If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now

Chiquita Joins Tar Sands Oil Boycott

Fruit producer Chiquita Brands has become the latest company to stop using oil sourced from Canada’s tar sands, following a campaign by environmental group ForestEthics, reports the Financial Times.

The environmental group had targeted Chiquita and fellow fruit producer Dole in a campaign launched in August. ForestEthics took out full-page adverts in USA Today to highlight and criticize the companies’ use of oil from tar sands deposits in Alberta, Canada, for shipping and refrigeration. The group subsequently encouraged its supporters to bombard the fruit firms’ Facebook pages with criticism of their tar sands oil use, effectively forcing Chiquita to shut down its page’s comments section for a time, the FT reports.

Chiquita has now committed to identifying – and eliminating from its list of fuel suppliers – all of the companies that it believes sell diesel made from tar sands oils. In response, the Alberta Enterprise Group – a business group representing local employers – has called for a boycott of Chiquita bananas, the paper reports.

According to the FT, Chiquita is the 15th company to boycott, or reduce their use of tar sands oil, including Walgreens, Gap and Levi’s.

ForestEthics is now targeting Safeway and Walmart in its campaign, the newspaper reports.

Embrace Big Data
Sponsored By: UL EHS Sustainability

How the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) Can Improve Your Business Operations
Sponsored By: Digital Lumens

Become a More Effective EHS Leader for Your Retail Business
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

Zero Waste To Landfill
Sponsored By: Covanta Environmental Solutions


14 thoughts on “Chiquita Joins Tar Sands Oil Boycott

  1. Guess what – I and my family will now boycott all those brands. This is nothing short of economic extortion. An investigation into the funding sources of ForestEthics should be undertaken.

  2. This shows the tunnel vision the environmental movement continually suffers from. So let me spin this the other way. Don’t buy oil from Canada but please continue buying it from dictators and terrorists because they are so much better for the environment in the big picture.

  3. “tunnel vision”? You need to try better “spin” than that. The “environmental movement” has been forever at the forefront of less oil use in general, which inevitably comes from the sources you cite. Nice try.

  4. chiquita bananas are being added to my list of uninformed nitwits,their product will not be in my house as del monte has become our choice as well as our four kids and nine grandchildren.Chicquita has become the tenth company on our list of non support.

  5. Between the Saudis and Chiquita, the oil sands, not tar sands, are taking a bad wrap and the environmentalists are taking another shot at killing job creation in the U.S. and Canada. How dumb can these people be? Would they prefer to use oil from foreign nations with terible human rights records, rather than buy from Canadian neighbours who already provide more oil to the U.S. than the Saudis?


  6. Good for Chiquita and all other companies taking a stand against myopia. Yes, buying oil from dictators is bad, but pulling the trigger on environmental disaster is worse, and that’s exactly what those supporting tar sands are doing. There are many ways to diminish the power of the dictators. This, however, is one way for large corporations to respond to issues of environmental consequence. There is no single solution to any of these issues. A hearty thanks to those who are stepping forward and taking a stand for the environment.

  7. Isn’t this website devoted to the environment? Thought so. “Environmentalists,” as the name implies, are concerned with the environment, hence climate change. The tar sands are far more carbon-intensive than other sources, which is one cause for opposition. Another being that putting yet more sources of oil on the market is also counter-productive when it comes to environmental protection. My suggestion is to take rants about Saudis and “jobs” to other sites, or better yet, advocate something that clearly addresses a multiplicty of issues like a carbon tax.

  8. Just joined the large group of consumers who won’t be buying Chiquita brand bananas, avocodos, pineabpples, joiuce and Fresh Express salads anymore. What a bone-headed move by a company that supports terrorists and exploits their workers in central and south America!!

  9. I join in boycotting Chiquita. The result of their anti-Canadian policy has been to expose their sordid history – indeed, they should be the last to call the kettle black. To highlight the futility of Chiquita’s move – how will they determine which oils comes from where? Does oil come with a label, “Canada’s Oil Sands” or “Conflict Oil from Sudan”?

  10. I would be much more impressed if Chiquita and the other companies boycotting fuels derived from tar sands would, instead or in addition, INVEST in sustainable energy sources. Changing the names of those who use fuels from tar sands while maintaining exactly the same demand for petroleum-based fuels doesn’t accomplish much.

  11. Tar sands are destroying the environment. Oil greed and ignorance is destroying the fabric of humans on this planet.
    Ironic how those who challenge don’t boycott anyone, because they cause the system to sustain itself. The customer, aka consumer, aka all of us, will continue to demand oil until we all change. It can happen. Solar is already at parity in many parts of the US. the current level of EV car development and growth learly show that environmentalists are getting more headway than oilists…this is why there is so much anger and insanity on Capitol Hill and in this comment trail. Tho doth protest too much I always say. He who shouts the loudest as the most to LOSE.

  12. Brazil #2 producer of bannana’s. Which country in the Western Hemisphere benefits from the USA importing oil? Nice try to make this about the “environment”.

Leave a Comment

Translate »