Is Maple Leaf Foods really carbon neutral as they claim?

I noticed advertising from Maple Leaf Foods claiming that the company's operations are carbon neutral, which surprised me. An industrial-scale meat production company carbon neutral? Is that even possible?

Well, the answer is: maybe. For one thing Maple Leaf produces pork and chicken products, which are much less carbon intensive than beef and dairy. But even more importantly, Maple Leaf is a meat processing company, and does not actually raise or feed the animals it processes, which is where much of the carbon load of meat arises.

And yes, Maple Leaf does indeed offset its electricity and transportation operations by investing in environmental projects like wind and solar farms, waste diversion, and reforestation. But this is only sufficient to offset its Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions (from in-house operations like heating, warehousing, vehicles, etc, and from energy purchased and used by the company), but not its Scope 3 emissions (from necessary related activities, such as their raw materials and supply chain). So, the most carbon intensive part of processed meat production - raising the animals in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) - is not offset.

So, it kind of depends on your definition of carbon neutral (I have written about the Scope 1, 2 and 3 problem elsewhere). The product that people are buying, processed meat, is far from carbon neutral, even if the company that does the final processing and selling part is. David deCoriolis, of sustainable agriculture campaign Farm Forward, calls Maple Leaf Foods's claim "a greenwashing effort, top to bottom", although that may be a little harsh. They are certainly doing more than most of their competitors. But in a cut-and-thrust business environment where everyone is trying to burnish their green credentials, companies have to be pretty careful what they claim.