After my research on greenhouse gas emissions of different outdoor clothing brands (see analysis here 1, also see Zhi’s analysis on hotel emissions 2 and sneaker emissions 3), I wanted to find out the carbon emission for different brands of skin care products. For me, this piece of information is even more important than the carbon emission of an outdoor jacket, because a small jar of facial moisturizer only lasts 3-6 months while a branded outdoor clothing can last 10+ years.
I am so happy that I did this research. After reading ESG reports of 6-10 companies and several blog posts, I learn how the beauty industry reduces carbon footprint in making, transporting and selling skin care products. The raw materials should come from natural, sustainable and biodiverse plants; water going through factories should be treated and/or recycled; electricity in manufacturing facilities and stores should all come from renewable energy; unnecessary packaging and plastic should be avoided, and etc.. Talking about avoiding plastic, this eco-brand Ethique has made solid face cleanser, solid face moisturizer and even solid face cream! I am very intrigued by this and if you are curious as well, you can contribute $1 to our website 4 and obtain 20% off as a thank you award. Other brands (like L'occitane 5) provide refillable products, which are composed of less packaging and at a better value.
Similar to previous analyses, I show carbon emission numbers of four companies, which are: Johnson & Johnson, Unilever, Shiseido, and L'occitane. I admit that it reflects my personal bias, particularly the last two companies. Shiseido had been the most popular skin care brand in Asia before Korean beauty products occupy the Asian beauty markets. I love L'occitane for its’ shea butter foot cream. Putting it on my foot right before I go to bed is part of my daily bedtime ritual. While both Shiseido and L'occitane companies focus on beauty products, Johnson & Johnson and Unilever carry much more than skin care products and are proportionally bigger in revenue. Therefore I warn you to take a grain of salt in the numbers of Johnson & Johnson and Unilever because drugs, food and beauty products are all lumped together to calculate carbon emission and revenue. I have also looked into some other big companies for their ESG reports, but I couldn't display it here because they either didn’t have complete emission data (e.g., Estee Lauder doesn’t have scope 3 6,7 data in their 2021 ESG report) or specific emission numbers (e.g., Procter & Gamble doesn’t have any scope number in their 2021 ESG report). So, a big shoutout to these four companies that fulfilled their responsibility in ethics and sustainability in 2021.
Before I present to you how much greenhouse gases are emitted when making a 50 ml facial moisturizer, let us point out a few definitions and make a few assumptions.
Same as before, we use a regular refrigerator’s volume to measure the CO2e emission data. In this way, we hope the visualization of many refrigerators full of CO2e feels more tangible and you will be a more environmentally conscious consumer.
I assume that the greenhouse gas emission is evenly distributed into every dollar in revenue.
As for the average price of a 50ml facial moisturizer, we decided to go by company because of the huge price difference between a luxury brand like L'occitane and a budget brand like Neutrogena from Johnson & Johnson. Some simple google search on the facial moisturizer led us to conclude the average price for Johnson & Johnson is $20 8, L'occitane $75 9, Shiseido $75 10 and Unilever $10 11.
A medium-sized refrigerator for a family of 4 has a typical capacity of 20 cubic feet 12, which equals 0.56 cubic meter.
CO2’s density at average temperature is 1.98 kg per cubic meter 13.
Learning from the analysis above, we found that Johnson & Johnson generates the least in unit CO2e emissions, while L'occitane generates 8X of Johnson & Johnson’s emissions. As a L'occitane fan, I am particularly disappointed to discover that a 50 ml L'occitane facial moisturizer produces 17 refrigerators of CO2e, which is equivalent to buying a $200 Patagonia puffer jacket (see outdoor jacket GHG analysis 1). I will have to find a replacement for my foot cream. What about you? Does this article help you to make a conscious choice? Do you have any eco-friendly skin care brands to recommend? Feel free to comment below since we want to build a platform where consumers can consolidate our requests to the big brands, to help them reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Comments