Climate change, greenhouse gasses, green energy ”” all terms are very familiar to us these days. The question is, do product manufacturers actually care about the green movement or are most of them boarding the green train because there is money to be made by producing a green product?
I don’t doubt that some companies do make an effort to be green, but I believe most companies understand that most consumers are concerned with saving money than buying a green product. I don’t see too many people at a store looking for a little green leaf on a label ”” they are looking at price tags.
I really don’t think a majority of Americans are buying into the whole green movement anyway, and the majority won’t unless they see some blatantly conclusive proof that there is a global climate crisis that will affect them within their lifetime. With our current financial struggles, the only way to get Americans to buy in is to stress the areas where going green saves money.
Solar power is a perfect example of the American mentality toward the green movement. If solar power for a household was much less expensive, a massive majority of Americans would jump on the opportunity because they hate power bills. The fact that it’s environmentally friendly is a second thought for most.
Fortunately, in some cases, creating a green product can be a win-win situation for producers and consumers. Producers are beginning to use less material in products, which in some cases is a good thing.
Take plastic water bottles, for example. Producers are using less plastic and using more recycled material than ever. That makes production costs decline, which trickles down to consumers who pay less for the product, all good things.
One thing I have a serious beef with is hybrid cars such as the Prius. This car has become a status symbol, saying, in effect, “I care about the environment so much that I’m willing to drive a hideous car.”
Jay Leno said it best referring to the Prius: “In America, we like everyone to know about the good work we are doing anonymously.”
The problem with the Prius and other hybrid electric cars is that they are marketed as green vehicles, but that could be far from the truth. Some reports show that between the environmentally hazardous production of batteries in North America, shipment of those batteries to Asia for assembly, then shipment to the final destination, a Prius has created more pollution than a normal vehicle in two lifetimes. Not to mention the hazard related to disposing of the massive batteries in electric cars.
I don’t understand why there isn’t a bigger push for hydrogen-powered cars that are already in production. These are the only truly zero-emission vehicles around today. They still use electric motors, but that motor is powered by a hydrogen fuel cell rather than batteries and the only emission from the vehicle is water.
If there is an expectation of citizens to be green then there will have to be more affordable options. I’m beginning to believe that the entire green movement is more about a lot of people making a lot of money than it is about some supposed global crisis. If we are legitimately looking down the gun barrel toward the “end of our planet,” I think people would be trying a lot harder.
recommended you read • Aug 7, 2013 at 8:17 pm
If you want to improve your familiarity simply keep visiting this web page and be updated with the most up-to-date
information posted here.
SpectacleStudy • Nov 6, 2011 at 4:02 pm
Jake,
To start, why does any company exist? To make a profit. “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”. Everything’s production has costs and labor added to it. It people really care about the planet they invest spare time and resources to defray the costs of these themselves rather than selling them to others. Given the profit margins of Solar companies worldwide they are interested in business success that just so happens to coincide with a niche market for “environmental betterment”. All of the advancement towards “green technology” is a faux revolution. It stands on the idea that electricity is better than natural gas….but the funny thing about it is that a vast majority of the electricity generated is generated by Coal and Natural Gas Plants. As demand for electrical appliances and vehicles grows there is a reliance on these quick and cheap sources of energy irrespective of the REAL environmental cost of using electricity. It’s just moving the externalities associated with your energy source further from your eyes so that you can ignorantly claim that you are “green” and “care for mother earth”. Solar and Wind are the only truly environmentally friendly options and even now they are too costly and consume too much space to generate electricity to meet demand. The only effective solution is to cut electricity consumption as a whole. As far as hydrogen goes…it’s unrealistic. It would be easily twice the price of gasoline for consumers per mile driven and would take an immense amount of freshwater and energy resources to produce.
So for all intents and purposes there is no “green consumer revolution”. There is a “green consumer mentality”. There is very little hard data to back up the success of these campaigns. Seeing as we are now living in peak oil the reality surrounding artificially deflated oil prices will soon come to public attention and manufacturers will be forced to raise the price of crude with an increasing cost of production associated with resource intensive tar-sands transitions and deep water drilling becoming more problematic with depth.
Dave • Nov 4, 2011 at 6:59 am
You were right on target until you started bashing the Prius based on erroneous information from discredited studies and pushing for hydrogen cars. Just like the electricity for electric cars doesn’t appear out of nowhere and developing batteries isn’t free from pollution, hydrogen doesn’t appear out of nowhere. Hydrogen is merely a storage device for power, power that has to be generated in the same ways that electricity has to be generated (mostly from coal-fired power plants right now, but hopefully from more green sources in the future). Electric and hydrogen cars aren’t all good and are mostly not cost-effective yet, but if you want to compare them to hydrogen, you have to take into account the same factors there.
Conrad Braganza • Nov 14, 2011 at 3:32 pm
An important part of the discussion that is missing is we are using resources at a rate faster than they are being replenished. A more critical analysis of the issue would involve how to develop clean technology so that it doesn’t comprimise the ability of future generations to have access to the same resources we do today. The issue still stands: the shift in thinking about green issues involves an understanding that we live in a world with finite resources.