Eco-friendly labelling? It's a lot of 'greenwash'
TOM HANSON/THE CANADIAN PRESS
THE SIX SINS OF GREENWASHING
1. Hidden trade-offs: A product that's eco-friendly in some ways, but not others, such as paper from sustainable forests that's bleached by methods that release dioxin.
2. No proof: A claim that can't be substantiated by easily available information or reliable certification, such as toilet paper claiming a certain percentage of recycled content, but without evidence.
3. Vagueness: A claim so poorly defined its meaning will likely be misunderstood. "All natural" isn't always non-toxic, for instance.
4. Irrelevance: A claim that may be truthful but not helpful – CFC-free is a frequent claim, but CFCs are banned by law.
5. Fibbing: False claims, such as products claiming to be Energy Star-certified that are not.
6. Lesser of two evils: A claim true within a product's category, but not for the category overall, such as a "fuel-efficient SUV."
98% of product claims fail 'sin-free' test, marketing experts say
Apr 17, 2009 04:30 AM
Catherine Porter
Environment Reporter
"All-natural" shampoo. "Planet-friendly" glass cleaner. "BPA-free" baby bottles.
The labels on 98 per cent of those good-for-the-earth-and-your-body items you fill your shopping basket with are lying, a new study shows.
Of the more than 2,000 self-described environmentally friendly products in North America examined by the environmental marketing firm TerraChoice, only 25 were found to be indisputably "sin free." The rest were greenwashing, a term environmentalists coined to refer to misleading environmental ads or claims.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/619936
Yes, you really have to know your products and the standards for "green products" before you pay for the labels. Nothing that some research can't help with!