RFID provides better traceability in the food supply chain.
Dated: 1 October 2008
BY PETER HARROP, CHAIRMAN, IDTECHEX.
Improved food traceability permits rapid, timely and appropriate responses to accidental or deliberate food poisoning and degradation. It assists in stock control and permits customers to have what they want, when they want it, as well as providing information on food origin and the manufacturers. Electronics now enable better food traceability and computers are used to process and distribute timely information in the supply chain.
RFID
Radio frequency identification (RFID) tags enable each food package to have a unique electronic number read by automated readers – even with many labels at a time. Electronic readers could even read the labels that are obstructed by surrounding goods or objects. These tags are not easily damaged and they could be read from any direction, in large quantities and at high speeds.
Unlike barcode labels, RFID tags do not affect the aesthetic appearance of food packages – they can be hidden on the inside. Eastman Kodak and Somark Innovations, for example, have also patented edible electronic tags that could be applied to food using FDA-approved materials.
However, manufacturers today consider it costly to have these electronics go onto food and pallet loads and cases. In the West, some major retailers have previously required consumer goods to be tagged onto pallet loads and cases. Anti-theft tags were even required, regardless of cost. These demands have increased the profits of the retailers but not the suppliers, resulting in a lack of support by most suppliers, with a small percentage of their cases and pallet loads fitted with RFID tags today.
Paradoxically, both suppliers and retailers would be keen to adopt RFID when the use of tags becomes more cost effective. In the US, about 60 apparel brands and apparel retailers would be adopting and testing RFID on individual items this year. The cost of implementation is justified as the profit margins are generally higher in apparel than in food.
Retailers in East Asia consider positive consumer service and shopping experience as important as cost reduction.
RFID cost savings measures in East Asia
In East Asia, companies are not keen to adopt electronic product code global (EPC global) numbering and systems, as these are features that are considered as unnecessary and costly to implement. The high cost of membership and number issuances is also a push factor to deploying the systems. The industry has, therefore, looked for alternative ways to adopt the technology.
• U-Code
An alternative to the EPC, the U-Code is invented and managed by Japan’s standards group Ubiquitous ID Center UIC. It is being trialed by East Asian countries such as Taiwan and Korea. The cheaper RFID tags could be manufactured without a silicon chip and they use printed transistor circuits developed by Japanese companies such as Matsushita, Toppan Printing, Dai Nippon Printing; and Paru from Korea. Each tag is expected to cost $0.01 from the current price of $0.10 in the future. It would then be possible to print standard RFID directly onto packages and food cheaply. Currently, about 85% of barcodes are printed directly onto packages and products without labels. RFID is expected to perform the same task in 10 to 15 years time.
• More benefits to consumers
Retailers in East Asia consider positive consumer service and shopping experience as important as cost reduction. Stores in Japan had previously tested RFID tags on food to provide consumer information and loyalty rewards. Food is typically held near a terminal in a store and the terminal would provide information such as food origin and details of farmers. Consumers could also download computer game software as a reward for buying particular RFID-tagged foods.
• Printing electronics
The advancement of printed electronics now enables packages with dynamic color displays that could communicate, illuminate or flash an image when it senses consumers in close vicinity. Consumers could read instructions and promotional messages, as well as play games on the packaging. There is even a Japanese invention in which a package emits an aroma when it senses a person is near. In the pharmaceutical industry, more drug trials are using RFID blister packs to identify users and record the time pills are removed from the packaging. Some packaging systems would even capture patients’ images. If adopted in the food industry, these technologies could provide better traceability, stock control, consumer benefits and protection.
www.idtechex.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Growing RFID use in China
New, printed electronics are expected to be widely used in the world, and East Asia is proving to be the largest user and manufacturer of RFID and printed electronics by value. This is evident in China. According to IDTechEx Knowledgebase, of over 3,400 RFID projects in 108 countries, China leapt from the world’s seventh largest user by number of projects in 2006, to the third position in 2007. The country ranked second to the US in 2007.
The world’s largest adopters of RFID by the number of projects in the IDTechEx RFID Knowledgebase of over 3,400 projects in 108 countries.
The format of RFID tags by number of projects in the IDTechEx RFID Knowledgebase shows how labels are meeting the needs of retailers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justifying Safety
When machinery suppliers are locked in a sales war, safety is sometimes the first casualty.
BY FRANK SCHREVER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, PILZ SAFE AUTOMATION. FOOD MAGAZINE
Dangerous machinery could undo, within minutes, reputations built over decades.
Take these quotes from a machinery supplier. The first, before the amputation: “Why should I make my machines fully compliant with the law and standards, when my competitors don’t?” The second, after the court case: “I now know what I should do to make my machine safe. I have offered the compliant option to my customer but they don’t want to pay for it. What now?”
The catch-cry is ‘safety is non-negotiable’ but when machinery suppliers are locked in a sales war, safety is sometimes the first (but sadly, not the only) casualty. Both buyers and sellers need to consider the costs of neglecting safety – whether they are human costs, workers’ compensation costs, legal liabilities or even goodwill.
Immediate costs
Workers’ compensation might not be cheap but it is only the tip of the iceberg after a serious incident. Employers must deal with selfreproach, long-term physical and emotional trauma, sick leave, excess payments, extra overtime, paperwork, investigations, staff turnover and legal costs. A report by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC) estimated that the indirect costs of a temporary injury that reduced the capacity of a worker in 2000-2001 was over $8,000.
Legal liability
Even the most hard-nosed financial controller understands legal liability and the value of risk management. And, in the case of machine safety, the law is clear. All importers, suppliers, manufacturers and designers in Australia are obliged to minimize risk by design, via engineered solutions, before relying on human behavior.
The law makes sense because it is human to make mistakes and therefore it is better to make machinery safe rather than rely on people to avoid hazards. Of course, it is not always possible to completely eliminate risks with good designs. So the law deals with this by using a well-known hierarchy of controls detailed in the occupational health and safety (OH&S) legislation.
Non-compliance with the regulations is costly. WorkSafe inspectors can and do shut down operations until safety is restored. When someone is injured, the legal costs, fines and lost productivity could cripple the businesses, employers, machinery suppliers, importers and designers.
When someone is injured, the legal costs, fines and lost productivity could cripple the businesses, employers, machinery suppliers, importers and designers.
Human cost
Severe injuries inflict a personal toll on workers, families and employers that is rarely reported in the media. However, they would outlast any business cost. The law enforces a moral obligation to look out for the safety of others. But sadly, thousands of Australians are maimed at work each year. In April, Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities chair, John Watson, announced a national campaign to address machine safety in manufacturing.
“Unguarded machinery has the potential for causing severe injuries, including crushed fi ngers or hands, amputations, burns or blindness,” says Watson. “In NSW, around 1100 serious incidents occur each year as a result of inadequately guarded machinery, with 46% of injuries occurring within the manufacturing industry.”
Severe injuries inflict a personal toll on workers, families and employers that is rarely reported in the media.
Goodwill
Dangerous machinery could undo, within minutes, reputations built over decades. Designers and suppliers of the equipment who were hauled to court have found it difficult to remain in the marketplace. The Australian manufacturing is a tight-knit community and news of court cases and convictions spread fast. Employers convicted of safety breaches are no longer ‘employers of choice’. A tarnished OH&S record could also jeopardize existing contracts with customers. On the other hand, proper guarding and safety control systems could be advantageous for suppliers competing with non-compliant, low-cost imports. When safety is part of the design, it does not compromise on production or ease of use, unlike guards or rails that are slapped on as an afterthought.
It is not always easy to make a case for expenditure on safety. One could rarely show it would generate extra efficiencies and in most cases, the statistical gains in lost time through injuries are incremental and difficult to predict. The irony is that the costs of neglecting safety are only really known once it becomes too late and when it has become far too prominent to ignore.
www.foodmag.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hong Kong warns on canned soup
Hong Kong's Centre for Food Safety (CFS) advised the public on September 11 not to consume two types of canned soup that might have an objectionable smell.
They are batches of Campbell's Condensed Cream of Mushroom Soup (405g/14.3oz) and Campbell's Condensed Creamy Chicken Mushroom Soup (410g/14.5oz). The Associated Press says about 30, 000 cans were recalled in Hong Kong and Macau. A CFS spokesperson said the importer Campbell Soup Asia was recalling the affected products that were manufactured in Malaysia as a precaution. The company has also set up a consumer helpline for enquiries. "We have alerted the industry and are closely monitoring the situation. We also appeal to traders to stop selling these two products," says the spokesperson.
The company has recently reported in its fourth quarter and fiscal 2008 results that sales for international soup, sauces and beverages were $362 million, an increase of 17% compared to a year ago. Sales in the Asia-Pacific region increased due to the favorable impact of currency and growth in the Australian soup business, which was partially offset by costs associated with the launch of new products in Russia and China and impairment charges on certain trademarks.
www.cfs.gov.hk
-------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimizing Recalls
New report shows it would take more than a month to enact a recall, with costs high enough to cripple many companies.
EDITED BY DAVID BELLM, PACKAGING DIGEST
Modern traceability software helps food companies track information on every raw ingredient used.
A new study by AMR Research shows that recalls are more common and costly than expected – expenses often exceed $10 million per recall, with companies losing twice that much. The report says that a majority of food and beverage companies surveyed participated in at least one product recall in 2007 with more than half of the losses associated with those recalls exceeding $10 million. The study developed in conjunction with Lawson Software found that 40% of the respondents had incurred losses of at least $20 million in 2007. This is despite the fact that traceability processes and systems could make many of these recalls avoidable.
Entitled “Traceability in the Food and Beverage Supply Chain,” the study surveyed companies in the US, the UK, France and Sweden. It reveals that, on average, it takes food and beverage companies 14 days to sense the need for a recall and 34 days to enact it. Respondents say that by that time, less than 40% of the affected product could be collected because the rest has either been consumed or thrown out by consumers.
“Despite a perception among food companies that they’re doing a good job at managing product quality, the staggering cost of recalls proves that ‘business-as-usual’ isn’t working,” says Rob Wiersma, industry strategy director for Lawson. “Food producers could be much more proactive in managing food safety to improve product quality and reduce supply chain risk.”
Addressing issues
While the food and beverage industry has been slow to adopt modern traceability software, many companies appear to recognize it might be time to change their mindset. Three out of four companies surveyed plan to invest on improving their time to sense a quality issue and enact a recall this year. An equal number of respondents have also plans to invest to improve supply chain traceability this year.
Modern traceability software helps food companies track information on every raw ingredient used. In the produce sector, it could provide detailed information such as the time of harvest of an apple for example, the temperature during shipping, and the batch it belonged to. By capturing these details − down to the individual case or specifi c product − traceability software could help manufacturers sense and resolve food safety and quality issues before products leave their manufacturing or processing plants. Food safety is one of many factors that could trigger costly recalls. Traceability software could help food companies to sense triggers such as a soup label with an incorrect marketing claim or a missing allergen warning label quickly. This improved ‘time-to-sense’ capability enables companies to address product quality issues during the manufacturing and packaging processes to reduce losses associated with recalls.
According to the AMR study, companies that proactively manage product quality efficiently possess five characteristics: multi-enterprise tracking, unit-level tracking, manufacturing automation, cross-functional team reviews of quality data, and mature supply chain teams. One such company is Norwaybased seafood company Marine Harvest. It produces one-third of the world’s farmed salmon and trout with operations in 18 countries and customers in more than 70 countries.
“Software solution helps us control product quality across the long growth cycles of fish like salmon,” says Arnt Mjoen, IT manager for Marine Harvest. “It also supports end-to-end supply chain visibility. This helps us ensure we consistently deliver fresh, highquality products that meet our customers’ specific growing and production requirements.
www.packagingdigest.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA: Infant milk formula is safe in the US
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a health information advisory on September 12 following reports of contaminated milk-based infant formula manufactured in China. It says there is no known threat of contamination in infant formula manufactured by companies that have met the requirements to sell infant formula in the US.
Although no Chinese manufacturers of infant formula have fulfilled the requirements to sell infant foramula in the US, FDA officials are investigating whether or not infant formula manufactured in China is being sold in specialty markets that serve the Asian community. The authority has advised caregivers not to feed infant formula manufactured in China to infants but with an appropriate infant formula manufactured in the US instead.
It has been reported that a number of infants in China who have consumed Chinese manufactured infant formula are suffering from kidney stones, a condition which is rare in infants. The Chinese manufactured infant formula may be contaminated with melamine. Melamine artificially increases the protein profile of milk and can cause kidney diseases such as those seen in the affected Chinese infants.
www.fda.gov
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
