The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #7

at least it's an honest fake...
GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #7 – THE SIN OF WORSHIPPING FALSE LABELS
This sin is a relatively new one to the report. According to terrachoice, this sin “is committed by a product that, through either words or images, gives the impression of third-party endorsement where no such endorsement actually exists; fake labels, in other words.” So in my ever diligent research mode, I set out to find some of those fake labels.

But then I thought I’ve been trying to get you all to do some of this for yourselves (after all, many of you don’t know me; how reliable am I, anyway?). So I thought I’d post an obviously-fake label to show how ludicrous things can get. I’d bet that I could put the above label on a product and some people would buy it thinking it was actually sustainable, green and eco-friendly. It’s similar to the label on the “organic cigarettes” in my post regarding Sin #5 where they were actually honest in saying “No additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette.” They’re actually quite upfront and “honest” about it, but we still buy the product. Why is that?

I’m reminded of the old bumper sticker that says “If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

We have reached the final sin of greenwashing published by terrachoice in their report titled “The Seven Sins of Greenwashing”. It’s been an interesting journey for me. I have always enjoyed research and finding out the underlying facts to any claim or “news” story. I hope you have enjoyed this series, too.

I’ll leave you with this charge: Don’t get outraged, just pay attention and take the time and energy needed to check it out. And that applies to whatever “it” is.

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #6

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #6 – THE SIN OF FIBBING
Outright lying drives me nuts. I can understand stretching the truth (although I don’t agree with it or condone it), but deliberately messing with the numbers or stats to give a result you want is not acceptable. Period.

Early in 2010, LG Electronics, maker of the refrigerator pictured above admitted to using an illegal device on some of its refrigerators to skew the energy saving results. It’s interesting because the refrigerator actually uses MORE electricity to operate and could endanger your food. So not only was LG lying, it appears they don’t care about your health and safety as much as they care about their energy label.

There was also apparently another instance of a manufacturer putting the big yellow Energy Star guide on their dryer. Does anyone know what’s wrong with that picture? (hint: dryers don’t have Energy Star labels).

As with everything that we read, see or hear, I believe it is our responsibility to check out all claims as best we can from reliable sources. This won’t be a fool-proof 100% guarantee, but I can tell you I’ve easily found the information I’ve wanted for about 95% of the cases I’ve tried to check. That means the correct data is out there and relatively easy to find. We just have to go looking for it. The manufacturers who outright fib are betting we don’t.

And, judging from most of the political stuff ( I thought of a few other, less kind words) out there I’ve heard over the last couple of years, the manufacturers will win that bet; we won’t go looking for that information.

Next Post: Sin #7 – The Sin of Worshipping False Labels

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #5

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #5 – THE SIN OF LESSER OF TWO EVILS
Well, I struggled with this sin. Not that I gave in (have never smoked, never had the desire to smoke), but that there were a couple of pictures I could have used. The lesser of two evils sin deals with making a claim that diverts your attention from the real problems. The picture I decided to use is that of a company that makes organic cigarettes. Really. Organic cigarettes.

And not only that, but the smoke screen (pun intended) continues because not only are these cigarettes organic (natural tastes better, after all), their tobacco has been grown “in a responsible, sustainable way through our earth-friendly and organic growing programs.” The ad goes on to list how they are reducing their “footprint on the earth by using recycled materials and renewable energy sources like wind power.” And, as ATIS547 from flickr (who posted the photo) added after their quote “protecting the earth is as important to us as it is to you” by saying “in other words, the earth is fine — it’s YOU we’d like to see dead.”

I used their picture because they seem to win the prize (at least in my book) for the most attempts at diversion. But I have to confess it was a close one between these cigarettes and the 2011 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid SUV.

The Tahoe hybrid gets an amazing 20 mpg in town (better than the 15 mpg of the standard Tahoe) and hauls up to eight people. My problem is I rarely see more than one or two people in most any SUV. And that’s where the issue arises for this sin: the increase in fuel economy actually diverts your attention from the real problem. And that is that most times, you don’t need an SUV for carting one or two people around.

So I guess I just want to point out that we should, once again, be very discerning in the ads that bombard us all the time. The cigarettes even have the disclaimer “No additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette.” Oh, really?

And I’ll be the first to say if you regularly cart six or eight people around, the Chevy Tahoe hybrid might be a good choice for you. But if you’re like most of us who drive around with one (at most two) people in our vehicles, maybe a smaller car (or the bus…) might be a better option.

Don’t get sucked into the hype; stay focused on the real issues.

Next Post: Sin #6 – The Sin of Fibbing

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #4

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #4 – THE SIN OF IRRELEVANCE
By now, you can probably see there is a lot of overlap in these sins. As I have been relating the sins and some examples, I’m finding things like vagueness and irrelevance and no proof have a lot of commonalities. The Sin of Irrelevance is “committed by making an environmental claim that may be truthful but is unimportant or unhelpful for consumers seeking environmentally preferable products.”

The example the TerraChoice studies use is that of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). CFCs have been shown to deplete the ozone layer and as such have been heavily regulated sine the 1970s. And, in 1978, the United States banned the use of CFCs in aerosol cans. Yet, some aerosol cans still carry a label “CFC-Free”. Totally irrelevant and completely misleading. I liken it to advertising a new car as having seat belts for all seats. Wow. I’m underwhelmed.

“All natural” is another term that is really, totally meaningless from an environmental standpoint. And I say that because the following are “natural” products: arsenic, uranium and formaldehyde. So just because something is natural, that doesn’t mean it’s good for us. By the way, formaldehyde also qualifies as “organic.”

I have also learned that everything, in improper quantities can actually be poison to us. Water, necessary to life, in the wrong quantity can poison us. It’s called “water intoxication” and is basically the opposite of dehydration. And very small quantities of certain chemicals can be beneficial. An example would be medicines. So we have to be careful making blanket statements.

And we have to be aware of statements that ultimately have no meaning. The proliferation of green products and the subsequent marketing related to selling those to us, should put us, the consumer/purchaser/user on a heightened level of awareness. We have as much responsibility as anyone to verify statements and sort through irrelevant and meaningless claims.

So be careful, be informed and be aware.

Next Post: Sin #5 – The Sin of Lesser of Two Evils

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #3


GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #3 – THE SIN OF VAGUENESS
The Sin of Vagueness is when a manufacturer makes a claim that is unsubstantiated or what I’d call so “milk toast” as to have no meaning. As an example, the logo shown here says “eco-friendly”. OK. The product is friendly to the ecology. Friendly how? What’s THAT supposed to mean? Does the product enhance the environment, cause minimal harm or what? It’s kind of like the other phrase “all natural” that I’m saving for my next post on irrelevance.

But in the same sense, when a manufacturer makes a claim about the environmental benefit of their product, there needs to be substantive evidence that what is said is something that can be backed up. Otherwise, just let the benefits of the product stand on their own without clouding it with vague claims that really mean nothing and are only made to sell the product.

I understand marketing and I understand the “need” in our current culture to sell products. We are a consumer society (and whether or not that’s good or bad is a debate I will save for another post). But what the Greenwashing Reports we have been referring to talk about is some clear, concrete guidelines on what the claims actually mean. And being able to find the information, accurately and clearly would be so helpful.

Which leads me to what I think is a pretty cool discovery. As I was researching this article, I came across a Natural Home Magazine article from July, 2009 (OK, there’s a lot of information out there and I try to stay up on the latest, but still often miss stuff) with a site that intrigued me.

It’s called The Good Guide and is also available as an iPhone app. And that also was interesting because I have an iPhone and am a big fan of Apple products. So I downloaded the app and tried it out. It’s free and currently has about 70,000 products available.

Products are rated in the areas of health, the environment and the company’s ethics related to society. A simple scale of 0 to 10 in these three categories is established and an overall rating is given. There are a lot of really neat features with this site and the iPhone app. Probably the most exciting for me is the ability to use my iPhone’s camera to scan the bar code and get the rating. I’ve tested it and it seems to work quite well.

So if I’m in the store, shopping for an item, and have a question or concern, I can whip out my trusty iPhone (always fun to do, regardless of the outcome), scan the bar code and generally get the info I want.

And The Good Guide has more detailed information available if I want it. That helps get past the Sin of Vagueness.

Next Post: Sin #4 – The Sin of Irrelevance

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #2

"Mother Earth Approved"
photo by Adam Kuban
Today we’ll dive into Sin #2, The Sin of No Proof. But first, as a reminder, here’s a definition of Greenwashing:

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #2 – THE SIN OF NO PROOF
The Sin of No Proof is one where there isn’t a readily-available way to verify the claim. So my picture here of a wine “bottle” that claims to be “Mother Earth Approved” would be deceptive in that you can’t verify that claim. I visited the website for this wine and I think this is probably done largely in jest, but it’s still a claim that can’t be substantiated. The cartons are made of paper, “a renewable resource that comes from trees.” and are recyclable (much like milk cartons).

But many of the claims on this particular product’s website about package ratio, CO2 footprint, fuel efficiency (because they are lighter to transport) would be difficult to quantify. Sometimes a manufacturer will make claims that try to snow you with facts or figures or fine print that really can’t be determined or with data that is irrelevant or so vague as to be irrelevant.

Green Guides” is a publication of the Federal Trade Commission that is seeking to set out some strict guidelines for what is appropriate in an advertiser’s claim and what isn’t. One example they give is a good indicator of what we need to be aware of:

“A trash bag is labeled ‘recyclable’ without qualification. Because trash bags will ordinarily not be separated out from other trash at the landfill or incinerator for recycling, they are highly unlikely to be used again for any purpose. Even if the bag is technically capable of being recycled, the claim is deceptive since it asserts an environmental benefit where no significant or meaningful benefit exists.”

As with all advertising claims, green or not, we as consumers need to be smart and aware. We need to pay attention, read closely how claims are worded and be sure we make the best decisions we can on our product purchases. The purpose of advertising is to get us to buy the product. And while many manufacturers will make accurate claims, there are those who will not. And with the proliferation of “green” as a consumer buzz-word and desire most of us have, we need to be even more aware.

Next Post: Sin #3 – The Sin of Vagueness

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #1

Eco-Friendly Disposable Diapers
In 2007, 2009 and 2010, a company called terrachoice published a report titled “The Seven Sins of Greenwashing”. And although they found that 95% of “green” consumer products they surveyed were found to be guilty of one of the seven sins, things do seem to be improving. More manufacturers are really living it, not just selling it. In my effort to raise your awareness of “green” claims (and being able to discern the truth about them), I want to post the seven sins here so you can have a better perspective and keep your guard up about manufacturers’ claims.

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #1 – THE SIN OF THE HIDDEN TRADE-OFF
The first sin is suggesting a product is “green” based on a narrow focus without drawing attention to larger environmental issues. The example they use is that of paper from sustainably-harvested forests may not take into account the incredible amount of water and resources that go into producing that paper.

I’m reminded of an old ad that said “8 out of 10 dentists recommend Brand X sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum.” Or “Brand Y Beer is America’s number one imported German Beer.” Both are very narrow areas of focus that may (or may not) miss the larger picture.

The eco-friendly disposable diapers shown above will still go into the landfills and, in my opinion, miss the whole point of whether or not disposable diapers are even a good way to go. Another example is the compostable or biodegradable disposable cups for coffee or water. An incredible amount of water goes into just making these cups, they are used once, then discarded. So while we have “backed up” from styrofoam cups to a more eco-friendly version, we have missed the point that we’re still throwing them away! A washable, reusable cup or glass (or diaper) will have a much more friendly impact on our world and our resources. And you know, it will cost less money in the long-term.

The three “R’s”, reduce, reuse, recycle start with reduce. We need to be willing to step back a bit and look at reducing what we consume first. Before we reuse something (which is the second step) and before we recycle something (third step), we should consider whether or not we should even be using it in the first place. And once we determine if we need to use it, do we really need something disposable or can we use something over and over? We get sucked into the “green” compostable cups or corn-based forks when a little extra time and effort washing glass cups and metal forks might be a better solution.

Our church is starting a new direction with our coffee bar on Sunday mornings. We are switching to glass cups and plates, metal forks and we’re going to wash them. It will be a bit of a challenge (the dishwasher is at the other end of the facility and a long walk), but our team is committed to at least giving it a try. Much of this stems from our belief of stewarding our planet and our spiritual response to our Creator, but you know, I think we’re going to find out we save money, too. And when you get into a win-win situation like that, it’s a good thing.

Next Post: Sin #2 – The Sin of No Proof

The Carpet and The Dust Mite

For many years, the concept of wall-to-wall carpeting was marketed to us for our homes. The truly cool, hip homes had carpeting everywhere. Soft, warm and conducive to walking around barefoot, carpet was the status symbol of the 1970s and 1980s.

I remember the house I grew up in. It had linoleum in the bathrooms, kitchen and family room and wood flooring in the rest of the house. I guess in the early 1960s in Oregon, wood floors were cheap. Well, inexpensive at least. When I was in Junior High (Middle School for those of you younger than 45), my parents decided to join the “wave” and carpet the whole house. I resisted. I liked my wood floor. It was a beautiful, warm reddish-brown. And it was easy to keep clean. Not that cleaning my floor was anything I ever really did (I was 13, after all). So, after much prodding and stubbornness on my part, I convinced my parents that while they were going to carpet the rest of the house, they should leave my bedroom the wood floor. And I won.

So the entire time I lived at home (which was until I finished college and got married), my bedroom had a wood floor. I’d like to say I was smart and ahead of my time and all that, but really I just liked the wood floor.

Since then, I have learned that carpeting is probably one of the dirtiest, hazardous-to-your-health aspects of our homes. We spend almost 90% of our time indoors, so the indoor environmental quality (IEQ) of our homes is very important. And in a study “Allergy-Resistant Housing – Principles and Practice”, common allergens in the home list dust mites, pollen, pet dander and fungi and molds high on the list of importance related to the effects these things have on our health. Dust mites feed on human skin flakes and live and breed predominately in our carpets. Pollens get tracked in on our shoes and clothes and can easily be transferred to our carpets.

Cleaning carpet is an interesting concept. Most vacuum cleaners just stir the dirt, dust and mites around. Have you ever seen a vacuum when you first turn it on have that “puff” of dust and dirt go flying around? Think about that for a minute then tell me if you think it’s really doing any good, serious cleaning. We have a central vacuum system in our current home so at least the dirt goes outside our home into a canister in the garage.

But the wake up call or realization or whatever you may want to call it came the first time we had the carpet professionally cleaned. The extractor water was black. And I’m thinking “I’m walking on this, laying on this to watch TV, breathing this.” And while we have some wood floors in our home, most is still carpet. The other thing we’ve noticed is when we dust mop or simply sweep the wood floors, there is an incredible amount of dust and dirt. And my wife and I think “this is also throughout our carpets…”

You may notice in my posts that we are designing a new, smaller home. We are also targeting a LEED Platinum rating. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a third-party rating system for sustainability and healthy buildings. One of the LEED emphases is hard-surface flooring. They, too, recognize the health benefits to not using carpet.

So as we are designing our new home (view the Lawrence Street House posts), we’ve committed to using all hardwood floors. Everywhere. We will have no carpet. If we have rugs, they will be throw rugs that can be removed and cleaned periodically. And we will have a healthier home.

Simple Sometimes is Really Good

OK, so a few days ago I dissed on the one-cup coffee makers with all the disposables. Now for something truly sustainable and amazing. It’s the Niagra Stealth HET (High Efficiency Toilet). Made by Niagra Conservation, the Stealth toilet is a single flush, using only 0.8 gallons. Most of the new dual flush toilets are 0.9 and 1.6 gallons per flush, depending on whether or not you are flushing #1 or #2. This toilet uses air-assist to achieve the results and seems to work very well.

I haven’t actually used one or seen it “in action”, but all indications are that it’s pretty amazing. It recently received recognition as one of the Top 10 Green Products for 2010 by the Environmental Building News organization.

It also is simpler, with less moving parts. It uses air and vacuum in the filling to help the efficiency of the flush, is quiet and retails for about the same as a good quality standard toilet: $300. It currently comes only in white. But it may the future of HE toilets.

Advent Conspiracy – Give Presence

Sunday, November 28 marks the beginning of Advent. A few years ago, a group of pastors in Portland, Oregon started the Advent Conspiracy. Their concept was simple: Worship Fully, Spend Less, Give More and Love All. You’ve probably noticed in my posts that I have a tug in my heart toward those who are the disenfranchised and the less fortunate. And actually, how this fits a simple, sustainable lifestyle is this: we have so much, if we lived just a little simpler, just a little less in the American-Dream-Consumption-Mentality, we could share. Even just a little.

I also have a good friend, Emily, who has a tug in her heart toward an awesome organization called Heifer International. Heifer International was founded in 1944 by a midwestern farmer named Dan West. His story is fascinating. Click here to read it.

Because of Emily and the Advent Conspiracy, I decided this year to lobby my online friends (Facebook and other) to donate an Ark through Heifer. The Oregon Ark is our team and our goal is $5,000. That $5,000 will provide a bevy of animals, two-by-two around the world to people in areas of extreme need.

The Advent Conspiracy mentions how Americans spend $450 BILLION every year on Christmas. Watch their video here. How many times have you bought a gift out of obligation? How many times have you received a gift out of that same obligation?

I’m suggesting, as they do, that you consider buying ONE LESS gift this Christmas. Just one. And consider sending that $25 to Heifer through The Oregon Ark Team to help people around the world who really NEED a sustainable source of food and income.

Food. Income. Hope.

Consider helping your neighbor this Advent Season.