The current buzzword in marketing is ‘going green’ or ‘eco-friendly’.
Today’s New York T
imes has an apropos look (subscription required)at the phenomenon ( which I had ranted about earlier in my Madness of Magazines post on my personal blog), thus confirming my suspicions that while going green might be desirable, there will always exist a vast contingent of eager pilers-on who see marketing manna in attaching a ‘green’ label to just about anything.
For instance, Home Depot’s ubiquitous green labelling which already came in for derision in this NY Times op-ed titled "How Green is that Chain saw?".
"Plastic-handled paint brushes were touted as nature-friendly because
they were not made of wood. Wood-handled paint brushes were promoted as
better for the planet because they were not made of plastic.An
electric chainsaw? Green, because it was not gas-powered. A bug zapper?
Ditto, because it was not a poisonous spray. Manufacturers of paint
thinners, electrical screwdrivers and interior overhead lights claimed
similarbragging rights simply because their plastic or cardboard
packaging was recyclable."
Never mind that not buying into the newest ‘green’ craze and reusing your ancient battered but perfectly serviceable stuff would in fact be the more environmentally friendly approach.
From the latest NY Times article:
Critics question the notion that we can avert global warming by
buying so-called earth-friendly products, from clothing and cars to
homes and vacations, when the cumulative effect of our consumption
remains enormous and hazardous.“There is a very common mind-set
right now which holds that all that we’re going to need to do to avert
the large-scale planetary catastrophes upon us is make slightly
different shopping decisions,” said Alex Steffen, the executive editor
of Worldchanging.com, a Web site devoted to sustainability issues.The
genuine solution, he and other critics say, is to significantly reduce
one’s consumption of goods and resources. It’s not enough to build a
vacation home of recycled lumber; the real way to reduce one’s carbon
footprint is to only own one home.
Buying a hybrid car won’t
help if it’s the aforementioned Lexus, the luxury LS 600h L model,
which gets 22 miles to the gallon on the highway; the Toyota Yaris
($11,000) gets 40 highway miles a gallon with a standard gasoline
engine.
When malls jump in on the act
and try to become bastions of greenism, these may seem like an oxymoron
of sorts, when their primary purpose is to just trigger more consumer
spending. "We’re going green",they thump their chest in self-adulation
"Come and spend a day shopping on products guaranteed to save 5 acres
of rain forest, 3 barrels of petroleum and 2 Congolese villages". Nobody
should be fooled by these tactics, except those who love to shop and
use any justification to purchase the now-fashionable tag of being
‘green’.
That’s not to say that small steps taken by businesses and other institutions in becoming more energy/space
efficient/reducing waste/water consumption are not going to make a dent
in the climate crisis. But how many greenified malls will it take make a difference?
Why push
concepts and models upon rising economies like India and China (‘a new
Walmart opening every week’) rather than leaving in place perfectly sustainable,
already existing greener practices such as spread out neighborhood stores which use paper wrappers instead of adopting more energy-intensive packaging and other practices? One merely has to see the legions of countries now banning the humble and petrohungry plastic bag to conclude that it is truly one of the greatest scourges of mankind ( and marine life too!).
In a world ruled by money and who has the most of it, it might make
sense to first try appealing to the pocketbooks and the vanities of
people for the greater good. Buzzwords and marketing may be the initial trigger for change, but it should morph into a deeper understanding of how to go beyond the superficial approaches and seeing the bigger picture in the efforts to save the planet from consumerism run amok.
Updated: Link that Ruchira posted in her comment. A must-read if you were ever curious about how exactly the recycling process works for all the newspapers, plastic, glass and metal that we dump at our curbside on trash pickup day.
Accidental Blogger 
5 responses to “Trading Greenbacks for Green (Sujatha)”
Great point, Sujatha.
This is so similar to the low fat craze on everything from soda to blackforest cake when eating less and smaller portions at the average American diner or restaurant could also be a simultaneous welcome change.
While I agree that new products, buildings and cars should focus on eco-friendly manufacturing, there should be equal attention paid to recycling and conservation of older products. Recycling is a huge challenge but nothing is too big a problem if someone figures out a way of making money from it. Remember the kabadiwallah (junk collector) in India? He took from us almost every small household reject that he could recycle. And since he paid cash for the junk, the householder had the incentive to hold on to old paper, books, broken utensils and other items, instead of throwing them into the trash. Because everything he took, was indeed recycled, there was that running joke about so & so coming across a college exam paper / love letter in its new incarnation as the paper bag containing the roasted peanuts he/she bought at the bus stop.
I agree with almost everything here. Most important, don’t throw away perfectly usable items. Also don’t buy, build or drive if you don’t really have to. And yes, please don’t have too many babies.
LikeLike
That was a very good article on the details of recycling, Ruchira. I added the link to the article. It was an eye-opener to learn that energy consumption costs for metal could drop 95% if all metal was recycled, as most of the energy is consumed in extracting metal from the ores.
The kabadiwallah is turning into a dying breed, at least in my hometown. There was always one of them doing the rounds monthly, and my mom would trade old saris and household articles that had outlived their useful life for brand new stainless steel pots and pans or cash. No longer, though. Who knows, perhaps with increased awareness of how important it is to recycle, the kabadiwallah may still make a comeback.
LikeLike
Nice post. I also remember the utensil selling woman who came by and sold new utensils in exchange for used clothes. That was a nice barter system, and it was fun to see my mom (and others) bargain with her while my brother and I sat on the stairs watching the proceedings with much interest. My dad (and pretty much everyone else in the neighborhood) always took 2-3 cloth bags for groceries and vegetables – this was ~25 years ago (and he still does). I’m glad that the same concept is now gaining ground in the US (5 cents off for bringing your own bag), though India is also going through the phase of realizing the ill-effects of plastic bags. Last time I was in New Delhi, I saw many signs warning people against using plastic bags. T.S. Eliot’s words come to mind (“..Will be to arrive where we started, And know the place for the first time.”).
After living in the US for the past 10+ years, I’ve certainly realized and gained a new appreciation for many of the sustainable means of living in India that I grew up with, and are/were part-and-parcel of the social fabric. Not to have a romanticized, starry-eyed notion of “India is the best,” but more of giving credit where (and whenever) it is due.
It’s wonderful that the green awareness is seeping in, but we still have to be careful to separate the wheat from the chaff (green-washing), and of course, the best policy is to try to reduce, reuse, recycle, freecycle before (mostly) buying anything new. And, not beat oneself up over rigorously adhering to these policies. :)
Paul Hawken’s ‘Ecology of Commerce’ is an excellent book on this issue, as is ‘Toxic Sludge is good for you’ by Stauber & Rampton.
Cheers,
-Amit
LikeLike
Glad you liked the post, Amit.
Incidentally, about 10 days back there was a large article in my local newspaper on the growth of freecycle.org and the growing trend in finding ‘good homes’ for unwanted clutter. I promptly signed up for the local chapter (though the disclaimers and rules were quite eye-poppingly draconian!) I’ve yet to make a first “OFFER” post,though there’s a brand new (ancient) digital color printer box sitting by my computer table (minus some must-have and doubtless impossible to find cable not sold with the set), begging to be put up on freecycle. Maybe I’ll get around to ‘offering’ it today.
LikeLike
Sujatha,
I have been a satisfied freecycle member for a few years now, and I have experienced first-hand (and being on both ends) some of the issues that have lead to the evolution of strict rules. In my opinion, the rules are justified so that people act responsibly. Plus, they have evolved in a democratic way with the participation of members. Good luck with it, and please let us know (hopefully) in a future post about your experience!!
-Amit
LikeLike