The Business of Green Shopping

Over the course of this blog I have analyzed the how the scope of the green movement has gotten narrower with progress and how it continues to grow.  At its inception, the green movement was about getting the government to pass legislation aimed at protecting the environment.  While this fight still goes on within state and federal governments, today's green movement is much more localized in the individual.  While we are encouraged to do things like recycle, or go paper free, many of the individual decisions we make regarding going green focus on buying "green" products.  We are encouraged to buy energy saving light bulbs, or to shop organically, all in the efforts of "doing our part."  These actions are not regulated by government legislation, but rather require the desire from the consumer to advocate for the environment.

Green products are those which are aimed at having a positive impact on the environment through their use, and often are marketed to benefitting the consumer as well.  Green products are prevalent in a variety of markets including beauty care, cleaning products, office supplies, or even things like hybrid cars and energy saving electronics.  These products all offer some sort of environmental benefit, such as making a product from recycled materials, being chemical and CFC free, or using only renewable resources for production.  Additionally these products offer to benefit the consumer by often marketing them as healthier alternatives.

Courtesy of Nicolo Castellini

While it is not a tangible benefit, the most important reason why consumers choose to go green lies in the thought of doing something good for the environment.  The recyclable aspect of green shopping implies that using a particular product will do less damage to the environment, as less toxins are leached into the atmosphere during production, contributing to a lighter impact on air and water pollution.

The concept of buying a product that will have less negative an impact has grown to be increasingly popular with consumers as the green movement itself has progressed.  Consumers have become increasingly aware of their actions regarding going green as it is constantly being thrust in our faces the importance of our duty to preserving our planet.  This awareness has seeped into consumer behavioral trends as people are likely to buy green products at a higher rate than ever before. According to a study conducted by the National Marketing Institute, nearly 85% of American consumers were accepting of green products and practices and 63% are continually increasing their purchasing of green or sustainable products.

This increase in the purchasing of sustainable products suggests that people genuinely care, or want to appear to care, about what kind of environmental impact they are having as an individual.  The same study found that 69% of American consumers cared about the reputation a company has in regards to its environmental impact.  This has turned sustainability into a business opportunity, as consumers are more likely to purchase products from a company if they know the company is a leader in sustainable practices.  If brands are able to reach this reputation amongst consumers, they are likely to sell more products, which ultimately benefits everyone in the long run.

In the past five years, consumers have even changed their attitudes regarding the quality of green products, as there has been nearly an 8% increase in the percentage of consumers who determined higher quality solely on the basis of a product labeled as eco-friendly.  And when it comes to quality, people are willing to pay more for something that is held to a higher standard.  For green products, nearly 70% of global consumers in 2012 were willing to pay a higher price for a green product when compared to the same product without the green features.

Courtesy of Euromonitor Internation Analyst Survey

At the end of the day, consumer behaviors have shown that green products are important to them, as they become more and more aware of the impact production and consumption has on the environment.  Shopping sustainable allows consumers the gratification of knowing they are doing something to make a difference in the global fight to preserve the environment.  Ultimately, the green movement has moved beyond simply following government regulations, putting the advocating in the hands of the individual.  While it is important that these guidelines be set, the most influential person in the green movement is each one of us.  Individual awareness and action is crucial to seeing that progress for a sustainable world continues, as this is our planet and we each must do our part in its protection.

The Cost of Going Green

When the green movement first began in the later half of the 20th century, activists were focussed on getting the government to enact policy in promotion of environmentally friendly regulations.  As we have seen throughout this blog, the scope of these regulations have gotten narrower as we continue to progress towards a more sustainable world.  Just as states have taken their own measures regarding individual green initiatives, communities have taken action to do their part in becoming green.

Many communities have supported the creation of "Green Ribbon" K-12 schools, which follow a set of standards to reduce the school's environmental impact as well as provide an effective education regarding sustainability.  What this means for schools is making slight changes in day to day activities to create an overall greener environment for the school community.   This could be accomplished through efforts made in water conservation, energy conservation, solid waste reduction, and a number of other areas.  In addition to these changes, green schools must also create partnerships allowing the school to be active in the community and provide training to staff on sustainability.  One of the ultimate goals of Green Ribbon schools is to have a celebration of the school's environmental achievements.

To become an official Green School, schools must meet the guidelines set by the national requirements of the US Department of Education.  These requirements effect nearly every area of the school's operations, from administrative changes through the implementation of a Green Team to structural changes such as environmentally friendly building materials.  In addition, Green Schools strive to improve the wellbeing of students and staff through the making of Air Quality improvements, buying products with fewer toxins through an Environmental Purchasing Policy, or simply using more electronic devices in the attempt to reduce paper waste.

While the idea of being honored with the Green Ribbon is appealing both in the prestige of the award and the positive impact on the environment, making the necessary changes to infrastructure can be costly.  Many blueprints now account for the environment and are built to save energy, but the advanced features they include, such as heat reflecting roofs or automated light sensors, cost as much as 10% more in construction fees when compared to the standard school.

When green schools began to take off in the mid 2000's, the rising costs begged the question of if these features were worth it.  The Houston Independent School District built a green school from the ground up in 2007 with the hopes that significant cuts in energy costs could be made.  However when tested the school produced energy costs higher than anyone would have expected, causing some backlash for the idea.  

After these operational issues came to light, school boards across the country were forced to take a closer look at the operations of their green schools.  Under a study conducted by LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) companies such as Capital E analyzed the effectiveness of their systems within these new schools.  A number of factors demanded greener infrastructure in the first place, including rising energy costs, worsening power quality, increasing cost of water and the impact of water pollution, and growing pressure to cut air pollution.  Going green allows schools to address all of these problems, and was ultimately found to save the district money in the long run.

Capital E's breakdown found that on average, green schools cost about $4 per square foot more than the standard school.  The financial savings however were found to be about $70 per square foot, astronomically outweighing the construction costs.  While the Massachusetts schools for which the study focussed received only about $15 per square foot of these savings, it was still about four times as much as they invested.

Via Mother Nature Network

Green schools provide a way for communities to take the environmental challenges they face into their own hands by tackling the problems with solutions specifically geared to that area.  If a community suffers from increasing electricity costs, green schools provide an opportunity to cut these costs through energy saving options designed specifically for their needs.  In the average school lifespan of about 42 years, green schools use less than 33% energy and 32% less water than the standard school, effectively saving up to $100,000 a year as time goes on.  This provides school districts with greater budgets, allowing them to hire new teachers, buy new technology, and provide a better atmosphere for students and staff overall.

Reducing Our Carbon Footprint

In my last post, I discussed the progress that global leaders are making in regards to adapting to climate change and making appropriate adjustments to reduce harmful emissions.  While this progress that arose out of the Paris Climate Conference in 2015 did establish a goal percentage for which to reduce emissions, it did not clearly outline how these numbers could become a reality.  However, as one of the top producers of harmful emissions, it is crucial that the United States do whatever they can to actually meets these new guidelines.  Although many methods would be capable of achieving these goals, one of the most viable options is to reduce our carbon footprint through renewable energies.

A carbon footprint is defined as the total amount of carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases produced by an individual or, in the case of the global perspective, individual nations.  The reason for the stress on the importance of reducing these emissions stems from the fact that as more carbon dioxide is emitted, the more the balance of the atmosphere is thrown off.  This is where the name "greenhouse gases" comes from, as the gases allow more of the Earth's heat to become trapped.

Carbon emissions come from a variety of sources, including burning of fossil fuels for electricity, transportation, and industrial processes.  Electricity is the largest contributor, as coal must be burned to create enough energy to power almost every aspect of our lives.   (Think about it—could you go a day without turning on the TV, charging your phone, or simply turning on the lights?)  So if electricity causes such a large percentage of harmful carbon emissions, it seems that changing this process to burn less fossil fuels would ultimately reduce our nation's carbon footprint.

Graph courtesy of EPA

The US has been struggling to reduce our carbon emissions for years, but as the emphasis on environmental awareness increases, more and more federal regulations have been proposed to ensure we can follow through.  In August of 2015, the Clean Power Plan was proposed to give each state a target number by which to reduce their individual carbon emissions.  One of the many options proposed by the plan was the use of renewable energies.

Although the Clean Power Plan gives states flexibility in which actions they could take, renewable energy offers certain advantages over other options such as natural gases or nuclear power.  Renewable energy is generated from sources that are not limited in the way that fossil fuels are, making them an appealing option as a long term solution.  Because renewables generate energy from wind, solar power, biomass, or geothermal heat, they do not come with the worry that one day they will be used up completely.

Photo courtesy of Aaron

In regards to the Clean Power Plan, renewable energy may be most appealing as it would allow states to cut their carbon emissions substantially, while still being cost effective.  In fact, switching to renewables has many economic benefits in addition to its environmental advantages.  As a relatively labor intensive means of generating electricity, renewable energy as an industry creates more jobs per dollar invested than the traditional fossil fuel industry, while also creating more jobs in general for the economy.  Additionally, the industry promotes the support of local businesses as investment dollars are kept local by paying private landowners for providing a space in which to build wind and solar power plants.  This also creates an influx of property and income taxes, which ultimately benefit states and local communities.

When compared to the other options proposed by the Clean Air Act, renewable energy outweighs most in the long run.  Nonrenewable sources such as natural gas pose many problems, despite being cleaner than fossil fuels.  While natural gas allows the energy industry to meet the increasing need for electricity, it comes at a price.  Literally.  As the dependence for natural gas increases, customers must deal with spikes in the price for electricity.  Not to mention the fact that while burning natural gases puts less pollutants into the atmosphere, it emits a substantial amount of carbon dioxide.

At the end of the day, when states are considering which options to pursue, it seems that renewable sources are the most effective option to providing a long term solution.  Making these decisions puts states (and ultimately our nation) one step closer to reducing our carbon footprint.

A Green Race

While we are all motivated by different things, the reason that makes taking care of the environment rather important is pretty much the same for all of us:  we can't get away from it.  Everyone in the same community is breathing the same air, using the same resources, and essentially experiencing the same environment, so the reason we care, to whatever extent, is because we live in it.

Photo Courtesy of Alisdare Hickson

The magnitude of our environments differ; it could be our town, our state, our country, or even our global environment.  However, the scale we choose to look at affects who is able to do something to make a difference on that particular environment.  I recycle because I want to decrease the amount of trash that ends up in my community's landfill.  My state sets anti-littering laws so less garbage ends up in our waterways.  Our country regulates the pollutants released in the atmosphere so the citizens can breathe cleaner air.

Obviously these regulations become harder to implement on a larger scale.  However in recent years global agreements have become a crucial part of making headway within the green movement.  After all, climate change is a global issue as much as it is an issue for small communities, and in some ways more so, which is why last November, almost 200 countries came together in Paris, France for the 2015 Paris Climate Conference.  

This conference was particularly important to the U.S., who have tried unsuccessfully for decades to get involved in the global discussions on climate change.  Take the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 for example.  This was an international negotiation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 7%, which the United States signed in 1998, but failed to ratify and ultimately rejected by 2001.  While the U.S. continued to attend the Conferences of the Parties (at which negotiations such as Kyoto Protocol are agreed upon), they did not follow through with the Protocol.  The lack of participation by powerful countries such as the U.S., who historically have the highest emissions of greenhouse gases, was felt throughout the past couple decades, leading to COPs that were anything but successful.  

The 2009 COP, held in Copenhagen, Denmark, was one of the more infamously dysfunctional conferences to discuss climate change, especially for the U.S., who was distracted with congressional gridlock regarding other issues at the time.  The conference failed to meet its goals and ended up settling on an agreement to simply try not to make things worse by keeping temperature rises to no more than two degrees Celsius.  All in all, the conference was described as "chaotic and disappointing".  

Photo Courtesy of United Nations Photo

However, November's Paris Climate Conference, aka COP 21, became a historic deal amongst the 196 countries in attendance, who after many days of deliberation signed a pact in which all agreed to make actual progress regarding climate change.  This pact holds countries to not just maintaining the temperature rises, but aiming to decrease them to 1.5 degrees Celsius, which would also help to reduce harmful emissions.  Many of the participating nations agreed to implement more use of solar and wind technology in the effort to reduce these emissions.  In addition, the agreement aimed to make a lasting impression on the future by mobilizing $100 billion (about two-thirds of the cost) for developing countries to implement infrastructure and technology that is clean and environmentally friendly.  This term of the deal was implemented as a method to encourage developing countries to engage in the movement to become more environmentally friendly without the added worry of the higher costs of building such an infrastructure.  Furthermore, the deal agreed to monitor the progress by having regular reviews of the plans made to reduce emissions.

The Paris Climate Conference could be looked at as a success on both the environmental side and the diplomatic side.  The fact that nearly 200 countries were able to agree on the minute details of a 

31-page document shows global accordance regarding climate change.  If the world is taking steps to make a difference in climate change, it forces the individual to recall how even the smallest actions can have a global impact.  That being said, environmental activists argue the deal is not enough.  However it is a step in the right direction, as there has at least been global agreement that something needs to be done.  Lord Nicholas Stern of the London School of Economics remarked that "a green race is going on," and nations are calling on their citizens to be a part of it.  

When Did It Become So Important To Go Green?

Walking around campus it is hard not to notice the university's effort to do their part in becoming more environmentally friendly.  Take the green to-go boxes or the assortment of recycling bins in every building.  We compost our food at dinner, separate our recyclables, and try not to feel guilty when we throw things out, knowing that the trash is going to the landfill. ("ARE YOU SURE?")  All over the country, similar initiatives are taking place in order to combat the negative affects of climate change.  But when did this effort begin?

Courtesy of John LeGear

The modern environmental movement was catalyzed by Rachel Carson's 1960 expository Silent Spring, which analyzed the harmful effects of DDT pesticide.  Carson's book not only described how the pesticide hurt each part of ecosystem it traveled through, but also set the stage for others to question how human actions are capable of harming the environment.  This idea was the basis for the environmental movement, as people became aware that their actions had the power to harm nature, which in turn would negatively affect everyday human activity.

Courtesy of Mechanoid Dolly

Before Carson's novel, lifestyle choices such as driving gas guzzling cars or running an industry that produced excessive air pollution were done without the consideration of what these actions would do to the environment.  However, as it came to light that humans were doing things that were a threat to the environment's safety, initiatives to change these harmful actions began, as did the modern environmental movement.

The publication of Silent Spring prompted the government to look into Carson's claims about DDT's harmful effects.  The research concluded that Carson was right, prompting governmental regulations to limit DDT use until it was outright banned in 1972.  Between the twelve years of Silent Spring's publication and the DDT ban the government claimed its role as a responsible advocate for the environment's protection through the use of policy.

Legislation such as the Clean Air Act of 1963, the Water Quality Act of 1965, and the Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act of 1965 were all implemented as an effort to reduce the harm humans themselves were doing to the environment.  The indication that an environmental revolution was underway became obvious with the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970, who were tasked with the job of regulating all this environmental policy.

While these policy changes impacted Americans in that they had to abide by the standards set by the EPA, this required no more effort than, for example, driving a car that met the appropriate emissions standards.  However, in 1970, millions of Americans gathered to celebrate the creation of a healthy environment, asking everyone to do more then just the bare minimum.  This celebration became known as the first Earth Day and continued to be celebrated every year on April 20th.  Celebrations for the protection of the environment allowed everyday citizens to learn more about their responsibility to protect their communities by doing their part to reduce the pollution in the air and waterways.  This stress about the importance of individual efforts was a crucial part to allowing the environmental movement to take off.

Courtesy of NASA

From these pivotal moments in the 1970s, the movement continued to progress with policy changes to address growing environmental problems.  In the 1980s, policy adjustments were made to preserve millions of acres of wilderness and more funding was provided for the cleanup of hazardous waste.  The 1990s presented another series of policy adjustments, including the amendment of the Clean Air Act, aimed at reducing the pollutants in air with more sustainable resources and cleaner fuels.

By the time the movement reached the 21st century, climate change was an abundant theme in the discussion of going green.  We often feel that it does not matter if we ourselves are going green all the time; as long as everyone is doing their part, what is one more piece of trash going to do to the earth?  This line of thought has been a struggle for the green movement since its inception, but the evolving policy and pushes from environmental advocates have been enough to at least get us talking.   Through my blog, I will discuss the green movement and its successes and controversies in order to analyze what the big deal is about "Going Green".