What can Brown do for green?

loved this post from Citizen Brand on a corporation doing some good in their own way. UPS, or "brown" as we've come to know them have put a stake in the ground by leasing alternative fuel vehicles to transport ground packages in areas that will not only benefit from reduced congestion, but reduced emissions. UPS currently has 1,600 alternative fuel vehicles in its fleet. i applaud this as a powerful start and a nice bar raised for the industry.

i also value UPS' view of their role in the larger carbon footprint and its impact on the bottom line:
"Packages go from the airplanes, to the tractor trailers, to the delivery vans, then to the drop-off nodes. From there the ZAP trucks make the final delivery to the consumer in a zero-emission vehicle that costs less to operate," said ZAP CEO Steve Schneider. "It's a perfect example of how green technology can help corporate America's bottom line."

it's companies like this, which balance their environmental impact with solid business practices, that will grow and lead during this important time of business renaissance. yes, i said it. and i believe that's what we're experiencing. kudos to UPS not only for finding a green solution, but for integrating green into the solving of a business problem.

Critical Mass in Chicago

my friend sara (and interwoven threads advocate extraordinaire) just shot me a link to a Chicago Tribune story on the city's famous (and huge!) critical mass. check it out. i'm a big believer in critical mass-type events within the cycling community. they help underscore a number of issues: car/bike safety, environmentalism, getting off the grid, fitness. but they also serve to energize a base and recruit new enthusiasts with the hope of converting drivers into pedalers (is that a word?).

one thing that caught my attention in the article is the questioning of participants dedication to the mission and meaning of critical mass events. "are you real?" do you come out and ride a mass or do you commute to work/school/jump on your bike when you run errands? i personally don't have any problem with people participating who may not live that vision daily - the more the better here. and some people are unable to bike to work, etc. because of distance/terrain/inability to show up sweaty for meetings.

this brings up a larger question: how many causes or issues are you involved in in theory, but not in practice?

it's cliche, but take action. however small your first step. ride a critical mass and then aim to cut a car trip a week via bike. watch the 11th hour, but then set up your home recycling system. you get the point.

PSFK calls out Delta

I walk a fine line here at the Do Better Blog. I try to post only info of the purest of heart. We all know there's a ton of "greenwashing" going on with brands right now to be part of the cool, green, kids' table. Boo on that. I'm not suggesting a witch hunt, but I am suggesting we continue to feature and laud honestly good companies compared to companies who've tacked on a green initiative because their competitors just adopted a highway. So far from the point. Anyway, I love reading PSFK (and get a lot of my truly environmental info from this source - so put 'em on your RSS reader) and tonight saw an interesting post calling out Delta's "green" efforts.

First of all, I'm really happy. Why? Because PSFK did something that I am so darn excited to see in the mainstream: a feet-to-the-fire accountability check of companies' "green" efforts. Since forming Interwoven Threads, I've tried to do as much as I can to create a sustainable company. Am I 100 percent good yet? No. But I'm working toward it. And I like the dialogue and the pressure from consumers. I invite it. It's how this green thing will get some gas (and by gas, I mean...).


PSFK questions Delta's "green" in-flight amenity kit (photo credit psfk). You know, they were pretty harsh on Delta, but I'd have started out with even a harsher criticism: When you're an airline, burning god knows how much fuel, a corn-based toothbrush isn't going to offset your carbon footprint. Don't jerk me around with an in-flight kit. I'm going to criticize your marketing dept. Promote the trees you're planting to offset your footprint. Promote your partnership with the Breast Cancer Research Fund. Give me a sapling instead of a toothbrush to, if your website is correct, symbolize the tree you are planting on my your employees' behalf. That's good stuff and it's stuff I, as a consumer, get and can get behind.

What would make me happy (and I imagine Piers, too) would be an honest account of how to do better. Something like this, printed on the in-flight bag: "We're an airline. We burn lots of fuel. But you have to get to L.A. from New York and you need to do it fast. So, we exist to aid travel. To offset the environmental implications of our industry, we're doing X. You'll see that reflected in our in-flight service and our gate experience, where we're working toward a social consciousness we believe is critical to balance our impact on the environment we all seek to preserve."

One great thing that came from the giant Web 2.o movement was transparency. It started as an edict for web behavior and has trickled into all aspects of modern business communications. Nowhere is it more beneficial to a company and appreciated by a consumer than being transparent with your environmental and social efforts. None of us are perfect. Delta, your consumers know what you're putting into the air when they buckle their belts. So face it. Be who you are. Seems like you've got a lot of good offsets going for you, none of which have anything to do with a "green" toothbrush. How do you communicate those better? How do you change the bigger picture, not just the cute kit with some nice copywriting.

It's a good day, folks. We're challenging brands. We're debating authenticity. And that is what grows efforts.

Counting your carbon calories?

PSFK, which is quickly becoming one of my standby sources for green news and thoughts, had a nice post today on Tesco's (a UK grocery retailer) effort to embark on a labeling system for its products that will chart each product's carbon footprint. Wowsa. Now, the blog post argues that consumers may not really be interested in a product's carbon calories...I rebut that argument with the following: no one thought eating massive amounts of bacon was a good idea until a feller named Atkins came around. Just saying...I think we'd all be much better stewards of the grocery aisles and the world if we turned our attention away from carb counts and made some purchase decisions based on the carbon calorie.

I do, however, agree with the post's challenge to turn attention toward simpler fixes, such as focusing on local products.

So the question is, could you be conditioned to check carbon calories with the same attention as you check fats and such? Would it be enough to cause you to switch brands?