the green guard.
all i am getting at is: there is an incredible amount of corporate interest in everything environmental at this moment. the clearest signs that eco is a hot topic can be seen in the interest given by both wal-mart and the conservative party of canada to environmental issues. if these two bastions of eco-apathy have actually turned an ear towards the environmental vote (and they both have in concerted, determined jests), then it is clear there is something to be gained by listening to all (or at least some of) these greens.
but as i’ve suggested earlier, i think it is important that we keep an eye on how our interests as a society are being received and utilized by private interests (i.e., wal-mart and the conservative party of canada). sabina brought a great article to the front stoop a couple of days ago regarding recycline’s decision to sell their recyled plastic toothbrushes in wal-mart. there are many committed eco-folk out there who think that such a decision is a form of selling out - the argument being that such an immoral company could never be an ethical choice. i think the article does a good job of explaining how perhaps shady companies such as wal-mart can be used to do good, without them even knowing it.
the point being, i think it is important that those who are most committed to living in greater harmony with the environment (such as the team at grace & cello and all their friends, peers and acquaintances) should keep vigilant regarding some of these issues. organics in big supermarkets: good or bad? eco-products at wal-mart: worthwhile? how about the big question: can we truly make meaningful environmental improvements through ‘green consumption’?
if you have any articles that touch on some of these sorts of questions, please pass them along. there is so much being written out there right now, it is impossible to keep up. but i want to, and i think having a space for clear thinking around these questions is key to moving our society forward in terms of sustainability. so, if you read something thought-provoking please bring it here to share!
thanks!
c.
May 18th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
They’re magicians of pricepoints and posterboys. Their lables are so sexy, so simple. There there, their time has almost passed.
“Hey, remember when Wal-Mart, yah, that big blue bottom barrel box store, had stores in all the suburb slums… well, they were new back them… anyway… I can’t believe we fell for it. I’m so glad they’re gone. This big empty building is way better used for this GFJ (Gymnastics For Jocks) facility.”
The time has come for DOWNTOWN MEDICINE HAT to RISE UP!
May 19th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
funny you should post this, I was going to forward this article to you yesterday but forgot. it seems like they are reeeeeeally trying to shove it down the public’s throat that they are making changes, but are they really that significant? almost seems like painting this giant truck green is sort of way of diverting some attention away from their many unfair practices. OK, so they will have a green fleet, but they are still outsourcing most of their production to sweat shops all over the world? or paying minimum wage to their employees? makes no sense to me. i want to trust them, but i just can’t.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/05/walmart_hits_th_1.php
May 19th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
argh! i don’t know why those ‘annoncements’ annoy me so much!
a friend of mine (hubert - he’s french) was complaining to me the other day that he doesn’t think hybrids are that great. he has a buddy who works in one of the world’s largest hybrid engine factories, and apparently there is a quite a bit of toxic residue that is created from making hybrid engines. hubert’s complaint is that even when we try to be ‘eco’, some problem arises that thwarts our efforts.
i had two responses for hubert: 1) toxic residue in a factory (although not ideal) is much better than pollution in the environment. i think it is important to remember that once things hit the outdoors, the ability to ‘control’ the flow of materials is greatly reduced. if the bad stuff is caught indoors, there are still challenges, but these are challenges that can be overcome with a bit of imagination and effort (and there are many examples of this). so, for this reason i say hybrids are still better than the alternative, since they reduce immediately the amount of air pollution in the environment, and if the factory is run by an ethical company (or one being made to be ethical through regulations) then even the residues will be dealt with wisely.
my second point was: i’ve never been a big fan of the whole hybrid option. the biggest reason hybrids seem like too little too late for me is that are basically more of the same, with just a little less pollution. roads are a serious environmental issue that doesn’t even get raised in the whole hybrid option, since everyone is so happy greenhouse gases are being reduced. there is also the fact that the amount of cars keep increasing … even if these are all hybrid, what this means is our greenhouse gas emissions will keep moving upward as well.
what we really need is a thorough re-thinking of our transportation systems. first in cities, and then on our highways. as far as a fleet of hybrid rigs goes … i’d rather see trains used more.
one of the saddest parts of spring for me is seeing all the new species of roadkill that start popping up. it is INcredible how much roadkill there is. starting about two weeks ago, the raccoons, porcupines, muskrats and woodchucks started piling up alongside our highways … fresh out of hybernation, or just moving around more now that spring has arrived, populations of these animals are subject to an incredible amount of violence.
i say get consumer goods back on the tracks, and get them off our highways. then create a viable passenger rail system that can do the same for families and individuals. limited road systems can still exist, but i really think our goal should be to use them less and less, and to replant over the tens of thousands of miles of road that never should have been built in the first place.
oh jeez … sorry … rant and rave … !
i guess my questions are: should we be happy that wal-mart is trying to promote itself as green? can anything sustainable come out of a company like wal-mart? is that sort of consumerism helpful?
probably my biggest concern with all this green-washing is that is shifts the topic of discussion to ‘how we can use wal-mart to do good’ instead of resting squarely on the fact that a company as large, powerful and monopolistic as wal-mart is illegal, and there is precedence for breaking their stranglehold on our economy. their influence in this sense is clearly bad for our economies, and bad for our societies.
anyway, that’s my take on it … c.
May 19th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
hey aaron from medicine hat! i love your city, btw and i full-heartedly agree that more joy should be infused into the downtown core. i think you should start a coalition of inspired citizenry that can get wal-mart out of the surrounding sprawl-burbs so that beautiful historic medicine hat can actually rise up to its former glories!
good luck!
c.
May 23rd, 2007 at 8:48 am
What is frustrating about the current green consumerism bandwagon is that the consumerism is winning over the green. Green goods are being sold, not so much as alternatives to the goods that help us live and work, but as goods that allow us to consume more while assuaging our eco-guilt. In other words the new green consumerism implies that we can all have three new handbags every fall season, as long as they are made with recycled leather. We can have six different sets of organic cotton sheets, and heck, let’s save a little money by getting them from Wal-Mart. Actually Whole Foods market is another good example of the “buy buy buy, as long as it’s green” message.
This newest resurgence of environmentalism needs to embrace a stronger message about downsizing, de-materializing, and making do with less. When we go shopping, by all means, let’s embrace these green alternatives (thank goodness for companies offering clothing lines, especially for those of us who probably shouldn’t show up to work in baggy organic cotton t-shirts and rad pants from MEC). So, to end on a more upbeat note, there are companies that are approaching green consumption carefully—by offering alternatives without pushing us to buy more and more—and we should give them a little tip of the hat. Those of you reading this blog by default know of at least one.
May 23rd, 2007 at 9:27 am
i have to admit that i also wonder if we can “buy” our way into sustainability … you are totally right that consumerism itself needs to be challenged, and addressed, and all these new eco-products don’t force us to do that.
the only solace i can take is that while we are fighting to create sustainable societies, most of us should be wearing clothes! so, for those occasions, at least, grace & cello can help people out.
i’ve recently stumbled across a couple neat articles that touch on your some of your points nm, and i am going to try and post them a little later today …
c.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:19 am
Just read in a very credible scientific journal and a right-wing newspaper that companies should sell us products that last longer, so we can consume less. The key is consuming less.
Mmmm… I need another slice of pizza…
May 25th, 2007 at 4:27 am
i agree … we need to consume less. AND, it should be illegal to make products that are made to break after the warranty … seems electronics are infamous for this, and they are a crazy source of pollution in landfills.
c.