how green is the red bullseye?

Having just moved into a new place, my roommates have been making frequent trips to Target for this and that. I always talk about sustainable living, but I'm really learning now the things that are simple (conserving energy and water) and those that are not-so-easy (buying organic food etc.) Target is a broke college student's shopping heaven, but while I was in that red store, I kept thinking, how green is this place?

The better world shopper guide grades Target at a C+ for social and environmental responsibility. But there is no detailed explanation of where the company fails or succeeds at achieving green goals. Co-op America rates the company poorly, citing among other things that "As a big box retail store, Target contributes to environmental and community degradation and sprawl," and "is the subject of repeated allegations of sweatshop sourcing worldwide." Yet according to the Target Corporation website,

"[Target] recognize[s] that we have a responsibility—as team members, as a company, and as global citizens—to minimize our environmental footprint. So we've sought ways to reduce waste, use energy more efficiently, and operate more sustainably. We're proud of our accomplishments and we're continually improving, one store at a time."

The thing is, whether or not Target is true-blue-green or brown-tinted, most college students can't really afford to shop anywhere else for housewares. So if we're going to shop at Target anyway, despite unclear ratings, how do we do it in the greenest way possible?

1) buy the green products


Target online has an entire section devoted to eco-friendly products, and carries known green brands such as Seventh Generation and Method.

2) be skeptical

Reusable shopping bags are among the products on the eco-friendly list. Yet, nowhere in the product descriptions for the bags could I find whether the bags are made from recycled or even organic materials. So it's important to look for details about the "green" products listed, and to know the brands that are good/bad before going in. (This is where the better world shopping guide pocket-sized book comes in handy. More info on greenwashing.)

2) Bring Your Own Bags (BYOB)

Unlike grocery stores that sell cheap reusable bags (made from recycled materials) by the counter and give a discount for those who BYOB, Target has no such policy. Furthermore, they use only plastic bags at the register, and though these bags have clever tips for reuse, quitting plastic is best. So it's important to BYOB. (And check out the Center for a New American Dream's C^3 campaign which includes an entire blog page for BYOB.)

3) Ask when returning a defective item

I returned a set of Gladware that was missing a piece, and the lady at the register told me that it would most likely be thrown away as a defective item. I thought, this is ridiculous! But I had already finished the transaction so that was that. Ask when returning items where they will go - if it's something perfectly good that will be thrown away, I'd say to ask about donating it.

earthfest

Today I spent the day at the 15th Earthfest, Boston radio station 92.9's annual "celebration for the earth." I had a great day with my friends, wandering around to the various booths, picking up lots of free stuff, and listening to some good music. Overall, I'd call the day a success, but I walked away somewhat disappointed in the greenness of this mega-event poised to spread the message of sustainability.

As a college student, I have been trained to sniff out and never refuse free food. So my friends and I mozied from booth to booth tasting the free giveaways - organic cereals, energy bars, juices, fruit, yogurts, etc. Now I know beggars can't be choosers, but I found the distribution of the samples, and some of the samples themselves, to be quite unsustainable. First of all, most of them were individually wrapped, and I know that this is for health reasons but it is incredible wasteful if you think about tens of thousands of people taking these little packages, opening them up, eating the food, and then throwing the wrappers away.

Second of all, as I've written about in a previous post, eating organic is more eco-friendly than not, but eating local is much more sustainable in the long run. So - especially as there were signs and tips all over the esplanade encouraging people to eat local - I was disheartened to see Whole Foods handing out free organic bananas. Now I know that they are delicious - bananas happen to be my favorite fruit- but you don't see too many banana trees around New England. Not this time of year, not any time of year. So that means that those bananas most likely emitted a hefty amount of carbon to make it to Earthfest. That just didn't seem in tune with "celebrating the earth" to me.

For all of the banana peels, cups, juice boxes and wrappers left over from all the samples, I was happy to see that Waste Management stationed trash cans, single stream recycling bins, and even some compost bins around the area. My complaint? Except for in one place, it was impossible even for this green girl to figure out where to put what waste. There were no signs explaining which kind of waste belonged in which bin - so it all ended up as just a mish-mash of trash.

My last and most major issue with Earthfest's green credibility was that I had trouble find information about the energy used to power the different booths and of course, the CONCERT. Was the energy from clean sources? Were the carbon emissions from the even offset?

**Added 5/25** It turns out that the concert stage was SOLAR POWERED.

I definitely discovered some great things today. I loved the little ecotips posted all around the esplanade that told visitors what they could do to live more sustainably. And I really liked seeing booths from mainstream stores such as Home Depot advertising their new highly energy efficient washers and dryers. Of course, the various nonprofit organizations signing up new members and getting their messages out - and handing out planting paper filled with seeds!

The best of all was izzitgreen.com, a rating website where users can log on and review businesses from a variety of genres ranging from arts and entertainment to financial services, health and recreation, spas and beauty, and restaurants. I registered on the spot, and I'll definitely be logging in to write a review when I get the chance. I think it's a great concept for a site, and much needed. After all, as I've been pointing out, it's hard to tell what's green and what's not in this greenifying world. See, even this dog thinks so.

Eco barbie?

As many in the green blogosphere have commented on, Mattel recently hopped on the greenwagon releasing Barbie BCause collection. The items are all made from re-purposed fabric that the toy company would otherwise have thrown away. But from lead paint to underpaid workers, Mattel doesn't exactly have a true green history.

" 'Barbie is always a reflection of current cultural trends and issues, and girls are increasingly aware of making a green statement,' said Richard Dickson, Senior Vice President of Marketing, Media and Entertainment, Worldwide, Mattel Brands. 'Barbie BCause is for eco-conscious girls who believe that being environmentally-friendly is the right thing to do, and we are thrilled to give extra meaning and extra style to what was once just extra Barbie doll fabric.' "

Smells like a load of greenwash, but the framing of the company's motives with the controversial product line are interesting. Shaping young minds is an important aspect of creating a culture of sustainability, but encouraging this kind of green consumerism doesn't seem like the right direction.

"eco-shape" bottle

I know I might be beating this 'green' marketing thing to death here, but this is the perfect example of what I am talking about:
The Eco Shape Bottle. It's all the rage from the bottled water companies - and of course it's better than using a regular plastic water bottle.

But honestly people. How can the words bottled water and eco really be used in the same advertisement? Bottled water is one of the most wasteful inventions of our lovely oh so unsustainable society. According to treehugger, "Approximately 1.5 million barrels of oil—enough to run 100,000 cars for a whole year—are used to make plastic water bottles, while transporting these bottles burns even more oil." What's more, "Nearly 90 percent of water bottles are not recycled and wind up in landfills where it takes thousands of years for the plastic to decompose."

The only real eco-shape bottle is a reusable water bottle like these from Sigg or Klean Kanteen.

the master's tools: thoughts on consumer culture and the "green" revolution

"The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house"
-Audre Lourde

When I was talking to a friend recently about our efforts in the youth climate movement, she brought up this quote. Granted, in this essay Aurdre Lourde was writing about nothing directly related to global warming or sustainability, but the quote struck me as oddly applicable to one of the more stark contradictions that I find in our consumer culture's adaptation of the "green" movement ...

One of the best ways to be sustainable is to live simply, to break from the norm of overconsumption that exists in this country and to buy less. Out of the three R's, it is first about REDUCING, then REUSING, and then recycling. So whether or not a company is environmentally and socially benign or a raging greenwasher, is "green" marketing as an effort to sell more products contradictory to living simply , one of the central themes of sustinability? Can we shape a culture of sustainability using master consumerism's tools of advertising and marketing goods?

In some respects, I do think that it is possible. Just because things are heating up in the stratosphere, our water is a little contaminated, and there are workers being mistreated, we're not going to just STOP spending money. Unfortunately, despite all of its externalities, the economic show must go on. So if businesses and corporations are actually working to reduce their environmental impact and to be more socially responsible (see "echoing eco" to find out how to tell whether they are greenwashing or not), we should be supporting those venues as opposed to other ones.

But sustainability is not just about production - a big chunk of a sustainable transformation will have to happen on the consumption side of the market. Is all of the hype about sustainability and "going green" really going to have a substantial impact on reforming the unsustainable way that Americans overconsume?

Green marketing gets the idea out there, it certainly puts some concept of sustainability on the average person's radar - and this is great. But just because it's popular, I don't think that tomorrow, everyone in America is going to wake up and think, "I'm going to go green today." And for those who do decide to hop on the green bandwagon because it is trendy and cool, how does this ensure that these people are living the message of the movement? One of the problems that I see now that the 'green' revolution has reached the tipping point is that it has become so trendy that it's hard to distinguish between those businesses, people and practices that are truly environmentally sustainable and those that are just a part of the fad.

Sure, you can wear a shirt with a recycling symbol on it, you can buy a hybrid car, you can put solar panels on your house; but if you have three closets full of organic cotton clothes, if you drive your hybrid 500 mi each week, or if your McMansion is running on 10% solar power, I don't think that we can really call this a sustainable lifestyle. (For example, above we see Julia Robert's new eco-friendly Mansion - do you see the oxymoron in this?)

The truth I think that green marketing, media, and messaging is an effective way of getting this "green" movement started. But these tools alone will not dismantle the master's unsustainable house - they can only make waves to a certain extent. Hopefully, they were serve their purpose of introducing the vague idea of environmental sustainability into the mainstream, so that we can build a truly sustainable culture of simply living and environmental/social consciousness from there.

"Live simply so others may simply live."

echoing eco: a critical look at "green" marketing

Of course, if people are buying into Green,the market is going to sell it. Green advertising is one of the fastest growing trends in marketing. Even Wal-Mart, notorious among the activist community for their social irresponsibility, has launched an Eco Campaign. BP- yes, the oil company - began marketing themselves as "Beyond Petroleum" to tout their alternative energy investment initiatives.

When fighting global warming is hot, there is a strong incentive from the business perspective to hop on the green-wagon (in general I think this is a good thing, but I've still got some further thoughts on this for a later post). This brings up a critical question...

If we are trying to "vote with our dollars" by buying from sustainable companies, how do we know if these businesses are practicing what they preach?

A recent study completed by environmental marketing firm Terrachoice found that 99% of "green" marketing labels were either false or misleading. Greenwashing is defined by CorpWatch as "the phenomena of socially and environmentally destructive corporations, attempting to preserve and expand their markets or power by posing as friends of the environment." The following interview with the President of Terrachoice, Scott McDougall explains the "six sins of greenwashing."



So much of this "green" advertising could be a bunch of "all natural cyanide," so to speak. In order to protect ourselves from buying the faux-green products, we've got to be skeptical. Planet Green suggested asking questions before buying such as

1. Where did this material come from?
2. What are the byproducts of its manufacture?
3. How is the material delivered and installed?
4. How is the material maintained and operated?
5. How healthy is the material?
6. What do we do with the material once we’re done with it?

And of course, checking for certifications from well known programs such as

Green-e, EcoLogo, and Green Seal.

Unsuitablog also suggested looking out for buzzwords and phrases, and poor use of scientific facts.


But if you were to go to the store right now - not Whole Foods or Trader Joe's, just average Joe's store - or to flip through magazine advertisements, or to watch TV commercials, do you think that you would know who's greenness is for real? Here's a quick test to get an idea of your green IQ:

With their Ecomagination campaign, GE is claiming that

"Ecomagination puts into practice GE's belief that financial and environmental performance can work together to drive company growth, while taking on some of the world's biggest challenges. Learn about the GE commitment to products and services that are as economically advantageous as they are ecologically sound."

Are they for real?




Starbucks claims that

"Contributing positively to our communities and environment is so important to Starbucks that it’s one of the six guiding principles of our mission statement."

Are they for real?





On their website, Clorox writes,

"With Green Works cleaners, Clorox has set a new standard for natural cleaning – the products are as effective as conventional cleaners in its category but made from plant-based ingredients."

Are they for real?


How did you do? If you want more, a good website to sample some greenwashing ads is the Greenwashing Index, where people post ads and others rate them 1-5 on level of greenwashing (the only problem is a lot of the ads are car companies, oil companies, and energy companies - which is also quite ironic). For information about specific products, Coop America's Responsible Shopper guide can be helpful, and I really like the Climate Counts Scorecard site as well.