capitalism4good

Lifestyles of the Rich and Eco-Sensitive

This past weekend’s Wall Street Journal featured a Wealth Report called “Living Large While Being Green,” which raises some interesting questions about the intersection of environmentalism, lifestyle choices, and trend-setting.

Some point out that the wealthy are by far our biggest polluters, and therefore a marginal change in their environmental impact makes a big difference overall. Making their mansions more energy-efficient, filling empty travel legs on their carbon-spewing jets, and collecting atmospheric data from their oceangoing yachts – these sorts of “green” efforts make lifestyles of the rich and famous, if not a positive for the planet, then at least a much smaller negative.

Green Computing

I just found out about a great new company: Verdant Computing. They're dedicated to the idea that we should make our technology choices as environmentally-friendly as possible.

The basic principles that Verdant follows are:

  made with recycled or sustainable materials

  easy to recycle

  energy efficient

  fewer toxic materials

  eco-friendly packaging

  independently certified

The site is also informative beyond the company's own offerings, seeking to educate would-be-consumers with a variety of articles and links. The founders claim they won't try to over-sell, because excessive consumerism is "bad for you, and bad for the environment."

Sending Mixed Signals

Here's a conundrum that I've been noodling about for some time: if we support the businesses we like, particularly small or local businesses, will we inadvertently change them into businesses we don't like?  In other words, will we encourage them to become the huge corporations that we're trying to avoid?

A case in point is Dunkin' Donuts, which I remember from my Boston childhood as a no-frills local chain that made fresh donuts around the clock. I had my first coffee there, and supported the brand as an extension of my Boston identity. Over the past few years, however, the coffee has gone downhill, the donuts have become stale and mushy, and the interior of each store has blazingly colorful ads for a variety of greasy insta-sandwiches. For a while I held on, but I've given up. The quality will never go back up because Dunkin' Donuts is now a huge international chain, focused more on growth than on quality and tradition. I suppose they were so popular locally, they got greedy.

Another Blow to Starbucks

Starbucks, the company that made coffee a fashion accessory and ingrained in us the idea of a "third space" between work and home, has recently fallen off its CSR pedestal.

After building a solid reputation for giving baristas good pay and benefits, Starbucks recently got into a scrape with the Ethiopian government over trademark rights. Just after settling that lawsuit, the company now stands accused of a variety of illegal actions toward three ex-barista union activists.

In an article on Counter Punch, ex-barista Daniel Gross accuses his former employer of "illegal and relentless union-busting... video surveillance... anti-union propaganda... threats, bribes, interrogations... employees relying on Medicaid... (and) repetitive stress injuries driven by understaffing and ergonomic neglect."

The article is not exactly diplomatic in style, but I figure we should read everything with a grain of salt : http://www.counterpunch.org/gross08042007.html

Cape Wind and the Daily Show

An amusing take on the highly-controversial Cape Wind project, which happens to be planned for the area just offshore from where I grew up. Given that it's a comedy show, I suppose one can't take too much issue with the fact that the windmills are actually supposed to be quite visible, and that Ted Kennedy is not a Nantucket native... but the rest of it is slightly closer to accurate.

Here's the YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEaOkhWOZ1A

As for myself, I'm largely in favor of the Cape Wind project, though I have two gripes: 1) it would be nice if more attention were paid to assuaging fears among the non-rich community that tourism will fall off, since this is underpins the struggling economy, and 2) the project is basically being zoned in a loophole that is not under Massachusetts jurisdiction, presumably because the lines were drawn before we were able to build 450-foot-tall machines that could be seen across several miles of ocean. 

But while I think the project's supporters should take these two issues more seriously, and should work to ensure that the community will not be economically worse off, I'm otherwise in favor of the project.