Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Examples
Through the use of celebrities and entertainment venues, the message of environmental awareness and sustainability reaches out to a wider audience and attracts a lot of attention. However, some of these events held for environmental awareness are not necessarily environmentally-friendly and some of these celebrities SAY they are doing their part for the environment but DO not live up to their commitment. Let's look at some examples of environmental "do's and don't do's".
A Don't Do:
The "Live Earth" Concert
The Live Earth event consists of nine concerts--played over 24 hours across seven continents and before an audience of two billion. It is run by former Vice President Al Gore, and over 150 artists will be performing; such as The Police, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Madonna. On a green, energy-efficient note, these 150 performers will be "jetting" around to perform in various locations, from Tokyo to Hamburg. Talk about reducing the carbon footprint.
Madonna, who will be calling for mass global change to reduce carbon emissions and tackle climate crisis, arrived by private jet to the concert. Contradictory? I think so. In addition, Madonna produces 100 times the average waste that a single British citizen produces in a year. She also has a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, an Audi R8 and a Mini Cooper S at home. Talk about saving the planet.
Globally, this concert is expected to produce 1,025 tons of waste. At the Wembley venue, they only have the capacity to recycle a third of the waste produced--with the rest going to landfills. Additionally, each person that attends the concert will have to make a return trip: whether by car, air, rail, or bus which is burning fossil fuels--exactly what the concert is trying to promote the reduction of. Coincidence? I think NOT.
Do:
Reverb
A Don't Do:
The "Live Earth" Concert
The Live Earth event consists of nine concerts--played over 24 hours across seven continents and before an audience of two billion. It is run by former Vice President Al Gore, and over 150 artists will be performing; such as The Police, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Madonna. On a green, energy-efficient note, these 150 performers will be "jetting" around to perform in various locations, from Tokyo to Hamburg. Talk about reducing the carbon footprint.
Madonna, who will be calling for mass global change to reduce carbon emissions and tackle climate crisis, arrived by private jet to the concert. Contradictory? I think so. In addition, Madonna produces 100 times the average waste that a single British citizen produces in a year. She also has a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, an Audi R8 and a Mini Cooper S at home. Talk about saving the planet.
Globally, this concert is expected to produce 1,025 tons of waste. At the Wembley venue, they only have the capacity to recycle a third of the waste produced--with the rest going to landfills. Additionally, each person that attends the concert will have to make a return trip: whether by car, air, rail, or bus which is burning fossil fuels--exactly what the concert is trying to promote the reduction of. Coincidence? I think NOT.
Do:
Reverb
argument
While there has been a notable surge recently in support of environmental initiatives and sustainable practices, much of this "activism" is backed by little or no actual action. From the proliferation of greenwashed products to celebrity endorsements, people and companies are jumping on the environmental bandwagon at a rapid rate. Merely creating the illusion of eco-friendliness will not stop the effects of global warming; people need to put their money where their mouth is.
While it is an important first step for people to recognize environmental issues, simply supporting change verbally is not enough. Companies are taking advantage of the popularity of environmentally friendly products, and by using ambiguous labeling and "green" buzzwords like "natural," they fool consumers into purchasing products that may not really be good for the environment. It is a sad situation when consumers can't trust the labels on their products, and need to go shopping with a healthy dose of skepticism.
Because the major effects of global warming are not necessarily visible to everyone, and do not yet negatively impact many people's everyday lives, it is easy to recognize that something needs to be done but take no personal action. However, we cannot afford to wait until global warming has become a fill-fledged disaster. Action needs to be taken now, and taken on a large scale in order to prevent irreversible environmental damage and devastating effects. Greenwashing and statements of support are not enough. Many celebrities claim to be activists for environmental issues, but still arrive at events by personal jet, and live in sprawling mansions. As those who have an immense amount of resources at their disposal, it should be easy for them to implement energy-saving devices and lessen their carbon footprint. And although some may not like to admit it, celebrities are role models for many people, and their efforts might inspire others to make changes in their lives as well.
Many large corporations attempt to illustrate their commitment to environmentalism through commercials and advertising, giving consumers a false image of their actions and the goals of the company. Because people cannot see what actually goes on behind the scenes, and are often unaware of the processes that take their products from the company to the store shelves, they depend on the image the company projects. By putting an emphasis in advertising on their "environmentalism" or their "eco-friendliness," companies convince consumers that they are a good choice and are taking steps to address their environmental impact, which in many cases may not be true.
Skewing facts and figures and greenwashing products and advertisements is misleading and enables corporations to continue environmentally destructive practices while continuing to receive the support of mislead consumers. Companies must be held accountable for their products and their advertisements if they claim to be "green," the creation of an outside organization that monitors labeling and advertisements, or that can provide certification of products and commercials might make a difference, and may enable consumers to know for sure that what they are purchasing or watching is legitimate. Activists must walk the walk if they talk to the talk and encourage others to follow their lead, instead of saying one thing in public and doing another in private. After all, it's not the size of your car, it's the size of your carbon footprint, and if you drive a Prius in public but take a private jet to dinner, it makes for a pretty big footprint.
While it is an important first step for people to recognize environmental issues, simply supporting change verbally is not enough. Companies are taking advantage of the popularity of environmentally friendly products, and by using ambiguous labeling and "green" buzzwords like "natural," they fool consumers into purchasing products that may not really be good for the environment. It is a sad situation when consumers can't trust the labels on their products, and need to go shopping with a healthy dose of skepticism.
Because the major effects of global warming are not necessarily visible to everyone, and do not yet negatively impact many people's everyday lives, it is easy to recognize that something needs to be done but take no personal action. However, we cannot afford to wait until global warming has become a fill-fledged disaster. Action needs to be taken now, and taken on a large scale in order to prevent irreversible environmental damage and devastating effects. Greenwashing and statements of support are not enough. Many celebrities claim to be activists for environmental issues, but still arrive at events by personal jet, and live in sprawling mansions. As those who have an immense amount of resources at their disposal, it should be easy for them to implement energy-saving devices and lessen their carbon footprint. And although some may not like to admit it, celebrities are role models for many people, and their efforts might inspire others to make changes in their lives as well.
Many large corporations attempt to illustrate their commitment to environmentalism through commercials and advertising, giving consumers a false image of their actions and the goals of the company. Because people cannot see what actually goes on behind the scenes, and are often unaware of the processes that take their products from the company to the store shelves, they depend on the image the company projects. By putting an emphasis in advertising on their "environmentalism" or their "eco-friendliness," companies convince consumers that they are a good choice and are taking steps to address their environmental impact, which in many cases may not be true.
Skewing facts and figures and greenwashing products and advertisements is misleading and enables corporations to continue environmentally destructive practices while continuing to receive the support of mislead consumers. Companies must be held accountable for their products and their advertisements if they claim to be "green," the creation of an outside organization that monitors labeling and advertisements, or that can provide certification of products and commercials might make a difference, and may enable consumers to know for sure that what they are purchasing or watching is legitimate. Activists must walk the walk if they talk to the talk and encourage others to follow their lead, instead of saying one thing in public and doing another in private. After all, it's not the size of your car, it's the size of your carbon footprint, and if you drive a Prius in public but take a private jet to dinner, it makes for a pretty big footprint.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Top 5 celeb. hypocrites
1) Rock star and long time environmental campaigner Sting faced the embarrassment of having his group The Police labelled the “dirtiest band in the world” this year because of the scale of their reunion world tour and the massive carbon footprint made by fans coming to see them.
2) Former US Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize winning environmentalist Al Gore faced accusations of hypocrisy last year when a research group claimed his 20-room, eight-bathroom home consumed more electricity in a month than the average American household did in a year. Mr Gore pointed out that he had taken numerous energy saving measures and purchased offsets to reduce his carbon footprint to zero
3) The Live Earth concerts last year were aimed at saving the planet but organisers faced a backlash over the massive carbon footprint of the events themselves as 150 performers, along with their technicians and dancers, jetted around the globe to appear at various venues. The total carbon footprint of the event was estimated to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to carbonfootprint.com
4) Actor John Travolta, who has spoken of the need to come up with alternative forms of fuel, has faced criticism over his ownership of several planes including a Boeing 707 which would normally have room for 150 passengers.
5) The Prince of Wales faced embarrassment last year over a 7,000-mile round trip to the US to pick up an award for his environmental work. Some green campaigners said he should have picked it up by video link.
source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1955742/Top-five-celebrity-eco-hypocrites.html
2) Former US Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize winning environmentalist Al Gore faced accusations of hypocrisy last year when a research group claimed his 20-room, eight-bathroom home consumed more electricity in a month than the average American household did in a year. Mr Gore pointed out that he had taken numerous energy saving measures and purchased offsets to reduce his carbon footprint to zero
3) The Live Earth concerts last year were aimed at saving the planet but organisers faced a backlash over the massive carbon footprint of the events themselves as 150 performers, along with their technicians and dancers, jetted around the globe to appear at various venues. The total carbon footprint of the event was estimated to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to carbonfootprint.com
4) Actor John Travolta, who has spoken of the need to come up with alternative forms of fuel, has faced criticism over his ownership of several planes including a Boeing 707 which would normally have room for 150 passengers.
5) The Prince of Wales faced embarrassment last year over a 7,000-mile round trip to the US to pick up an award for his environmental work. Some green campaigners said he should have picked it up by video link.
source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1955742/Top-five-celebrity-eco-hypocrites.html
More celeb. hypocrisy
Hybrid cars are all the rage in Hollywood. Celebrities drive them like they're a badge of honor. You save a few gallons of gas, you save the planet. Right? Well, not when you hop on a private jet and burn enough fuel to propel NASCAR through 2050.
Of course, the stars need to go here and there. The location shoots, the fabulous vacations, etc. But that's why God created United Airlines. G-IV's, on the other hand, were created in the image of precious celebs.
Julia Roberts
On the ground: Roberts drives a Prius, which gets (at best) 60 miles to the gallon, shaving 30 miles off a normal car's mpg.
In the air: Chicago/LA, 1,749 miles in a private jet, the route she took with Rupert Everett while shooting "My Best Friend's Wedding."
Gas guzzled: 2,100 gallons of jet fuel.
Prius Penance: Julia would have to drive 30,000 miles, or roughly once around the earth and then some to even out her consumption in the air.
So Julia says: No word yet from Julia's rep.
Jennifer Lopez
On the ground: J-Lo tools around in her 60 miles-per-gallon Prius.
In the air: LA /New York, 2,475 miles in a private jet. Lopez was actually sued by a private jet company for allegedly skipping out on the bill, though she says it's all a misunderstanding and she was not supposed to be billed.
Gas guzzled: 2,750 gallons of jet fuel.
Prius penance: She'd have to drive 45,000 miles, and that's a lot longer for Jenny than just going down the block. It's actually more like twice around the earth.
So Jennifer says: There was no comment from Lopez's rep.
George Clooney
On the ground: George favors a Tango, an electric car that gets a whopping 135 miles to the charge.
In the air: Los Angeles/Tokyo, 5500 miles in a private jet.
Gas guzzled: 7,000 gallons of jet fuel.
Electric shocker: Even with his super-saver Tango, he'll have to drive over 57 oceans -- Pacific Oceans to break even.
So George says: Clooney's rep, publicist Stan Rosenfield, tells TMZ, "You clearly have no understanding of certain people's need for private transport," and points out that Clooney often has "no control" over his travel schedule.
Brad Pitt
On the ground: Eco-champ Brad is yet another Prius-lover, and he reportedly has several hybrids in his stable.
In the air: Los Angeles/Namibia, 9,400 miles in a private jet.
Gas guzzled: 11,000 gallons of jet fuel.
Prius penance: Brad burned enough fuel to take a Prius to the moon.
So Brad says: Pitt didn't have any comment. His rep tells TMZ that Pitt is out of the country.
Leo fueling his Prius And the true-blue Green Award goes to ... Leo DiCaprio.
On the ground: Leo drives a Toyota Prius
In the air: Leo flies just like us folk -- commercial, unless he positively must fly private because of scheduling.
Prius penance: None.
Source: http://www.tmz.com/2006/10/18/celebs-who-claim-theyre-green-but-guzzle-gas
Of course, the stars need to go here and there. The location shoots, the fabulous vacations, etc. But that's why God created United Airlines. G-IV's, on the other hand, were created in the image of precious celebs.
Julia Roberts
On the ground: Roberts drives a Prius, which gets (at best) 60 miles to the gallon, shaving 30 miles off a normal car's mpg.
In the air: Chicago/LA, 1,749 miles in a private jet, the route she took with Rupert Everett while shooting "My Best Friend's Wedding."
Gas guzzled: 2,100 gallons of jet fuel.
Prius Penance: Julia would have to drive 30,000 miles, or roughly once around the earth and then some to even out her consumption in the air.
So Julia says: No word yet from Julia's rep.
Jennifer Lopez
On the ground: J-Lo tools around in her 60 miles-per-gallon Prius.
In the air: LA /New York, 2,475 miles in a private jet. Lopez was actually sued by a private jet company for allegedly skipping out on the bill, though she says it's all a misunderstanding and she was not supposed to be billed.
Gas guzzled: 2,750 gallons of jet fuel.
Prius penance: She'd have to drive 45,000 miles, and that's a lot longer for Jenny than just going down the block. It's actually more like twice around the earth.
So Jennifer says: There was no comment from Lopez's rep.
George Clooney
On the ground: George favors a Tango, an electric car that gets a whopping 135 miles to the charge.
In the air: Los Angeles/Tokyo, 5500 miles in a private jet.
Gas guzzled: 7,000 gallons of jet fuel.
Electric shocker: Even with his super-saver Tango, he'll have to drive over 57 oceans -- Pacific Oceans to break even.
So George says: Clooney's rep, publicist Stan Rosenfield, tells TMZ, "You clearly have no understanding of certain people's need for private transport," and points out that Clooney often has "no control" over his travel schedule.
Brad Pitt
On the ground: Eco-champ Brad is yet another Prius-lover, and he reportedly has several hybrids in his stable.
In the air: Los Angeles/Namibia, 9,400 miles in a private jet.
Gas guzzled: 11,000 gallons of jet fuel.
Prius penance: Brad burned enough fuel to take a Prius to the moon.
So Brad says: Pitt didn't have any comment. His rep tells TMZ that Pitt is out of the country.
Leo fueling his Prius And the true-blue Green Award goes to ... Leo DiCaprio.
On the ground: Leo drives a Toyota Prius
In the air: Leo flies just like us folk -- commercial, unless he positively must fly private because of scheduling.
Prius penance: None.
Source: http://www.tmz.com/2006/10/18/celebs-who-claim-theyre-green-but-guzzle-gas
Celeb hyprocrisy
Photo: Via Daily Mail
1) Paul McCartney and the Lexus Hybrid Delivered by Plane Fiasco
Given, it wasn't really the fault of our favorite green knight (and apparently he's really peeved). But somebody in his posse should have kept closer tabs on how that free Lexus LS600H Hybrid was going to get from Japan to the U.K. Green car it was -- but not any more. Delivery by plane instead of by boat means its transport footprint was 100 times larger, and it got 4 mpg for the first 5,966 miles of it’s life without even hitting the road. The shocking carbon blunder: This Beatles alum might as well have jumped in his car and driven around the world six times.
Source:
2) Google Founders and Their $60 million dollar "Party Plane"
Gotta have at least one air travel culprit on this list. In the workplace, media giant Google is greening the way with a solar-clad headquarters, cafeterias serving hormone-free chicken, beef from free-range cows and eggs from cage-free hens, and free shuttle service for employees. They even have an employee incentive plan that encourages walking, biking, and taking public transportation.
Course, that doesn't mean the co-founders follow it: After a public dispute, Sergey Brin and Larry Page were revealed to be more concerned about the size of the mattresses in their $60 million dollar "party plane." The Boeing 767 carries 180 passengers in commercial use and is three times as heavy as a conventional executive plane, says the Wall Street Journal. Tripped out with the comforts of home, the Google plane is luxury all the way, with customized showers, dining rooms, and bedrooms...which leave room for only 50 people.
3) Gwyneth Paltrow's Perfume Smells Fishy
Oh Gwynnie, you promote hybrids, shop for organic products and green baby furniture, and support Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and Father of Inconvenient Truth Al Gore, so why are you hawking a perfume line that contains seriously dangerous chemicals? According to the Cosmetic Database, Estée Lauder Pleasures Delight body lotion gets a hazard score of 8 out of 10 (10 being dose yourself with this stuff and bring on the cancer, birth defects, reproduction failures, and immune toxicity). And it's not like she didn't have better options: Of all the skin creams on the market we could lather up with, 96 percent show better scores.
4) Vanity Fair's Green Issue Features Material Girl
Ok, so this one's not exactly a celebrity, but Vanity Fair, tell us again: How exactly is Madonna green? In 2006, you hit the nail on the head when you put the spotlight on our dashing TreeHugger founder Graham Hill…but Madonna? Spending almost 10,000 dollars a month on Kabbalah-blessed hydration, she's more the Queen of Bottled Water than the Queen of Pop. Some even blame her for starting the trend in the 1980's, with her promotion of Evian. She also invests in oil exploration, and her carbon footprint could squash us flat, at 100 times the average British citizen's. And no hybrid for this gas-wallowing diva: Her fleet includes a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, Audi A8s, and a Mini Cooper S.
Greenwashing 450
HOW TO FIGHT GREENWASHING
Shop Smart
Use reputable sites, such as the Good Guide, to find out how green a product actually is.
Watch MTV?*
*always think about who has made the video and why.
Act like the Cohen brothers
have sweet street cred? use it to dismantle the myths greenwashing pushes
think about it
yup- that's it. just think. really think.
Shop Smart
Use reputable sites, such as the Good Guide, to find out how green a product actually is.
Watch MTV?*
*always think about who has made the video and why.
Act like the Cohen brothers
have sweet street cred? use it to dismantle the myths greenwashing pushes
think about it
yup- that's it. just think. really think.
Greenwashing 101
HOW TO CONVINCE THE PUBLIC YOU ARE GREEN
find a pretty, famous face
Celebrities are of course the answer! Find yourself a celebrity who can get your company or product that extra umph. Having a celebrity, like Brad Pitt, say something is 'environmentally friendly' and that they use that product because they care- is pure gold!
Perhaps Kermit the frog is not what you typically consider to be a celebrity, but the recognizable character helps ford pretend 36/city 31/highway is efficiency and... green!
use something cute
cuteness is the way to go. add something cute, maybe furry, into your add and- bam! you're product is automatically more environmental!
wait, wait, wait- doesn't GE have 78 Superfund Sites? Didn't they have to pay $200 million in a settlement regarding their polution in the Housatonic River? What about the $92,000 fine they paid for violating minimum requirments to prevent toxic releases from a silicone manufacturing plant in Waterford, NY? Oh and then there was the $20,000 fine for moving 320 pounds of uranium to a waste treatment tank... etc. etc. etc.
using those green bills to pretend to be green
This is simple, spend lots of money to make people think youre green instead of investing in actual green technology.
The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) spend $45 million on advertising for clean coal, while investing $3.5 in actual technologies. Oh, and did I mention the social justice issues that comes with the burning of coal- or how about the extraction process? Mountaintop Removal anyone?
I guess it doesn't seem so clean after all... but A for effort ACCCE.
find a pretty, famous face
Celebrities are of course the answer! Find yourself a celebrity who can get your company or product that extra umph. Having a celebrity, like Brad Pitt, say something is 'environmentally friendly' and that they use that product because they care- is pure gold!
Perhaps Kermit the frog is not what you typically consider to be a celebrity, but the recognizable character helps ford pretend 36/city 31/highway is efficiency and... green!
use something cute
cuteness is the way to go. add something cute, maybe furry, into your add and- bam! you're product is automatically more environmental!
wait, wait, wait- doesn't GE have 78 Superfund Sites? Didn't they have to pay $200 million in a settlement regarding their polution in the Housatonic River? What about the $92,000 fine they paid for violating minimum requirments to prevent toxic releases from a silicone manufacturing plant in Waterford, NY? Oh and then there was the $20,000 fine for moving 320 pounds of uranium to a waste treatment tank... etc. etc. etc.
using those green bills to pretend to be green
This is simple, spend lots of money to make people think youre green instead of investing in actual green technology.
The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) spend $45 million on advertising for clean coal, while investing $3.5 in actual technologies. Oh, and did I mention the social justice issues that comes with the burning of coal- or how about the extraction process? Mountaintop Removal anyone?
I guess it doesn't seem so clean after all... but A for effort ACCCE. it's all natural- what more do you want?
well- maybe i would suggest something that doesn't create a monoculture by destroying biodiversity, or something that uses less energy intense refining, perhaps using a crop that doesn't use more fertilizers and insecticides than any other crop, or maybe... something that is healthy for you? (maybe i'm just crazy...)
well- maybe i would suggest something that doesn't create a monoculture by destroying biodiversity, or something that uses less energy intense refining, perhaps using a crop that doesn't use more fertilizers and insecticides than any other crop, or maybe... something that is healthy for you? (maybe i'm just crazy...)
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)