False Green

In general terms, I had always struggled with the concept of commercial "marketing" as it relates to fancy advertisements and clever gimmicks. Although I consider myself a staunch capitalist, it always made me uncomfortable that, when boiled down to simplest terms, convincing somebody to buy or invest in something all boils down to "deceit." How can I convince somebody that they need something more than they actually do. (Yes there is an aspect of need, we all need things, but it's safe to say most of us Americans have much more than we need). Good marketers accomplish this by equating NEED and WANT. They convince people that since something is COOL then you WANT it and somehow therefor NEED it, so you BUY it.

In terms of certain environmental products, such as wind power devices for example, the same strategy has been utilized. The underlying theme is commendable (clean energy, renewable energy, etc...), but since our society is so fixated on what's COOL, we have settled for branding methods based the now-standard form of marketing deceit.

Small scale wind power is one of many new enviro-fads. As observed in Sept 4 NYT article "Assessing the Value of Small Wind Turbines" By KATE GALBRAITH, cities such as San Francisco and New York and Boston are embracing the IMAGE of wind power, in pursuit of the end goal of relaxing dependance on "dirty" power, although on a small scale it is almost impossible to be economically sustainable. It's a noble ambition, but I can't help but relate it to the same silly (and frankly embarrasing) strategies that we use to market everything from extra sharp knives to fancy cars. Many individuals, governments and institutions are even open to the shallow nature of their "environmental" endeavors. The minds behind the small (and pretty much useless) experiemental wind turbines on top of the Holyoke Center office complex are open with the idea that its purpose is to create "outward symbols of our commitment to renewable energy." They know it's an investment not worth the financial return. Wow, talk about 100% image.* (*image has a value and therefor this statement can be argued in terms of "worth" as it may attract clients, tenants, etc..)

It's this "image" that bothers me. For an extreme example, I am currently working on a project that is marketed as "green" (and even pursuing certification), but the fact of the matter is, in terms of the big picture, this is purely marketing. Not only is it "cool" to be green now, but the multi-millionaires who spend way too much money on a high-end condo are feeling a soothing of their conscience by "saving the planet" when in fact, they are doing very little, and spending a lot of money to do so. I will be touching on this idea much more in the future.

Now let me be honest with myself. Going back to wind power, I do believe that these achievements are stepping stones to bigger and better achievements. It hurts me to say, but this marketing, this "image" that is portrayed, while shallow right now, is necessary to justify the means. After all, we are a capitalist society, and when it comes down to it, we have to convince people to pay for things. Right now we are paying off the technology, I suppose. I just hope people don't settle for having done their part in "saving the world" just by throwing 5 grand at a small device on their roof when in fact their personal benefit is merely looking cool.