Shiny Green Button

I was under the impression that the Energy Star ecolabel was backed by independent testing. But it’s apparently based on companies self-reporting their compliance with Energy Star guidelines, with the federal government conducting random tests to verify those claims.

According to this story in GreenBusiness, the U.S. Department of Energy and the EPA are now cracking down on those who may be misrepresenting product performance to earn the Energy Star label. (Disclosure: One of AHA!’s clients is EPEAT, an ecolabel system that covers an array of environmental attributes for technology products.)

What most interests me here isn’t how the Energy Star program is administered, but the basis of my perception. While I can’t pinpoint when I became aware of the Energy Star label, I know I’ve paid increasing attention to it over the past few years as we’ve replaced our refrigerator, dishwasher, computer and TV.

In researching those products, I treated ecolabels such as Energy Star as objective data, in the same category as product features and specs.

I think there are a few reasons for my thinking. First, Energy Star is a government-run program, so I assumed it involved comprehensive testing and enforcement. I perceived it to be a public service, something developed to protect the best interests of consumers.

Second, it focuses on a specific aspect of performance, i.e., energy efficiency, across an array of product categories. That horizontal focus suggests a consistency and methodology independent of a specific manufacturer or industry.

Third, the Energy Star logo. It signals the oversight of a third party. It’s a reassuring reminder you can look for and immediately recognize regardless of the type of product or the brand.

I’m not suggesting the Energy Star program lacks rigor or credibility. This story is just a reminder that we need to examine and test our assumptions about all environmental claims, even those that seem objective.

Ecolabels can be helpful, but they are only a piece of the puzzle. Consumers need to do their due diligence and understand the parameters and potential biases of these programs rather than accepting them at face value.

And brands should consider going beyond displaying the Energy Star label on packaging and calling it good. In fact, the Energy Star logo could be an opportunity for more substantive communications. After using it to gain consumers’ attention, brands could offer more information that helps deepen understanding of what the Energy Star logo signifies or how energy efficiency pays off in lower power bills and reduced carbon emissions.

UPDATE: It sounds like the Energy Star program may lack rigor and credibility after all. This story (Phony products impress federal energy program) underscores my point about the need to examine our perception of apparently objective environmental claims.

A few months ago, I wrote about Walmart’s sustainability program and wondered: how will the world’s largest retailer make sustainability meaningful to its customers’ everyday lives?

Since then, Walmart has pressed full-green ahead toward its wildly ambitious sustainability goals, which include using 100 percent renewable energy and generating zero waste.

Last week, Walmart announced a goal of cutting 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions from its supply chain over the next five years. As part of the announcement, the company released a video on YouTube about how it intends to make a difference.

The video explains “the more energy we conserve, the more money we save, the less pollution we create, the better we live.” It then gives the example of washing laundry in cold water instead of warm water. According to the video, if everyone in the U.S. switched to cold water, we could save $15 billion a year and 42 million metric tons of greenhouse gas.

The video had received just over 500 views last time I checked, and responses to it on YouTube and Walmart’s Facebook page are largely negative—a mix of global warming skepticism and complaints about Walmart stores themselves. But, one tiny image in the video strikes me as an incredibly powerful way to get the word out to consumers who might care more about saving money than saving the planet: a washing instruction label that reads “Machine wash cold.”

The New York Times reports that Walmart is working with suppliers to change clothing labels to indicate that items can be washed in cold water. This doesn’t educate or inform or inspire the way a video on cutting greenhouse gas emissions might, but it’s a more direct path to results.

If Walmart is truly going to democratize sustainability, as former CEO H. Lee Scott has said, this kind of simple, practical message right on the product might be the most effective way to do it.

Photo credit: crazytales562 on Flickr

Last week, I wrapped up all my holiday gifts for my out-of-state family, stuffed them in boxes and schlepped them to the post office, all the way thinking, “This is not very green of me.”

Too bad I hadn’t heard about UPS’s carbon neutral shipping option, which allows customers to offset the emissions associated with shipping for a fee. Apparently DHL is rolling out a similar program, though it’s only available in Europe at the moment.

I like this strategy for so many reasons. First, it’s a way for these companies to take a step toward integrating sustainability into their core business, rather than just tack it on as an afterthought. Also, the program makes the environmental impact of shipping more visible to their customers, and provides their customers with an easy way to make their own businesses more sustainable.

Unfortunately, there’s one aspect of UPS’s program that’s missing for me. I was hoping they would make it easy for customers to see the associated carbon footprint for each package. But this type of carbon analysis service is only available to their high-volume customers. Providing all customers with the environmental cost of shipping a package could drive increased awareness of the issue. Pairing the carbon footprint numbers with some simple tips, like using smaller boxes when possible, UPS can extend their influence even further, by helping smaller businesses and individuals do better for the planet.

On Wednesday, I attended the Sustainable Industries economic forum in downtown Portland. Paul Hawken was the keynote. He focused his talk on the challenges we face transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. Although this was familiar ground for most in attendance, Hawken brought new perspective to the issue, delivering both a sobering (perhaps depressing) and hopeful message.

He cautioned us to think of the unrelenting news about climate change and other urgent environmental issues as neither good nor bad. It’s just information—and information is the engine of opportunity. In other words, it’s what we do with the information that matters. Rather than see the worst and be overwhelmed by a sense of powerlessness, we should feel inspired by opportunity and empowered to act.

Yet Hawken pointed out there is a place for climate change pessimists, which he called “doomers.” They exist, he said, to make the designers of solutions brilliant. Designers are motivated to prove the doomers wrong, to do what’s necessary and figure out later whether it was possible.

The bulk of Hawken’s talk took its cue from what he called the Red Queen dilemma, namely that “It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place” (from Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll). While we need to drastically cut our reliance on fossil fuels to slow the rate of climate change, we also need to increase our consumption just to maintain our current quality of life.

That’s because we need more energy to extract increasingly marginal resources that keep civilization running until renewable sources of energy can be produced on a massive scale. The largest new oil fields are under miles of ocean and sand. The easy veins of copper, zinc and other vital metals are tapped; we’re working with declining, less productive mines. We have to drill deeper and deeper into aquifers to get our water. And so on.

The problem is, the rate of bringing new sources of energy online in time to mitigate the worst of climate change seems almost impossible. I didn’t capture the specifics Hawken rattled off, but it essentially requires us to begin adding staggering numbers of solar panels, wind turbines, wave generators and even nuclear power plants every minute for the next 25 years.

At this point, all the air went out of the room. There was a palpable sense of doom.

But Hawken was undeterred. “You should all be smiling,” he reminded us. “Think of the opportunities.”

Industries need to organize to accelerate progress, he said. The U.S. building industry, for one, is the largest green NGO in the world, and it is having success creating a new industry around green standards. (Hawken acknowledged you could debate whether they were going far enough.) Where are the similar organizations for the banking, chemical or other industries, he asked?

And there are emerging technologies that don’t limit us to current constraints that make a daunting challenge seem impossible. For example, a solar panel made of more efficient but less toxic and energy-intensive materials that can be printed could leapfrog our ability to generate energy from the sun. Just 70 minutes of sunlight, Hawken said, is the equivalent of the entire world’s energy use.

There are enormous opportunities to reduce energy use, too. While increasing the supply side of the equation is sexy, lowering demand is where the real action is, Hawken said. There are countless innovations to be discovered and huge money to be made. It’s all there, everything we need, in the information. The rest is up to us.

After a wondrous holiday weekend here in Portland (blue sky, sun, lots of planting, farmers market, live local music, mountains in view—is this heaven?), here’s something that helped me get back to the ol’ grind this morning. McDonald’s, who, IMHO, has done quite well the past few years in the area of CSR reporting, has done it again.

The granddaddy of all fast-food chains has just released a report that includes 80-plus green practices from their locations and operations worldwide.

The report features successful practices in energy, packaging, anti-littering, recycling, logistics, communications, restaurants, sustainable food, supplier leadership and other areas

Here are two nuggets that I’m particularly McLovin’ from this showing:

• You can read the report in a nifty virtual flip-book format (not just the standard PDF)
• You can cast a vote for one of five different environmental initiatives for the corporation. Way to get people to interact with the brand!

So … hats off to Micky D’s for its CSR communications efforts. Great, now I’m hungry for fries.

Call me a nerd but it’s Friday afternoon and I’m excited because I just found a great new report on sustainability efforts of major American cities. According to the writers, it’s “one of the first-ever assessments of exactly how cities are addressing climate change—and what they need in order to take these efforts to the next level.”

The report, “Green Cities: How Urban Sustainability Efforts Can and Must Drive America’s Climate Change Policies,” by a group called Living Cities, examines 40 of the largest U.S. cities’ progress on reducing emissions and provides recommendations in three areas identified as having the greatest potential for immediate impacts.

While I must admit I’ve only scanned this extensive report, I’ve already learned a lot and can tell it’s a valuable tool for city planners, nonprofits and companies looking to serve the needs of the green economy. 

For a quick hit, go to the back of the report and take a look at some of the survey stats:

• While four in five big cities regard sustainability as a top priority, only three to 10 staff members are focused on climate change in sustainability. Several big cities have just one full-time person.
• Most cities report budgets of $150,000 and $500,000 allotted to reducing greenhouse gases.
• More than 75% of big cities have, or will soon have, detailed plans on how they will reduce greenhouse gases. Nearly all of their targets call for emissions cuts of between 10 to 20 percent in the next five to 10 years.
• More than two-thirds of cities report that state and federal government have had little impact on their work.

Doing some quick math with these staff and budget figures leaves me wondering how big cities will reach their emissions targets with their current resources. However, the report’s recommendations are encouraging, outlining a bottom-up approach that includes retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency thereby creating middle-class jobs (a la Obama’s stimulus bill), reengineering workforce and economic development systems, and focusing on sustainable transportation and compact development. 

It’s heartening to read how cities have taken the lead on tackling climate change and may soon get much-needed support from the federal government. But of course it’s going to take a lot more help and resources to accomplish the goals identified. For starters, I’m going to make a point to look at the sustainability plans of Portland, where I live, and Vancouver, Wash., where I work, and see how I could possibly help.

Photo credit: Noël Zia Lee on Flickr

Dare I mention it? Next Wednesday is Earth Day. Before you tune me out—because every company from BP to JCPenney is Whap! Bam! hitting you over the head with its green marketing campaign, making you feel like you need to consume your way to a better world—I have good news for you.

You do not need to go out and buy a Prius right now. It truly is the small things that make a difference.

Yesterday, I attended a great webinar on greening the office, presented by Sustainable Industries. The first presenter, Marlowe Kulley, from the City of Portland’s Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, showed Portland has earned its status as one of the greenest cities in the U.S. by taking small actions—using mass transit and cycling, recycling, participating in residential renewable power programs. All these small steps have helped Portland reduce its greenhouse gas emissions significantly, while nationally, emissions continue to increase.

So I suggest you celebrate small for Earth Day. Here’s one idea. April 20-26 just so happens to be Turnoff Week, brought to you by the Center for Screen Time Awareness, who urges you to turn off your television, cell phone, computer, iPhone and PlayStation. Celebrating both Earth Day and Turnoff Week at the same time can help you avoid the jangle of Earth Day advertisements, save energy and maybe use the extra time to do something earthy, like plant some veggies or something. Or maybe walk over to your neighbor’s house for a conversation rather than sending her a messaging on Facebook (I’m guilty of this one).

What are your ideas for small ways to celebrate Earth Day?

I didn’t have to stray too far afield for amusement today. A stinging analysis of Tom Friedman’s column caught my eye as I scanned the Huffington Post. The writer, David Roberts, skewers Friedman’s critique of the Democratic House climate and energy bill, one assertion at a time, with a skill that is captivating and frightening to behold. Oh how I love the smell of schadenfreude in the morning…

Admittedly, I am a fourth wheel in this discussion, commenting on one writer’s scathing analysis of another writer’s critique of another group’s proposed action. I am the archetypal bastard derivative blogger commenting on something with little information or fear of recrimination, thrice removed from anyone actually working to solve the world’s problems.

My first take is that the critique and the analysis are unproductive. A form of greenbashing or “outgreening” by both writers.  The House energy and climate bill is already being undermined by skeptical, moderate Democrats, in addition to their uber-skeptical Republican counterparts. Now, House Democrats’ efforts are undermined by Tom Friedman, whose credibility on this issue is now being called into question by a writer determined to outgreen him.

On second thought, I think it’s healthy. It’s good to see Friedman playing devil’s advocate when it comes to proposed policy. And it’s good to see luminaries like him pilloried as much they are pedestalled.

For the record, I think Friedman’s misguided in his editorial. However, lively debate over how to address climate change is exactly what we need right now. And this is not the kind of greenbashing served up by the likes of Rush Limbaugh against all environmentalists. Nor is it the well-intentioned, though sometimes rabid, watchdogging form of greenbashing unleashed on corporations such as Apple, that may need a hot cattle prod poked at their brand. This is an intellectual variety of pro wrestling that will occur until a solution is put in place that has any signs of working. And that may be a long time.

My forecast calls for intellectual discourse around appropriate action to continue to heat up, while debate over the existence or cause of climate change begins to blow over for good (no matter what the latest Gallup poll says).

At the Going Green East conference in Boston this week, CEOs of green technology businesses have been mixing it up with venture capitalists. They’re debating best practices, discussing emerging trends, and looking for the perfect match between innovators and investors. It’s exciting stuff, but three days of bigwigs throwing around big ideas might get a little stuffy, too. Enter our very own Betsy Henning, with 15 minutes of fresh air.

When a technology glitch left her without the slides for her presentation, Communicating Green, Betsy had no trouble winging it. She simply followed her own advice and delivered a memorable, concise, story-rich discussion of how to authentically and effectively communicate a company’s efforts in the green space.

Her first piece of advice for the audience at Going Green: Don’t be green. Instead, be remarkable.

Be the purple cow in the herd of regular old cows (mental image courtesy of marketing guru Seth Godin, who Betsy loves).

Her other purple pearls of wisdom:

Put a value on it. Weave your greenness into your larger story—that means social responsibility, how you treat your employees and the core values that define your company.

Face the facts. Tell real stories about how you can affect real people’s lives.

Finish strong. Discover what’s memorable about your company, cut away the other noise and stay on message. (A good editor is your best friend.)

Don’t take my word for it. Your customers don’t care what you say about your company. They care about what other people say about you. Cultivate a tribe of evangelists and reap the rewards.

Betsy’s 15 minutes were much anticipated and well received. Proof? Just before Betsy spoke, about 65 viewers were following the conference online. When she took the stage, that number spiked to 250+.

Betsy Henning at GoingGreen East 2009

When you hear the words “award ceremony,” the first thing that may come to mind is Hugh Jackman incessantly breaking into song in front of a slew of Hollywood’s best and worst dressed celebrities. That was not the case in New York City this past week, where the stars of the show were actually gadgets, doodads and electronic thingamajigs (sorry Hugh). The Greener Gadgets Design Competition, hosted by Core 77 and Greener Gadgets, recognized the innovative new ideas that will be paving the way for green technologies.

Entrepreneurs, visionaries and eco-designers convened for the Greener Gadgets Conference, where the topic at hand was the future of sustainability for the consumer electronics industry. That future, as it turns out, may be as much about changing behavior as it will be about changing power usage. Out of the 50 design competition entries, only 13 made it through to the competition, where they were judged by a live panel. The top two winning gadgets don’t in themselves save a single nanowatt of power. Instead they communicate with us, educate us and influence us to use less electrical power.

First place winner, the Tweet-a-Watt power meter ingeniously uses the latest in social media to tweet daily Kilowatt usage to the user’s Twitter account.

In second place is the Power-Hog, a way to sensitize your kids to the energy cost associated with running electronics devices.

See a full listing of all the finalists here.