the handmade soap masters

To help save orangutans, several “responsible soapers” suggest that palm oil can still be used, as long as it is ethically produced (i.e., organically certified) and ethically marketed (i.e., distributed through fair trade networks).

It is of course possible to resort to “more ethical” sources for common soapmaking oils such as palm oil, just to mention the one that seems to be winning the title of Most Eco-UnFriendly. It is a sad fact, however, that eco-friendliness, workers’ health and safety, sustainability and other “general good” considerations do not fit in with the business goals of any of the large public companies (corporations) that either produce, or import/export, or distribute, or market, or otherwise handle products and commodities coming from overseas for the retail market.

Given these restraints, choosing organically certified/fair trade palm oil does not guarantee per se a better future, unless one has direct and immediate control on the overseas sources. One example of an authentically more ethical alternative to corporate palm oil (the kind that requires forest destruction and orangutan extinction) is when a group of consumers get together in an informal “buying group (co-operative)”, and appoint a qualified co-ordinator to organise the purchase of ethically grown, organic palm oil directly from the local producers. And yet even in this case, the necessity of transporting the raw material from the production area to the co-ordinator, and then from the co-ordinator to individual members of the buying group, might add unnecessary levels of complexity and misuse of energy resources.

A much better way to improve our options for a saner future, is to choose local products. I have always found it a bit of a mystery how palm oil is considered “indispensable” for soap in a country like Australia, where so many other, just-as-good and locally produced oils are available.

It seems to me that the only sensible explanation for pushing consumption of palm oil, in this context, is that palm oil production can be carried out by the industry players in countries where land costs, workforce costs, environmental and human health costs are so outrageously cheap, that long-distance transport and storage are basically the only costs affecting the final price of the product.

And for large companies that use palm oil as the raw material for consumer goods, this is a fantastically “good deal”, and a good enough reason to invest in the marketing of “more ethical alternatives”.

Palm oil in soap is not needed, and we can all contribute to a better environment if we learn how to do without it.

It has been interesting to follow the developments of the debate on whether palm oil can be considered an “acceptable” soapmaking oil. As shown on TV, if we want orangutans to survive, we must immediately stop buying anything containing palm oil.

Apparently, some Australian TV station recently broadcast a documentary, denouncing how orangutans have become endangered due to unethical palm “farming” practices. Not owning a TV, I did not see the show, but I have been witnessing how the waves from that piece of Australian “news” are rippling through the vast international audiences of several soapmaking mailing list. Dozens of well-meaning (albeit mis-informed) Aussie soapers and supposedly eco-conscious activists have promptly reacted to the documentary by launching a (quite vicious) campaign against “those terrible soaps made by some, which contain bad palm oil, which kills those poor, lovely orangutans”. As if the consequences of “corporate farming” practices - the economically rational, multicultural, politically correct answer to global markets and increasingly rampant consumerism - stopped with the orangutans. I for one am willing to bet that the poor orangutans would have probably been wiped out altogether, by the time the documentary was watched (and exploited) in Australia in late 2006.

The question whether palm oil is indeed a more ethical option than animal fats, which it traditionally replaces in (oh so trendy) “vegetable only” soaps, is in fact several years old. More tropical forests and a larger number of orangutans could have been saved, if a sufficiently representative group of (so called) eco-conscious soapers stopped to listen and act years ago, when a few of us tried to raise awareness on the destruction of tropical forests caused by galloping demands for cheap farmland, yielding cheap raw materials for personal (as well as industry) uses.

Every year for over thirty years now, millions of hectares of jungle have been “reclaimed”, “redeveloped” and replaced by intensive farming schemes. With our support to consumerism and fast food, we have all contributed to the destruction. And those who now, by pointing the finger at palm oil users “because they kill orangutans”, insist on one small aspect of a much bigger problem, are not really doing much to reverse the destructive trend that threatens the whole world - at least as we know it.

Within the broader context of “responsible choices”, replacing palm oil is certainly a sensible step towards sustainable soapmaking. How to do it is the subject of my next article.

Several sources maintain that soap was first discovered at a place called Mount Sapo (or Mount Sappo), located in or nearby Rome. Most contemporary (Internet) soapmakers believe this Roman legend explains the origins of soap. But they are wrong - or rather, they have been wronged by misinformed marketing media.

According to the Roman legend myth (where “myth” is the correct name for the historical lie it covers), soap was first discovered at a place called Mount Sapo (or Mount Sappo), located in or nearby Rome. Here goes the popular “Roman legend”: While pouring out into the river the dirty ash-laden water where they had washed their laundry, a group of Roman washerwomen noticed a lathery scum develop where their discarded waters met the fat-laden waters coming from the cleaning of a sacrificial altar.
In some versions, the washerwomen were kneeling at the river’s edge, rubbing their laundry with fireplace ashes, while a High Priestess at the nearby temple was wiping down the grease that had stuck to the altar after one of the animal sacrifices, which were so popular back in those times. So when the grease met the ash-laden waters, a rich lather developed, and everybody immediately recognised soap - with the Latin word for soap, sapo, being chosen as a toponimical from the name of the place all this was going on: Mount Sapo (or Mount Sappo according to some “experts”).

This story is pictoresque, romantic, and completely fantastic. And yet, it sounds so perfectly “true” in our media-numbed society, that even the American Soap And Detergent Association has been (incredibly) reporting it as “The Origins of Soap”!

There are several details that give away the Mount Sapo story as not being historically reliable. In particular,

1. There is no Mount Sapo or Mount Sappo in or around Rome, nor there has ever been.
2. It is not enough for fats and fireplace ashes to occasionally and surreptitiously meet in the waters of a river, for them to produce soap.
3. According to Roman historians, “sapo” (the Latin word for soap) was a product used by the Germans as a hair dye. It is not clear whether “sapo” was the Latin translation of the Celtic term, “saipo”, or vice-versa.

An honest history of soap, with documented reference sources and the acknowledgement that the annals of history do not seem to satisfy all possible questions, is included in the book Soap Naturally - Ingredients, methods and recipes for natural handmade soap (Patrizia Garzena, Marina Tadiello), which is recommended reading for anybody who is serious about making good soap.