Green Marketing

Thanks to CCS Printing, a hopeful note just in time for the weekend

At Washburn Communication, we are content experts. We often partner with companies that complement our strengths in areas where we're lacking, such as CCS Printing in Bellevue. The imagery on the company's Web site has always been a showcase for its production values. Recently, the site has moved into a certain direction, with greenery, vistas from nature (what is nature? but let's keep it short for today), and a very pronounced Pacific Northwest Ecotopia flavor.

Recently, CCS fully revealed its green theme:

One of our corporate commitments is a reinvestment in the community locally, and now globally. The GREENer Committee at CCS is formed by members of our staff who meet regularly to discuss goals, plan company-wide GREENer initiatives and celebrate milestones. After forming the committee in March of 2007, our committee has learned that CCS is already performing many of the tasks conducive to saving the environment.

In 20 years of business CCS Printing has always practiced responsible business practices by utilizing local area recyclers, minimizing waste, offering recycled paper choices and focusing on energy efficiency. In this day and age there are many more resources that allow for these practices and CCS is taking advantage of that. The GREENer committee has set its sights high with the goal of making CCS Printing carbon neutral by 2013.

This week's e-mail update from company president Kevin Sullivan had this to add:

Our newly formed GREENer committee is hard at work developing a plan to reduce the impact that our industry has on the environment and become a carbon neutral company within 5 years. On April 22nd, Earth Day, the GREENer committee will unveil their brand to the CCS Printing employees and launch it to the public with press releases and media coverage. The committee is focused on much more than recycling. Their efforts include the Adopt-a-Road program, volunteer trail work with the Washington Trails Association, FSC Certification, energy conservation and offsetting and much more.

Is that as good as it gets in green marketing nowadays? CCS takes a risk in sharing a measurable, verifiable goal and offers its employees and customers a mature, well-reasoned initiative, in an appealing, esthetic presentation. It's a little like that hopeful moment late in Twelve Monkeys when the heroes are escaping, the animals have been freed from the zoo, and for a brief moment you think, "All will turn out well, after all." That's before you see the remainder of that environmentally themed, civically sobering film.

The fact that a smaller company like CCS, thriving in a severely competitive market, dedicates significant resources to environmental marketing means there's lots of value here, even a little optimism. Thank you so much!

Past verdant righteousness

Alert reader and colleague Tyson Supasatit draws attention to a Fast Company article, Another Inconvenient Truth by David Roberts. I'm not sure why this article appears now; the report and findings Roberts mentions have been known since November of last year, and greenwashing has been around for many years. Fine with me, though, if Fast Company can bring more attention to these issues and rustle some feathers.

You can't swing a dead hippie in a big-box store these days without hitting some sort of green boast on a label. Partially recycled. Energy efficient. Eco-friendly. Natural!

Off the top of your head, how many of these claims do you suppose are bogus or misleading in some way? A quarter? One-half? Try 99.9%.

That's the startling conclusion of research from TerraChoice Environmental Marketing. Of the 1,018 green-advertised products it reviewed last fall, all but one committed one of the "six sins of greenwashing." Yikes.

That sounds like a call for tighter standards and more legal enforcement—perhaps some hefty fines, even a boycott or two. Force companies to be honest, right?

Sure. But there are deeper, less comfortable issues in the background of the greenwashing debate. While there's certainly a role for better oversight of green marketing, there are built-in limits to green honesty in a wealthy materialist culture.

Roberts goes on to discuss the tradeoffs many companies and consumers tolerate when they sell and buy products with ostensible green benefits, drawing analogies with Michael Pollan's analyses of how we eat and obtain our food. He concludes:

Greenwashing isn't merely a result of poor labeling standards and consumer protection. It's part and parcel of an economy built on trade-in material and energy waste. Until we are collectively ready to really go green, greenwashing will be with us. Naturally.

It's generally easy, and often enjoyable, to call out greenwashing misdeeds, because many companies seem to assume deep-rooted naiveté on the part of their customers and clients. And, for better or worse, righteousness can be a strong motivator. A not-bad place to start, it's a miserable frame of mind to dwell in, however. For balance and a possibly more practical approach, take a look at the original report from TerraChoice, also available in French. Review their blog. Working in a small company, I find the entry from February 27 worthwhile. If you like, you can even report a greenwashing sin. Somewhat hyperbolically, TerraChoice describes itself as "North America's premiere [sic] environmental marketing agency," but definitely helps to meet urgent needs of companies and their customers wondering about the veracity of their environmentally themed marketing.

 

In San Francisco, mayor and leading paper do today what most everybody else will get around to tomorrow

A week-long trip to the Bay Area gave me a chance to catch up with the region's environmental news.

Back in the mid-nineties, SFGate already was one of the more interesting and complete news sites, and today, it's still a worthwhile resource for news about San Francisco, the Bay Area, and California. Initially a joint undertaking by the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Examiner, after ownership changes that brought the Chronicle to the Hearst Corporation and the Examiner into irrelevance, the site is still the online home of the Chronicle and almost indistinguishable from it.

SFGate offers a Green section that parallels the quarterly environmental-themed sections of the Chronicle. As of today, the last edition featured is from October 19, 2007, a long quarter ago.

However, the Chronicle and SFGate provide environmental news also in another area of the site. Focus here appears to be mostly regional and West Coast, but articles to do with more-or-less environmental events from the rest of the world (such as what's happening with elephant culling in South Africa) also find themselves recycled here.

The Chronicle's extensive coverage is light years ahead of many other urban and regional newspapers, and probably has a lot to do with values and attitudes of Bay Area readers. The paper also employs an environment editor, Audrey Cooper, who as recently as a September 2007 conference of the Society of Environmental Journalists was an assistant metro editor at the paper. The print issue features daily half-page ads with a picture of Cooper next to the prominent tagline: "Coverage that moves beyond the trendiness of being 'green'." "Green staff" is listed on a separate page, and you can contact the team at green@sfchronicle.com.

Sophisticated enough not to simply join in the green choir, on February 20, the Chronicle cast a critical eye at the recent creation of a  "director of climate protection initiatives" by San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom. The salary for this position is said to be a neat $160,000 annually. The tone of the article is a little too populist for me, but still... It's remarkable that San Francisco is not just implementing environmental policies, but they have already become part of what some people consider excessive spending and a bloated mayoral administration. Even Ross Mirkarimi, lone Green Party member on the city's board of supervisors, criticizes the mayor's green empire building.

One might expect someone with such an exalted handle to solve global warming and save the rainforest all in a day's work.

But the new climate protection initiatives director is just the latest person to join the city payroll in the name of tackling global climate woes, raising questions about whether environmentalism is becoming the latest excuse for a bloating government payroll.

San Francisco has at least two dozen other city employees already working directly on climate issues at a cost to taxpayers of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

"Although it sounds very well intentioned, and perhaps even necessary, I'm concerned this is a case where eco-chic has gone out of control," said Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, the only Green Party member on the Board of Supervisors.

Newsom's critics in City Hall have pounced on the amorphous "climate protection" title and have blasted the mayor for creating the new role—as well as for creating new jobs for other members of his senior circle and doling out hefty pay raises—while the city braces for a projected $233 million deficit next fiscal year and lawmakers contemplate reducing hospital operating room hours and delaying playground improvement projects to balance the budget.

The article goes on to discuss existing environmentally-focused roles in the city's government, makes a good case for the existence of substantial redundancy (which might actually justify a new director's position, as long as the person in that job can streamline things), and lists what salaries the city employees in current jobs related to climate and environmental issues receive. Personally, I think this is great news. Most other cities don't even have environmental directors and an abundance of green bureaucrats to worry about. The lucky San Franciscans can keep an eye on these persons' effectiveness and critique the mayor for using environmental initiatives to house loyalists and green-shower voters. Download sfgate_director_of_climate_protection_initiatives_02202008.pdf

Environmental policy with both real and projected accomplishments play a major role in the life of the city and its mayor; don't expect any changes in that regard. Just yesterday, Gavin Newsom announced that San Francisco has received a second-place rating as one of America's greenest cities by Popular Science Magazine. Browsing around the mayor's press releases and announcements, you can soon see a pattern that combines environmental commitment, results, and propaganda. Consider, for example, the 2005 press release on phase II of the mayor's clean and green initiative and the naming of the city's first "director of city greening." People elsewhere might just turn green from jealousy.

Take a chance on solid ground and remember to wipe your duck

If there were an award for understated environmental marketing, the Xextex Corporation might be a serious contender. Want to shake a stick at low-hanging, green-washing fruit? Move on. There's nothing to see here. Xextex won't be able to help you. (You could always apply your reasoning skills to finding holes in Dawn's Make a Difference Campaign, or maybe even end up being convinced. Just a thought.)

Back to Xextex, a member of the Washington Clean Technology Alliance. At first glance, the company site appeals most and maybe exclusively to potential distributors and engineers. But think about it. We're on the Pacific coast, home to many spill disasters or near-disasters before you take a single step away from the shore. Many of our business and personal interests compromise the environment even without any dramatic events. Xextex's main products, named X-TEX-B12, X-TEX-B12-AM, and X-TEX-VMS, serve to mitigate or forestall environmental contamination that could have a ruinous effect on water and resources.

Patented X-TEX^®, produced by the Xextex Corporation USA, is a new and unique non-polar lipophilic, hydrophobic media that FILTERS AND REMOVES OIL AND SEDIMENT FROM WATER. X-TEX is an EPA classified sorbent material with a multitude of environmental applications. In manufacturing X-TEX, recycled polymer fibers are converted into a lightweight fiber mass with enormous surface area and microscopic interstitial spaces.

X-TEX-B12 is available in blanket form and out-performs polypropylene and other competitive products. X-TEX is recognized and approved by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Coast Guard, Air Force and the US Navy. It is also used at major airports and industrial sites around the world.  Our claims are backed up with scientific testing and actual field data.

Xextex offers test data to substantiate its claims for the performance and value of its products. Applications for the products are plentiful and include many ordinary, day-to-day pursuits. Endorsements appear solid and credible. The company recently won an Energy Globe Award.

Should Xextex have a more polished online presence? Probably. Definitely fix the typos. But I expect that potential customers and distributors like the unassuming sobriety they find here. It's possible that the presentation we see today is perfect for the indended audience. As a marketer, I'm tempted to call President and CEO Jerry Brownstein and offer my ideas. As a person concerned about the environment, having seen too many vapid environmental marketing claims, I'm impressed, but still hope the company makes a splash.

Too dry for you? Sorry about that. Go back to your Dawn ducks. Real or not?

Reputation, regulation win in global corporate survey about responses to climate change

Recently, The McKinsey Quarterly published a global survey, How companies think about climate change. The survey, conducted in December 2007, considers responses from 2,192 executives in businesses around the world. Overall, it's shocking how quickly the resilience of business organizations, effective corporate response to regulation, and swift reputation management create a convincing impression of calmness in the face of the planetwide changes we're experiencing.

I'm quoting from the introduction, which sums up the results most elegantly:

"...fully 60 percent of global executives view climate change as important to consider within their companies' overall strategy. Further, nearly 70 percent see it as an important consideration for managing corporate reputation and brands, and over half say it's important to account for climate change in such varied areas as product development, investment planning, and purchasing and supply management. About one-third of respondents say their companies places [sic] more emphasis on climate change than on most other global trends.

"Relatively few companies, however, currently appear to be translating the importance they place on climate change into corporate action. Fully 44 percent of CEOs, for example, note that climate change isn't a significant item on their agendas. Further, many respondents report their companies consider climate change only occasionally at best when managing corporate reputation and brands, developing new products, or even managing environmental issues. And more than one-third of global executives say their companies seldom or never factor climate change into their companies' overall strategy."

According to the report, "managing corporate reputation, brands" is "very important" for executives in considering climate change issues, so identified by 36 percent of them, with "managing environmental issues" chosen by 30 percent. Forty-one percent of the execs say that their companies "always, frequently" consider climate change when they manage corporate reputation and brands, followed again by "managing environmental issues" with 35 percent stating that climate change "always, frequently" plays a role in that.

"Corporate reputation" spurs action for 54 percent of the respondents, followed by "customer requests or preferences" at 35 percent and "media attention to climate change" at 34 percent. The reality of climate change does not even appear in that listing, although it may be concealed behind "senior executives' personal convictions," causing action for 30 percent of the surveyed execs. Execs in energy companies are most concerned about their companies reputation in seeing the need to take action (69 percent), whereas only 52 percent of their peers in manufacturing respond in the same way. A relatively low 25 percent and 24 percent, respectively, of execs in manufacturing and finance share that executives' personal convictions cause their organizations to take action.

Interestingly, executives appear to see a huge disconnect between their companies' current practice and what they might be able to do. When asked, "What effect, if any, do you think climate change will have on your company's profits over the next 5 years?", a "very, somewhat positive effect" is considered likely by 36 percent if the companies continue to manage climate change-related issues as they do today, but 61 percent affirm that the effect on profits would be positive if companies were to manage such issues "very well."

Does that mean there's reason for hope that companies and their leadership will do the right thing? Is there reason for dispair in assuming that climate change in and of itself is just not enough of a motivator for these executives and corporations?

Read the McKinsey report in its entirety and spare a moment to comment with your thoughts. 

Have one for the environment

In this blog, we don't typically encourage people to consume alcohol. But it's Mardi Gras, I've been kept awake by a party next door much of the night, and here's a good context. Seattle Greendrinks aims to connect the many businesses, nonprofits, and people involved in environmental pursuits in our area. The next event is on February 12. If you prefer a smaller group and a semblance of sobriety, you can participate in a Green Lunch, instead. If you're not sure you're ready to join, you can be a guest, too, as described on the About page. Say, you're going out of town? No problem. Greendrinks is international, and you can raise an environmental toast in Singapore as well as in Sweden.

 

The basic Greendrinks site (no, you can't create content) offers introductions to many member blogs, some of them barely started. You won't find big regional companies sponsoring here yet, but that's only a question of time. Be sure to check out the events listed right on the home page (and linking from there to five others). If you have any interest at all in environmental issues, here are plenty of opportunities to participate, enjoy, and learn. Cheers!

More on biodiesel: If you don't like cars, one day there may be a train for you.

Earlier this week, we talked about Diesel fuel for cars, limitedly available in Seattle. If you find biodiesel interesting but don't much care about cars, I can empathize. How about trains, though? You're not in a hurry, right? A business newsletter we received this week told us about a company called Green Diesel, Inc., which will develop biodiesel production for the locomotives operated by its parent company.

Richland biodiesel firm “on track” for locomotive fuel

Green Diesel, Inc., an associate firm of the Tri-City & Olympia Railroad Co., has begun research and development in biodiesel production for its own locomotives. Since the summer of 2007, the Kennewick, Wash. company has invested more than $175,000 in biodiesel-refining equipment and is seeking to purchase 33 acres at the Richland Horn Rapids industrial park for the Green Diesel Biodiesel Research Facility. The land sale has been recommended by Richland’s Economic Development Committee and will be considered by the Richland City Council in February. The company plans to make biodiesel from canola oil from ConAgra.  The processing and use of the biodiesel are part of Green Diesel’s research efforts to find the most efficient and economical blends for use in railroad equipment. Eventually, the firm will expand its biodiesel operations using a variety of feedstocks and going beyond locomotive fuel developments. Contact Jack Farrell at (509) 727-5360 or jackfarrell@tcry.com.

If you go to the the company's Web site today, there's not much there yet except for a handy summary of headlines related to biodiesel news, both on the homepage and in a section titled Links. Don't be disappointed. I'm sure Green Diesel will add content as time allows, and eventually the biodiesel news will be even more interesting and actionable. Today, a brief scan will rapidly tell you that the rest of the world is progressing rapidly, while biodiesel in the United States is still more of a cottage industry.

By the way, the Green Diesel parent, the Tri-City & Olympia Railroad Co., may be seriously committed to biodiesel for its own operation, but, like its industry peers, will continue to transport coal and other items of a less than stellar environmental reputation. Check out the news release by Union Pacific featured on the Tri-City & Olympia Railroad Co.'s Web site. There's plenty of coal traveling across the country, in case you worried about supplies drying up.

UP also announced the following monthly SPRB coal delivery records:

• A record 1,159 coal trains were loaded in November, surpassing September’s record of 1,114 trains loaded in a 30-day month.
• A daily average of 38.63 trains loaded in the SPRB in November versus the previous daily average record of 37.13 trains loaded in September.
• A single-day loading record of 46 trains were loaded on November 29 to eclipse the previous record of 45 set on September 29.
• A consecutive seven-day record set was set twice during the last week of November with 293 and 284 trains loaded versus the previous consecutive seven-day record set during the last week of September with 278 trains loaded.
• Coal train size records of 15,460 tons per train and 130.6 cars per train were established in November. Both metrics are more than 2 percent higher than last year.
• The entire Energy commodity group, that includes SPRB, Colorado/Utah, Southern Illinois, Hanna Basin and coke, had best-ever records for any month regarding tons and carloadings. The total tons record of 23.9 million tons surpasses the August 2007 record of 23.6 million tons. The total carloadings record of 205,462 topped the August 2007 total of 203,759.