PD green

3R Disconnect

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle... In terms of potential environmental impact, "Reduce" is better than "Reuse".  Likewise, "Reuse" is better than "Recycle."  In other words, it is better to use less initially rather than have something be used twice or re-manufactured into something else.  With that said, recycling has a become a mainstream activity, and part of the behavior of a majority of consumers.  Reuse and Reduce are less commonly discussed and are generally part of community and/or business marketing campaigns.

This concept can be shown like this:

Do consumers gravitate towards recycling because it involves the least personal behavior and corporate change?  Or is it because of the systematic support that recycling efforts have enjoyed?   

I have seen numerous articles and posts about this topic (even t-shirts)recently, but very few companies have built "reduce" into their business models.  Until companies find a way to grow and make money by encouraging consumers to reduce their consumption habits, I am not sure how far this will go.

False Choice II

Al Gore on Global Warming
Originally uploaded by alexdecarvalho

As I wrote in my previous post, there are (at least) two types of false choices relating to the sustainable movement.  The second of these is the choice between being pro-environment or anti-environment.

(believe in global warming vs. skeptic, tree-hugger vs. red-neck, green vs. regular, etc.)

Contrary to these standard dichotomies, most people fall somewhere in the middle.  A person might recycle, buy organic milk for their kids, but drive a Hummer.  Another person might ride their bike to work, but choose to stay with incandescent bulbs in their house because they don't like the light quality of CFLs.   

There are more global warming skeptics in the general population, than among climate researchers.  That is partially because of the way the topic of global warming has been adopted by political leaders as a wedge issue.  Al Gore has done some wonderful work getting the word out, but because of this false dichotomy of for/against, there are some people who are just not going to listen to the message.

Very few people like pollution.  Very few people like waste.  Very few people like inefficiency.  Everyone likes to save money.  Perhaps we should base the marketing and storytelling of sustainable solutions on these areas where large majorities agree.   

False Choice I

Low Emission Vehicle Parking
Originally uploaded by Canadacow

There are (at least) two types of false choices relating to the sustainable movement.  The first of these is the generic choice between the Eco-friendly product or the traditional one. 

(hybrid vs. gas guzzler, organic bananas vs. conventional, CFL vs. incandescent, etc.)

There are a number of things wrong this... Perhaps you can buy nothing.  In the case of a choice between a Prius and a traditional sedan, you might also be able to take public transportation.  Perhaps you could hold onto your current vehicle a bit longer, and the extra gas you will use will be offset by the reduced impact of producing one fewer vehicle.

In the case of the organic bananas vs. conventional ones, you might choose to buy the local apples that are in season.  In the case of light bulbs, you might be more vigilant about turning the lights off.