Drowning in Green - Ecoconsumerism revisited
Sometime it is just not possible to find an environmentally friendly version of the product you want to buy. But now you can ease your conscience by using one of a range of 'green' credit cards to make your purchase.
-- Hey green spender! Spend (and borrow) a little money with these -- The Observer, August 5
I wrote a couple of months back on the slowly burgeoning backlash against eco-consumerism. That was before the great hulking beast of Live Earth spluttered across the planet, pop-stars attempting to make a difference as only they knew how, by asking you to spend money, drink beer and watch Bon Jovi.
Since then, the eco-consumerism juggernaut (biodiesel fuelled) has been gathering pace, creating one of the greatest marketing opportunities of the decade. That quote above comes from a new column launched in the Observer this week devoted to "eco-finance" issues. There are many important issues within this bailiwick, to be sure, and sensible, ethical investment is one of the few ways I believe an individual can have a serious impact on the carbon emissions of the multinationals. So bravo for the column.
However, this (generally very intelligent) paper has fallen for the hype -- "if it is just not possible to find an environmentally friendly version of the product you want to buy", heaven forbid that you wouldn't buy it. Buy it with a credit card that not only gives you great low rates (of course with a slight "conscience" premium) but contributes a token amount to an environmental cause!
The ever-readable, ever-reliable and ever-angry George Monbiot published a column last week in the Observer's weekday sister, The Guardian, surveying the absurdities of this emerging market, from eco-gadgets to free conference junk made from recycled paper:
"Uncomfortable as this is for both the media and its advertisers, giving things up is an essential component of going green. A section on ethical shopping in Goldsmith's book advises us to buy organic, buy seasonal, buy local, buy sustainable, buy recycled. But it says nothing about buying less."
"Green consumerism is becoming a pox on the planet. If it merely swapped the damaging goods we buy for less damaging ones, I would champion it. But two parallel markets are developing: one for unethical products and one for ethical products, and the expansion of the second does little to hinder the growth of the first."
Monbiot's article illustrates the inherent class-snobbery of eco-consumerism, and the sometimes even destructive effects of a showboating ecological hobby lifestyle. The world needs the answers to fit within the pages of a glossy.
I was recently researching web hosting alternatives for a client, keeping in mind those reports about Second Life avatars consuming about as much electricity as the average Brazilian (person), and I found a fair few providers proudly claiming themselves to be "carbon neutral". DreamHost even give you badges to put on your site so you can animatedly claim you are a "green site" for being on their servers.
What does this mean in practise? Generally, that they've purchased carbon credits from larger industrial players (via many of the emerging middle men spotting an opportunity) who were reducing their emissions anyway, or planting a few trees (via). It does not mean they've installed ranks of low-power computers all powered by renewables. It apparently doesn't even mean they've stopped using disposable coffee cups, they just use ones made from "renewable resources" (such as trees, I'd suppose). I don't mean to pick on DreamHost, for good intentions are better than none, nor do I mean to pick on those who stick carbon-neutral stickers on the back of their petrol-guzzlers. The problem is not these people, it is the combined weight of industry, and its marketing machine, creating a world where we believe that we can pay somebody else to actually deal with the real issues.
The problem is, carbon emissions and pollution can't be offset by cash. In that marketing focus group from five years ago I discussed in my last post on this, I expressed a certain terror that the introduction of "carbon-offset" energy products, as opposed to encouraging the use of fully renewable energy sources, was nothing more than a money grab wearing the clothing of ethical business. That it would make it somehow okay for me to run the giant industrial air conditioners in my current house non-stop, because somewhere out there a tree is being planted to balance. Good old-fashioned greenwash.
What, though, is the alternative? What is our proposition if we are in opposition? Are we suggesting that one not attempt to be carbon neutral, or use eco-friendly products? Of course not. The parent organisation of this blog will soon be publishing an ethical shopping guide that contains many wonderful suggestions for ethical shopping and consumption, and I'd stand by everything in it as worthwhile and important effort. But (if you'll fire up your solar-powered Melissa Etheridge for a second and pretend this is projected behind her) too many people use environmental branding as a get-out-of-apocalypse-free card, a Prius as a license to drive more, a green credit card as a license to buy more, or Bono as a license to stage a global series of concerts consuming untold ridiculous amounts of resources and generating massive amounts of waste.
Don't outsource your responsibility. That's all.
And no matter what Bono tells you, don't forget this, worth repeating from my last post: as the hype tells you, the responsibility for saving the planet is on us. But not in the way they want us to think. Don't just be a good consumer. Be a good citizen. Don't buy the story that climate change can be fixed by changing the products you buy (though you should). Don't feel pressured to buy coffee table books printed (with beautiful varnish and the smell of fresh petroleum wafting from the ink) in their millions to show you how to replace your chemical cleaners with organic ones. Six months ago, the Australian media was full of politicians talking of their "climate change credentials", and yet now as we get closer to the election cycle, real environmental policy, bold environmental policy, is nowhere to be seen.
Buy the story instead that, insomuch as it's not too late, the greatest impact we can have is by forcing governments to legislate with strength and ferocity against the combined industrial forces of the world, by forcing them to embrace Kyoto and the strategies beyond. By forcing politicians to be bold, to act with vision and reimagine the world after fossil fuel. By telling them we want them to stop exploiting our passive inbuilt racism by blaming China and India. To invest serious money in research and development of viable medium and long-term alternatives, be they nuclear, renewable or breeding a new race of wheel-running super hamsters (I don't know, I'm not a scientist, just putting it out there). They'll only do that when we remind them just where the responsibility lays, and when we remind them that, even though we have a nice new pre-approved ecoMastercard, we won't be buying their organic, all-natural fertiliser any more.Technorati Tags: environment, carbon offset
Leave a comment