Comments on: You give “green” a bad name

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:46:10 +0000

JP,

Your cynicism seems somewhat misguided. Before you criticise LEED you should research the enormous environmental gains that have come from this certification system. Not only does it give builders a guideline on how to build more sustainably, it also gives the public (who are usually not experts in building) a way of rewarding those builders that consider the environment when they undertake a new project. Unfortunately we do not live in a world where we can simply take a company’s word that they have behaved in a sustainable manner. Until the world changes we will need 3rd party verification such as LEED and EcoLogo.

LEED is not perfect but its a giant step in the right direction.

As well, it is important to look at the positive effects that LEED has had on the entire interior design and office furniture industry.

Jason

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 02:42:32 +0000

Isn’t TerraChoice the private company that evaluates other companies toward granting them with what at one time was the federal government’s EcoChoice program logo (Three birds converging to form a maple leaf)? If so, then isn’t it in TerraChoice’s best financial interest to claim that much greenwashing is going on and that therefore we need systems to regulate industry and determine excellence in environmental leadership? Some organic farms refuse to certify since it is a burden on them that they and their customers don’t require nor want; a formalized relationship beyond the trust and friendship of years of servicing the local community and caring for the land and its critters. This being similar to recent objections voiced against the LEED standard for buildings; that the money spent on certification, construction audits and performance evaluations could have been better spent toward installing conservation, efficiency and renewable energy gear/ systems.

This drumming up the need for oneself sounds like a wash with a different brush.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 11:58:55 +0000

I’ve seen a number of cases where marketers are simply adding statements to the packaging that have always been characteristics of their products, with the hope that whoever’s reading it will somehow connect it to a green initiative. For example, “herbicide free” greenhouse tomatoes. Herbicides kill weeds, of which I’d hope there would not be many in a greenhouse.

And then there’s blatant obfuscation, such as the Chevrolet Volt’s battery-relieving “range-extending power source” (aka gasoline engine).

Also, I’d take #6 slightly further. In fact, there is no such thing as a “green” car, no matter its configuration!