners see this as a drop in the ocean of tobacco companies’ profits.

4. Subtract the additives.

New brands such as "Natural American Spirit" (also marketed by Santa Fe), "Glory" and "Born Free" do not contain additives.

5. Refine the filters.

Among ideas patented by tobacco companies, but never put into production, are: catalysts to reduce carbon monoxide and nitrous oxides; and chemical filters that would reduce respiratory disease by removing large quantities of hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen sulphide and acetaldehyde. A new "Bio-filter" produced by Greek company, Golden Filter, is thought to provide some protection against emphysema. The filter was launched in Greece two years ago, but is not yet in use in Britain.

6. Tobacco without cigarettes.

Tobacco does not have to be taken in cigarette form: spit tobacco - i.e. snuff or chewing tobacco - is used by an estimated 6.8 million Americans, mostly in the South. A whole subculture exists around brands such as Skoal, whose users are said to be identifiable by the faded circle in the back pocket of their denims, where the can is kept. Not the safest bet, though: spit tobacco users face an up to 11 times higher risk of cancer of the mouth.

7. Nix the nicotine.

Healthwise, the best approach is to remove nicotine from tobacco altogether. Nicotine patches, gum and ‘inhalators’ are all recommended by health campaigners as alternatives to smoking.

So how do the big tobacco companies measure up? A spokesman for Philip Morris insists that "we are always conscious of the environmental impacts in our manufacturing and are seeking ways of addressing these", but declined to go into great detail. BAT’s head of environment, John Luke, says that the company has strictly monitored policies on deforestation and targets to reduce pesticide use. Forty-three percent of the tobacco in BAT’s cigarettes is cured using non-wood sources, he adds, and part of the farmers’ contract stipulates that they must follow BAT guidelines on sustainable agriculture and integrated crop management, which cover every aspect from sowing seeds to final harvesting. Luke points to BAT’s position in the top rank of companies in Business in the Environment’s 1998 Index of Corporate Environmental Engagement. However, BAT’s Environment Report, in which the monitoring and targets are outlined, is not made public, so it is hard to judge how impressive this performance really is. And the BiE survey is largely based on corporate self-assessment, and focused on management systems, not performance.

Overall, Clive Bates of ASH is sceptical. "This company’s products will be responsible for 1 million premature deaths a year by the year 2010, but as long as they recycle their paper cups, it’s OK."

ASH, 020 7739 5902; www.ash.org.uk

Out of the weed and into the flowers

As part of its anti-tobacco programme, the World Health Organisation is urging governments to encourage tobacco farmers to switch to other crops. The focus of WHO’s interest is mostly the developing world, which is responsible for 80% of global tobacco production. The main tobacco growing countries are China - which produces over a third of the total - the USA, Brazil, India, Turkey and Zimbabwe.

So how realistic is the expectation that farmers in these countries will diversify? Zimbabwe provides an interesting glimpse into the ambivalent relationship that both governments and farmers have with tobacco. The country depends on tobacco for 30% of its export earnings, and, not surprisingly, - it’s seen as an ideal crop for local conditions, thriving despite poor soil and unreliable rainfall. Yet farmers, nervous after three years of depressed prices and aware of international anti-tobacco feeling, are making efforts to branch out into other crops.

Zimbabwe’s farmers have tried various alternatives, including paprika, cotton and maize, but their greatest success story is horticulture. (The term covers cut flowers, temperate and tropical fruits, and out-of-season vegetables such as baby corn and mange touts.) Horticulture exports have boomed, from US$3.5 million in 1985 to $140 million in 1996. There are, of course, environmental downsides associated with this particular type of diversification, not least that of all the polluting aviation fuel used to get the relatively bulky produce to its northern markets. But the horticulture boom is offering farmers a realistic prospect of secure earnings to replace those of tobacco. And Zimbabwe has recently become the first African country to produce an Ethical Trading Initiative for horticulture (see Issue 18, pp33-36).

Duncan Miller, who runs a farm in Trelawney in central Zimbabwe, has been growing tobacco all his life and is vice president of the Tobacco Growers’ Association. His motivation for reducing his tobacco crop is not a question of principle, he says: "You might as well shut down all the distilleries." Yet since 1994, he has gradually been diversifying into horticulture, growing roses and ornamental daisies for export to Europe.

Miller’s farm is not huge by Zimbabwean standards - it covers about 1,000ha, 350ha of which is arable. The appeal of horticulture for him is that it requires relatively little land or water (unlike citrus, which some Zimbabwean tobacco farmers are also adopting). Although capital costs are high, flowers start to repay these within a year, and, after three years of production, he says horticulture is providing 35% of his farm’s earnings.

Miller is anxious to defend the environmental performance of tobacco, arguing that crop rotation with grassland protects the soil from depletion, and he stresses that it was tobacco earnings that enabled him to invest in horticulture operations. However, he agrees that he is part of a wider trend among Zimbabwean tobacco farmers - other examples include two former Tobacco Growers of the Year, who diversified into seed crops, asparagus and macadamia nuts.

Miller argues that Zimbabwe’s economy is too dependent on tobacco for government ministers to be swayed by international health programmes. Recently, the World Bank disputed the tobacco lobby’s claims about economic damage resulting from anti-tobacco measures. But in the case of the few countries whose economies are most dependent (such as Zimbabwe), it says that policies to aid farmers making the adjustment, possibly funded from tobacco taxes, are "essential". However, the Bank also stresses that "even if demand were to fall significantly, it would occur slowly, over a generation or more" - thus giving farmers plenty of time to adapt.

In the USA, health lobbyists have taken the novel approach of building alliances with tobacco farmers to ensure a closely regulated domestic production, with quotas, to protect against foreign imports. US tobacco farmers can see the writing on the wall: while more than eight out of ten say they personally expect to remain in tobacco farming, one in three would advise their children not to stay in the business.

Kirsten Denker is a freelance writer on environment and transport issues, and Editor of London Cyclist.

WHO, +41 22 791 2111; www.who.org

What’s in a cigarette?

Six hundred additives -

among them ammonia, used to give a better nicotine kick (just as with cocaine, it allows the nicotine to be ‘free-based’); cocoa, to dilate the airways, making it easier to inhale smoke into the lungs; and menthol, to numb the throat to the harshness of the smoke. Sugar and chocolate have also been added to cigarettes, designed, some claim, to make them more palatable to young people and first-time users.

Four thousand chemicals

as well as the better known substances such as tar and nicotine, tobacco smoke contains everything from carbon monoxide to hydrogen cyanide. Up to 100 of these chemicals are known to cause cancer.

Radioactivity -

in the form of the element polonium 210. One US study shows that a person who smokes 20 cigarettes a day receives a dose of radiation equivalent to 200 chest x-rays a year.

Pesticides -

no fewer than 16 sixteen applications are recommended during tobacco’s three-month growing period. They include Aldrin and Dieldrin, phased out in Britain in 1969, and DDT.

Tobacco planet

Over 80% of tobacco is grown in developing countries, where it’s responsible for the destruction of ancient forests, soil depletion and pollution from pesticides and fertilisers.

Deforestation -

a great deal of wood is used to dry tobacco, mostly as fuel, but also to build curing barns. In the tobacco-growing countries of south and central Africa, this accounts for around 5% of all ancient forest loss. In Malawi, where the ancient dry forests of the Miombo Highlands are particularly under threat, the figure is over 20%.

Soil depletion -

tobacco is very nutrient-hungry: it exhausts the soil of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium at higher rates than almost any other crop. So tobacco farmers are forced to use high quantities of chemical fertilisers to stay in production.

Chemical waste -

in the USA, the tobacco industry ranks 18th among all industries in its production of chemical wastes. Among those officially defined as toxic is nicotine: around 300 million kg is produced each year, principally from the manufacture of reduced nicotine cigarettes - ironically, in response to health concerns. Methyl bromide, widely used as a fumigant in developing countries, contributes significantly to ozone depletion.

Litter -

one in five items of rubbish found on the world’s beaches is a cigarette butt.

17 October 2001

Kirsten Denker