Going Green Overkill
With companies like Clorox putting out product lines endorsed by the Sierra Club, should we be concerned about where all this “Go Green” is going?
Back in January 2008, the Sierra Club first announced its partnership with Clorox and the Green Works line of household cleaners—the first new line from Clorox in 20 years. While some consumers remain skeptical that the line is as green as it claims (phosphorus and bleach-free, with 99 percent natural ingredients like coconuts and lemon oil), the Sierra Club says they have fully investigated the line’s “green”ness and are happy to back the products.
But Clorox isn’t the only big-name company getting in the game, Colgate-Palmolive is currently promoting its own line of Eco-friendly, phosphorus-free cleaners, SC Johnson claims its recent Greenlist reformulations have removed 61 million pounds of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from products including Windex, Pledge, and Fantastik Orange Action, and the list is growing steadily.
According to the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, “overkill” is “an excess of what is required or suitable, as because of zeal or misjudgment.” This is, of course, only one definition. The original meaning stems from literally “over killing” members of an opposing force, such as via nuclear weapons, than necessary to win the battle.
While I’m all for the “Go Green” movement, and many others seem to agree that it’s a good thing overall, I also wonder what may happen in the future. Sure, going green is catching on like gangbusters, but is the onslaught of green products more than is needed? Could the push to be “green” spur a backlash? Or does the fact that we have so many options to choose from show we are headed in the right direction?
It’s clear that going “green” can be profitable, and maybe it doesn’t matter why a company is producing products that are safer for us and better for the environment. But what happens when the trendiness of going green wanes?
With so many products falling under the umbrella of being green, the concern becomes whether the concept of being green will stretch into…well, not being so green after all.
Should we shun green products from companies like Clorox, simply because of past track records, or embrace the fact that they are making an effort?
What do you think?
July 23rd, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Big companies impact the environment considerably more than individuals do. Their implementation of a substantive green effort (not marketing only) will have considerable long term benefits. One only has to look at WalMart’s hiring of Adam Werbach (ex Sierra Club) to understand the potential (see http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/118/working-with-the-enemy.html).
A problem for consumers is understanding just how “green” these new products are. Much like putting nutritional labels on packaged food gave consumers an early tool for gauging nutrition (hardly perfect but a start), a more understandable green label would give consumers of non-packaged food items a similar tool. Creating such a label, however, will not be easy considering there are various metrics to measure - energy used in production/shipping, environmental byproducts of production, water usage, etc.
If such a standardized label ever comes to pass, consumers should remember that they will share the burden of learning how to understand it (much like they should learn what fat, sodium, carbohydrates, etc. are and how these items impact nutrition…that is, if they care about their health).
October 26th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
[...] with the information set forth above and in another article on this website, — http://www.competetoconserve.com/blog/2008/06/the-great-light-bulb-dilemma/ — this would be [...]