Origins Easy Breezy on the Surface

Anyone who’s ever been seduced by Origins’ ‘ginger souffle’ or ‘cocoa therapy’ knows that it would be easy for even the most green-minded beauty consumer to forget about pollution, natural resources and any other environmental ill in the pursuit of a little indulgence.

Origins itself has been touted for eco-friendly initiatives particularly in regard to packaging where they use both recycled and easily recyclable materials. They have recently signed on with Community Energy to offset 100% of their CO2 emissions from their North American retail stores and U.S. manufacturing facilities with wind energy renewable energy certificates (RECs).

The offset from their REC purchases are equal to a reduction of 4280 metric tons of CO2, 900 cars off the road or, theoretically, the planting of 3800 acres of trees. Their products don’t contain aerosols or use animal testing.

Origins has a ‘green’ corporate identity but the company is owned by one of the biggest names in beauty, Estée Lauder. In 2004, cosmetics manufacturer Estee Lauder was named as one of several liable parties for cleanup costs at two New York landfills. Contamination at the Blydenburgh landfill in Hauppauge includes solvents, paints, dyes and other manufacturing waste.

Groundwater contamination migrated some 400 feet from where waste had been dumped and down to a level of 535 feet below ground. Cleanup costs were estimated to be $16 million. At the second site, the Huntington/East Northport landfill, cleanup costs were estimated to be $20 million. (Newsday 6/10/2004)

Another issue that is related to the Origins/Estée Lauder connection is Estée Lauder’s (and Origins’) failure to sign the Compact for Safe Cosmetics which calls for the removal of harmful nanomaterials from cosmetics, sunscreen and personal care products to protect consumers, workers manufacturing such products, and environment.

The failure to sign the Compact, which includes cancer-causing ingredients, is in conflict with the company’s well publicized support for breast cancer research. In addition, Estée Lauder has been cited for sweatshop labor abuses, toxic dumping, and antitrust issues.

It’s possible that Origins, like another Estée Lauder subsidiary Aveda, could forge ahead as a social and environmental leader despite the sins of its parent company but a separate philosophy is still muddled.

In December of 2006, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition issued a press release claiming that some of Origins’ new products contain dangerous ingredients. According to Dr. Epstein, some of the products contain Butylene glycol (which can cause skin irritation if correct dilution is not used), parabens (which can cause hormonal disruptions especially in male embryos) and limonene (also a skin irritant and research has shown that it causes renal cancer in male rats).

Recycling and RECs are good environmental initiatives but Origins needs to amp it up if the company seeks to avoid a “greenwasher” label and maintain a green identity that is more than just skin deep.