Really Stupid Greenwash: Budweiser's grow a beard, save water campaign

We use 1,500 gallons of water  to make 
one 32 gallon barrel of beer!

The American beer company Anheuser-Busch, makers of Budweiser, is urging American men to grow a beard between now and World Environmental Day on June 5. According to Budweiser, the average American man uses 5 gallons (almost 20 litres) of water each time he shaves. They estimate that their 'grow a beard campaign' can save a million gallons of water.


I first heard of this campaign as an advertisement on Onion News Network. A husky American guy was out fishing in a motor powered boat, urging men to stop shaving. I thought it was a joke, but it's not--you can read about it here.  You can pledge your support on the Budweiser facebook page.


This is the worst kind of green wash, because it makes people believe they are doing something, when they are not. Sure we need to save water. And yes, shaving does require water. But so do a lot of things in life that we do every day. Why not stop doing them? 


When he heard of this campaign, my 11 year old sun suggested that American men give up bathing and washing their clothes from now until June 5. That would be smelly, but it would certainly save more water than not shaving. Alternatively, since it takes a huge amount of water to grow and process food, American men could give up eating potato chips for the next few weeks--that would be healthier--and I'll bet it would save a lot of water. Really committed men could simply go on a three week fast. (Sorry, but you'll die if you actually stop drinking water, so I don't recommend that, though it would save a lot of water...). 


The problem is that real change--the kind of change the planet needs--will require more than feel good symbolic steps. We need to change the way we live--every day. Shave, if you want, but don't use 19 litres of water when you do it--simply turn off the tap between strokes. Take a bucket bath. Use the water you rinse your clothes with to wash the next load--that kind of thing. 


Even more important, we need to make some big changes in things that we don't often think about when we think about water. Like the food we eat. Long grain rice, for example, uses much, much more water than traditional millets. Actually, wheat uses a lot of water also. Far more water is used by food production than by toilets and bathing. And then you have our modern consumer society. Those blue jeans you are wearing? They took 6800 litres to make; an automobile takes nearly 1,50,000 litres to produce! (Figures at Treehugger; use this site to convert gallons to litres).


The purveyors of greenwash don't want you to change the things that matter, because that would mean you might consume less. They know many people around the world are profoundly worried about the way things are going. They want to help ease our minds; otherwise we might use our minds to figure out a new way to live.


By the way: the makers of Budweiser beer know that a 32 gallon barrel of beer takes 1,500 gallons of water to make (see that Treehugger link for the details). In other words, if you give up one 330 ml Budweiser, so save 15 litres of water--or just about 4 gallons, which is almost as much as you'll save by not shaving. And if you forgo a big 650 ml bottle of beer, well, you've practically saved the world!

Delhi Stupid: We can do without this podcar scheme!

Podcar: AKA 'Personal rapid transit'. (Wikicommons)

One has to wonder: who is making money off the CM's latest "Green Scheme"?


Last night I read in The Hindu that the Delhi city government is considering an elevated pod car system. CM Dikshit, quoted in the Times of India , had this to say about the effort: "We are willing to consider a new modern, convenient, pollution-free and affordable City Pod Car System to supplement the existing modes of public transport in the capital." Officials promise the city won't have to pay anything and the rides will be affordable. The cars, they say, would be battery powered. Hmm.


Apparently, Smt. Dikshit is disappointed by her government's failure to eliminate pollution in Delhi through construction of new flyovers.  So she figures that we can do the same though the use of high-tech, battery-powered elevated pod cars.


Now I have been known to employ parody when writing about the CM. But not this time; this is all real.


For the record, I want to be clear: this is an incredibly stupid idea. I just can't figure out why the press seems to be simply printing government-issued press releases on the subject with no critical questions whatsoever. 


We have a public transportation system, we just need to improve it. If we want to get people to stop using their private cars, we need to think of a way to make driving more expensive. The 'good news' there is that the world energy market will do that for us if we don't get around to being proactive about it. What we do know is that nobody is going to stop driving just because the can travel in a system that seems to be something out of a science fiction film.


This reminds me of the times Smt. Dikshit said we should eliminate auto rickshaws.  Or the time World Class Toilets (number 1 on my CWG pet peeve list) were built--but never operationalised--in many Delhi markets.That, my friends, was a high cost, high-tech scam. There is a pretty good chance that this pod car stupidity is one more way for some friends of some powerful person to get a contract to build something we don't need. 


Let's be realistic. Put more buses on the road--the ones we have are full; if we build more, those will also be full. And while we are at it, we can add more trains to the metro. I love the metro, but it is also bursting at the seems. The other day, my 11 year old son whispered to me while we were riding on the Yellow line at rush hour: "YOU think this is bad? I'm at armpit height! I can't wait till I grow a little bit...it won't smell so bad then!"


 As for this high-fi, sci-fi pod car thing--forget about it.  It's a stupid idea!

Earth Hour 2011: good intentions or greenwash?

Earth Hour: Lights on or lights off?

Today is the last Saturday in March, so this evening at 8:30 pm, people all over the world will turn off their lights for an hour to raise awareness about a variety of green issues.  Of course many good-hearted greens will use the time to think sincerely about what else they might do to be earth friendly, or they will use Earth Hour as a chance to educate their friends, family and neighbors about the massive environmental problems we all face. On the other hand, many political, entertainment and business leaders will use Earth Hour as a low-cost opportunity to prove they are 'green,' when in fact they actively pursue earth-unfriendly policies and/or lifestyles during the rest of the year. For those people, Earth Hour really is just a way to cloak themselves or their companies with a thick coat of greenwash.

That's one reason why Delhi environmental activist Nagraj Adve leaves his lights on in silent protest during Earth Hour. Adve's Earth Hour guest post here last year resulted in a few angry emails, but it clearly touched a nerve: it was re-run in all kinds of places and ended up in the Green Light Dhaba's all-time top-ten most-read list.

Whatever you feel about Earth Hour, do read Adve's post--it will make you think, whether you agree with him or not. And while you are thinking about light consumption, take a look at "Earth at Night" to find out which countries send the most light into space. (There's a lot of light coming from India, but not when you consider the population here; roughly 400 million Indians don't have access to electricity; for them, every hour is Earth Hour.)  


I've put together a list of our best posts on greenwash.  We're not against symbols here at the dhaba; hey, we just ran a World Water Day Special last week. But symbolic actions are intended to make us think. And Earth Hour is a great time to think about the dangers of greenwash. So read a few of these...you won't be disappointed, and it probably won't even take you a full hour.


The Best of the Dhaba: Greenwash
 False advertising:  Priyanka Chopra: do we really need role models like this?
 Tell it like it is...   A phrase I hate: brand ambassador
 Annoying little things: Top 5 Commonwealth Games Pet Peeves
 Antidote:  The Story of Electronics: best known cure for the 'green paper fetish'
 Hard to believe: Flyovers reduce emissions and other examples of Delhi greenwash 
 Should've been:  Breaking News: Leak Reveals Chief Minister Dikshit is Planning Major Green Policy Shifts

Priyanka Chopra: do we really need role models like this?

When you think about it, Priyanka Chopra  gains from her association with green causes than the greens she says she's supporting

I have a drawer filled with newspaper clippings that frustrate me. I write about some, and some end up in the kabadi--there's just not enough time to do justice to all the outrageous things going on in the world these days.  I was sorting out those clippings the other day when I found this lovely piece in The Hindu about NDTV's "green ambassador," Priyanka Chopra. On behalf of NDTV and Toyota, Chopra was giving out cash awards and certificates to motivate green activists. This from the article:

Ms. Chopra said ever since she became a green ambassador, a number of netizens were actively following what she wrote and said.  “It feels great to be part of the campaign. For the past two years, Greenathon has been doing amazing things to protect our environment; it brought light to 150 villages. When we, as actors, get acknowledged with an award for our acting skills, then it motivates us to put our best foot forward. Similarly, when we would honour unsung heroes who are contributing in their own special way to make our plant environment-friendly it would encourage them to do more.”

I won't complain about anyone giving cash money to green activists, though I'm not convinced it will do much good. Cash money to fund green research, or subsidies to help farmers grow food more sustainably, would make more sense. Or maybe scholarships for students who have demonstrated an interest in green issues or technology. Most of us green activists do what we do because we understand that being green is in all of our long term interest; we don't need cash prizes to convince us.


What's more, if we environmentalists ever start relying on car companies or TV stations to provide the motivation or funding for our movement, then that will be a sad day indeed. TV stations and car companies are not the kind of organizations we can rely to support anything more than superficial change--they have too much riding on the current system. Obviously.

At least this tacky hanky is reusable...

As for Ms. Chopra, well she has a pretty face, she claims she pays her taxes, and my kids loved the Krish, so I don't feel I should be too hard on her. After all, the article in The Hindu that I quoted above also says she is against killing tigers. In fact, she's even against litter:

[Ms. Chopra] said the film fraternity in Mumbai had also become environment-conscious. Earlier, film crew used to litter the sets with plastic mugs and napkins but now they dumped it in a big bag that went for recycling...“This is a cause that is close to my heart. My colleagues with whom I hang out also share my concern for doing our bit to save our planet from ecological degradation. 

But when all is said and done, being against tiger killing and litter does not qualify one to be a 'green ambassador.' And I say that not only because I hate the phrase 'brand ambassador.'  
The problem is that even while she is being called a 'green ambassador', Priyanka Chopra is serving as the poster girl for unsustainable overconsumption. It's not just Samsung and Levis--Indian Express has called Ms. Chopra the "'Face' of a million products," stating that she represents, "practically every second FMCG [Fast Moving Consumer Goods] product!" 


But Ms. Chopra is not just advertising overconsumption; she is practicing it! In the wake of the recent income tax raids on her flats, she was quoted in the Times of India as saying:

Also, it was said that I have ten flats. These are all accounted for flats and I am very proud that I bought these from my hard-earned money. I am very proud that I started so young and that at my age, I can afford so much with my hard work. And it's all accounted for – all my homes, five of which I am currently living in...

I could go on, but I don't think it's necessary. The green movement doesn't need role models like Priyanka Chopra. But it's not surprising she feels like she needs us. After all, it takes a lot of greenwash to cover 10 flats!

The Story of Electronics: best known cure for the annoying 'green paper fetish'

There is a lot wrong in the world.  Hunger, massive corruption, ecological destruction, brutal oppression of many kinds--these things inspire emotions like outrage or even despair. But there are plenty of things out there that are just plain annoying.  Like 'greenwash' or the term 'brand ambassador' --or the 'world class toilets' being built in a city where millions of people lack clean water and basic sanitation facilities.

Today, let me add one more thing to my long list of pet peeves.  I'll call this one the green paper fetish.

The green paper fetish actually a sub-class of greenwash. It afflicts those people who believe that being 'green' means the exact same thing as 'saving paper at all costs.' This fetish lacks both the prurient charm and the kitsch potential of the foot fetish or the restrictive clothing fetish; it is simply and solely annoying and stupid.

First, let me be clear: I do not advocate wasting paper. Although paper is recyclable, it takes a lot of energy both to make and to remake. And of course, new paper requires harvesting trees or other types of plant life. A few months back, I looked at the environmental costs and benefits of both electronic and paper reading here. It's a lot more complicated an equation than you might think, because most alternatives to paper consume a lot of electricity and because the electronics we read on--like the computer you are looking at right now--come with high environmental costs.

Of course many people who admonish us to use less paper at the office are actually not interested in saving the earth--they are interested in saving money. There's nothing wrong with saving money, but let's not pretend our primary reason for printing or copying less is to save the earth, unless our office is also considering how to cut systematically cut our collective use of big things like power and unsustainable forms of transportation. Are the people in charge willing to come to work by public transportation? Are they willing to do more than just use more efficient light bulbs; will they turn down the AC to the point where they might actually break a sweat from time to time?

I'm going to say this one more time: nobody should be wasting paper.  We just shouldn't pretend that we work for green organisations just because someone comes around and collects the recycling or because we print on both sides of the page from time to time. 

And when people say the answer to our environmental problems is to trade paper for laptop computers, we need to explain the high costs of the electronics that more and more of us are becoming dependent on. Nobody does this as simply or as convincingly as Annie Leonard. Her Story of Electronics is the best thing she's done since The Story of Stuff. Not only does she explain why electronics are so toxic, but she suggests ways in which we could vastly reduce their toxic affects.  

Take a few minutes and watch in now.  Then send it to your coworkers--especially those with a green paper fetish!

Flyovers Reduce Emissions and other Examples of Delhi Greenwash

Before we get to the greenwash, Kabir Arora from the Indian Youth Climate Network asked us to announce a summer course: "Agenda For Survival" from Anil Aggarwal Green College (Center for Science & Environment). Kabir has attended the course and gives it a strong endorsement.  For more information about the course, you can find details on the CSE website, here. 

 ******

Our April Fool's issue was more difficult to write than I expected.  I think this was partly because when you are trying to make fun of silly (but real) policies and policy statements, satire can end up sounding ... reasonable--and reasonable is not funny!  (The exception to that was our suggestion that we replace the CWG with an international Science Olympiad....now that was reasonable and funny!)

One thing I realized in researching that post was that our leadership spends a great deal of time applying greenwash.  Just google "Sheila Dikshit" +green and you'll get over 33,000 results; try "Sheila Dixit" +green, and you'll get another 4,500.  That, my friends, is a lot of green! Of course some of it is the real thing.    But a lot of it, I found, is greenwash; and a coat of greenwash does not make something truly "green".  It's a little bit like dying an egg at Easter, or dumping a bucket of colour on a kid at Holi--it's fun, it looks nice, but it really doesn't change anything in the long run! Below are three examples of what I'm talking about.

Delhi Greenwash: 1-2-3:

1.  Shelia Dikshit's plan to phase out auto rickshaws:

“Auto-rickshaws are not a good option — they are uncomfortable and pollute environment....We are looking at the option of electric cars and even electric motorcycles.I was recently told that cycles are fitted with electric motor — this will be a good option for travelling short distances.”--Indian Express, March 18

Sorry, but this is not about the environment.  This government doesn't even enforce bicycle lane rules on the BRT where there are cycle lanes--they are over-run daily by motorized vehicles during rush hour.  How will we convince people who can afford to take an auto to ride battery powered cycles in these conditions? And as for electric cars, they are a long way from becoming cost effective when compared to CNG-powered autos.  Besides, an electric car uses a lot more steel--not to mention rare earth metals in its electric motor--than a little green and yellow Delhi auto; it's actually not clear to me which is "greener."  That's not to say that autorickshaws are completely and truly green--they are not nearly as good as buses, cycles, or even the metro.  But they are not the worst polluters on the road--not even close.  

The CM wants to ban autos, because they are "uncomfortable" and their drivers are "rude."  To make autos more comfortable, all you really need to do is reduce traffic from the millions of private cars on the roads.  Delhi's expansion of the Metro and the bus system will help here.  As for rudeness, many auto drivers are under huge amounts of stress--some of it unnecessary.  For a discussion about what kinds of pressures auto drivers face--and what we might do about it, see this piece in Kafila.  Maybe that's where the CM should start.

I suspect part of the problem with autorickshaws is that they are not the kind of transportation that fit with the current idea of what a "World Class" city should look like.  After all, do you see autos in London or Paris or  Los Angeles?  Of course the emissions in those cities are much, much higher than in Delhi, but that's another story.

2. MCD wants solar powered carts for street vendors:

From a story in last week's Asian Age:

These carts will also be fitted with solar panels for the requirements of lighting after sunset. The official said that usually the vendors use battery lanterns having CFL bulbs or even normal electric bulbs. With the solar panels fixed, not only would these carts look good but also help in curbing pollution.

This is great.  But if you really look at your carbon footprint, street carts are not the place you want to start!  A light bulb is nothing compared with the electricity used by the AC in one fancy restaurant, to say nothing of the food court in a big mall. Nothing.  So why make a priority of doing this?  The article in the Age hints at other reasons. First is the basic principle of greenwash-- looking like you're doing something is more important than doing it:

In the first phase, those vendors will be provided with the carts around the Commonwealth Games Village, main stadia and also those areas that were main attraction centres for tourists. Subsequently, the carts will be given to the vendors from other areas.

And maybe "security" has something to do with it.  The article goes on to say:

Besides, they will also be fitted with closed-circuit television cameras. "These cameras may be connected to local control rooms and will be of great help on security matters as it would help in keeping an eye on the happenings going around in a particular market or a commercial space," said an official.

Again, a few solar powered light bulbs will not make eating "greener" in Delhi. But it may make Delhi look greener to CWG tourists who don't know better...


3. Shelia Dikshit: Flyovers will help make Delhi "pollution free by 2010"

I wouldn't have believed this, but way back in 2007, The Hindu ran an article called "Pollution Free Delhi by 2010, says Shelia."  Well, we haven't quite gotten there, but I'm sure we will any day now!  One of the things the CM says will help us in that quest are flyovers!  (I never realized all those flyovers were being built to reduce our carbon emissions.)

The Delhi Government, Ms. Dikshit said, had already constructed 63 flyovers to reduce idle time of cars and consequent carbon emissions. For the Commonwealth Games, she said, another 28 flyovers and bridges are being constructed for better connectivity and traffic management and for beautification of the Capital.

Now I have to confess something about flyovers: they may be expensive, but they do help move traffic.  And traffic, as anyone in Delhi knows, is very bad these days.  The problem with flyovers and roads in general is that there is ample research to show that the more you build, the more people drive.  So they are not likely to make us use less fossil fuels, but more.  

Interestingly, back in 2007, the CM was singing the praise of CNG powered vehicles, including autorickshaws.  In this article, she says:

“In the past six years, all old commercial vehicles have been phased out and 1 lakh vehicles involved in public transport in Delhi have been put on clean CNG fuel that has helped in substantial improvement in the ambient air quality of the city."

OK, so that's a quick lesson in greenwash, Delhi style. Have a great day!