If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
On the list of many things I have to do to go green in my new home is to upgrade to Energy Star appliances as soon as I can. Of particular concern are my Maytag washer and dryer that look like they’ve been around since before I was born. Energy efficiency and water saving wasn’t considered to be quite as important back then and these two appliances seem to consume a lot of both.
I did some research and found that the Obama Administration is preparing a “cash for clunkers” program for old machines, to encourage people to replace them with more efficient Energy Star appliances (and thereby help the economy improve). It is a rebate program to reimburse you when you purchase an eligible energy efficient appliance.
Here’s how it works, based on the Energystar.gov website. The Department of Energy has approved rebate money to be allocated to the states and the District of Columbia. The latter will establish their own guidelines for implementing the rebates, including amounts to disburse per purchase. The money available varies by state and is limited–here in my home town of Washington DC a total of $568,000 is available.
Check this website to see when the Energy Star rebate program begins in your state (some states have already begun their programs.) Also on this page is a list of each state’s rebate website and the phone hotline you can call for more information. Follow your state’s instructions carefully! One state I checked had a requirement of purchasing your Energy Star appliance in the state itself instead of online.
It’s important to act fast–once the money allocated for your state is gone, it’s gone. For my part, I’ll have to wait until April 2010 before the money arrives in DC. You can bet I’ll be lining up to buy my Energy Star appliances and replace my old clunkers. Can’t beat going green with energy efficient appliances and helping the economy while you’re at it!
For our seventh installment in our greenwashing series we look at Terrachoice’s Seventh Sin Of Greenwashing: Worshiping False Labels, a new sin that has arisen as a result of increased interest in and demand for green products.
Terrachoice’s first research report came out in 2007 and identified the six greenwashing sins identified in the previous six articles (a full list of which is at the bottom of this post.) In early 2009 Terrachoice published a second report which looked at what had happened in the interim. The latter report found some good news: the number of “green” products is exploding in response to consumer demand.
While greenwashing is still a major problem, legitimate eco-labeling became almost twice as common in 2009 as it was in 2007, with 23% of products reviewed listing a valid eco label. That’s great for consumers trying to bring method to the madness of green shopping, because it brings the light of meaningful third-party certification to an increasing number of truly green products. Valid eco labels help shoppers tell the difference between the green and the greenwashed.
Hearing the clamor from consumers for eco labels, some product marketers are unfortunately trying to create the impression, through words and images, that a valid third-party green endorsement has been given when no such endorsement actually exists. In other words, these companies are slapping fake green labels on their products. Fully 23% of green products evaluated by Terrachoice in its latest report committed this sin of worshiping false labels.
Examples cited included:
- A US brand of aluminum foil with certification-like images referring to the name of the company’s in-house environmental program without giving any explanation about what that meant.
- A Canadian paper towel product that made the bold claim “this product fights global warming.”
- Various products using certification-like images with green buzz words like “eco safe,” “eco secure” or “eco preferred”–all of which are meaningless without context or proof.
It’s inevitable that companies try to tap into increasing demand for green products, but applying a label that looks official to convince the customer of a product’s green credentials is not the way to go.
So how do you avoid this last sin of greenwashing? The only real solution is to become aware of what is considered a good, independently verified eco label and what is not. Here are six major eco labels to look for when doing your shopping:
- Green Seal, found primarily on cleaning and building products. I’ve talked a lot about it here at EcoVillageGreen because I consider it one of the gold standards for eco labels.
- GreenGuard, also used on cleaning and building products, including low-VOC paint.
- EcoLogo, a meaningful Canadian eco label for a wide variety of products.
- Energy Star, a US government label for energy efficient appliances.
- WaterSense, a US government label for water-saving faucets.
- USDA Organic, a US government label for organic foods.
There are other meaningful eco labels that will be covered in future EcoVillageGreen posts, but this short list is a good place to start. If you see an eco label you don’t recognize, be suspicious and do your research. It may be good–but it could just as easily be made up and therefore meaningless.
Seventh in a series. The full list:
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #1: The Hidden Trade-Off
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #2: No Proof
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #3: Vagueness
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #4: Irrelevance
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #5: Lesser Of Two Evils
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #6: Fibbing
How To Avoid Greenwashing Sin #7: Worshiping False Labels
Is A Greener Product Green Enough? Our Greenwashing Series Wrap-Up
Millions of consumers each year look for the big yellow label on consumer appliances to check an appliance’s energy consumption and whether it meets Energy Star standards for energy efficiency. That’s why it’s troubling to ask whether the Energy Star label itself is still relevant or meaningful. Yet that was precisely the unasked question behind the comments left by a reader in a recent EcoVillageGreen article.
The reader was annoyed that he had bought an LG refrigerator that supposedly met Energy Star standards, but when he did more research he discovered that the fridge actually consumed more than double the listed energy when used normally, a gross violation of Energy Star. How could this be? He had relied on the Energy Star label but nevertheless failed to save energy or lower his carbon footprint. He was understandably furious.
I started to dig, and came across this October 2008 article from Consumer Reports (CR), which took a close look at Energy Star. It cited the same example of an LG refrigerator found to consume twice as much energy as listed. According to CR, this was because LG followed an Energy Star testing rule that allowed it to turn off the ice maker, which in the LG model also turned off power to the ice compartment. The resulting lower energy use allowed it to comply with Energy Star. But CR rightfully questioned whether this is a realistic scenario for a purchaser of the refrigerator (clearly it is not.)
CR concluded that the program does save energy, but its standards are antiquated and full of flaws. In particular:
- there is no objective third party used to certify appliances as Energy Star compliant. Instead, companies are left to test their own products and label them as compliant. That’s kind of like leaving the fox in charge of the henhouse.
- Testing rules are out of date, and it can take the Department of Energy (DOE) up to three years to pass new rules for the Energy Star program.
- Testing standards are lax. CR found, for example, that 92% of dishwashers qualified until a recent rule change.
DOE ended up stripping the Energy Star label from the offending LG refrigerators, but its government partner EPA took issue with CR’s findings about Energy Star. In regards to how products are tested, it said:
The ENERGY STAR program includes a comprehensive set of activities to maintain the integrity of the label. Activities include testing of the performance of products where warranted, spot checking products pulled from the marketplace and coordination with a number of product testing certification programs. When issues are identified, they are addressed.
My view? Nice try, but wrong approach. If you’re promoting a government-sponsored label that millions of people are supposed to use in their purchasing decisions, it’s not enough to “spot check” products “when warranted” and “address issues as they’re identified.” Who identifies and spot checks? What is considered “warranted?” If it weren’t for CR’s sleuthing, the LG problem may have never been discovered. That’s unacceptable for such an important label.
There needs to be independent third party testing of all appliances, using strict and up-to-date rules without loopholes. Anything less is a disservice to the consumer who’s trying to do the right thing by saving energy and lowering their carbon emissions.
Where does this leave us? Is Energy Star still relevant? Despite the current problems with the label, the answer is an unqualified YES. Even if people save only half as much energy as advertised by Energy Star that is still a tremendous amount of savings.
We can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Testing is taking place, even if it’s flawed. New rules are being applied, even if they’re slow in the making (for example, the 92% of refrigerators meeting the standards dropped to 50% when new rules were adopted).
Unfortunately, this all means is that we can’t just rely on the Energy Star label; we have to do more research ourselves. Consumer Reports can help. I’m a huge fan of CR–while they charge for viewing their ratings online, it’s well worth the nominal fee if you’re about to invest in expensive appliances. Their testing is rigorous and documented. If an appliance is an energy hog, they’ll know it and report it.
Energy Star is incredibly important to our nation’s goals of increasing energy efficiency and reducing global warming. Hopefully the good folks over at Consumer Reports and other independent testers will continue to keep the heat on DOE and EPA to improve the program. Meanwhile, we should continue to look for the label, while keeping our eyes wide open before we purchase.
If you’re looking to build or remodel a home, one of the most important decisions you can make involves your home’s roof. The roof is essential not only for keeping the elements out but for keeping the temperature in the house constant. When making your decision on roofing materials you should consider a reflective roof, which will save you a lot of money with a big boost in energy efficiency.
The problem with today’s black roofs is that they absorb heat instead of reflecting it. That results in a lot of extra air conditioning to compensate, especially in hotter climates.
Also, when many buildings in a city have the same black roof material, all of that heat absorption causes the “heat island effect,” a phenomenon where cities can be 2-8 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than otherwise. This creates extra heating misery for everyone, requires yet more energy usage for air conditioning at all hours of the day and night, and creates more ozone and pollution.
The best roofs offer high reflectivity of the sun’s rays so that little heat is absorbed into the building and is mostly reflected back into space instead. A reflective roof can result in substantial energy savings: Energy Star estimates you can save as much as 50% on your energy bills by using a reflective roof! Better yet, if many people were to adopt the same practice it would seriously lower or eliminate energy costs associated with the heat island effect.
Metal roofing offers the most reflective surface and is also amazingly sturdy–it can last up to 50 years. However, it can also be prohibitively expensive. A better option for most people is to build a roof from more traditional materials but apply a reflective roof coating that essentially turns it white (the most reflective color) instead of black (the least reflective). This reflective paint coating is easy to apply and easy to maintain, although maintenance will be a bit more frequent to ensure it’s working right and not being blocked by dirt or debris. You should also select a roof coating that blocks UV rays.
Lacking that, just selecting a roof color that is as close to white as possible will give you many of the same advantages as a reflective coating.
A roof with a reflective coating should be only modestly more expensive than a regular one, and the difference in cost should be paid for within just one or two years because of the money you’ll save on energy costs. You may also increase your roof’s effective life, since a more constant temperature will reduce the temperature shock and stress you get when cold precipitation falls on a hot roof.
More peripheral benefits of a reflective roof include perhaps being able to purchase a smaller cooling system than you would have needed otherwise given the lower cooling demands of the house. You’ll also contribute to lowering the amount of air pollution and ozone in your community during the hot summer months.
If now is the time to change or build your roof and you’re thinking about roofing materials, there is every reason to go with a reflective one. If energy efficiency isn’t enough of a reason, then consider the tax credits you’ll get with the Obama stimulus plan over the next several months for installing one!
