Green Manolo

With various holidays on the horizon, I thought it would be fun to chat a bit about green travel. But truthfully, it wasn’t the holidays that got me thinking about green travel, but rather Coach America, a charter bus company here in the U.S. On their web site, they make a big show out of how green they are:

“A bus, by its very nature, is green! … Motorcoaches currently provide 184 passenger miles per gallon (MPG), more than double the second most fuel-efficient sector, commuter rail at 86 passenger MPG. … Coach America is using biodiesel in Portland, OR and other cities. … Each motorcoach has the potential of removing 55 autos from the highway.”

That all sounds very good, if you’re traveling on Coach America out of Portland, but what if you’re hopping the Fung Wah in New York City? Fung Wah is not biodiesel-friendly and their fleet is definitely not fuel efficient, based on their maintenance records. But what IS the greenest way to travel overall? Train? Bus? Car with four buddies? Obviously, walking and biking are *the* greenest ways to travel, hands down, but they doesn’t get you very far, very fast.

Now the important thing to know is that some sources measure green travel in terms of emissions and some measure it in terms of passenger miles per gallon. Some even measure eco-friendliness in terms of BTUs. On top of that, things change pretty dramatically depending on whether you’re traveling with a couple of friends or relatives. Not to mention the make and age of your car, bus, train, or aircraft; how much baggage you have; how many stops you make along the way; ground and air congestion; wind and weather; what kind of fuel you’re using; and dozens of other factors.

Add it all up, and it can be pretty difficult to figure out what’s the greenest way to get to your Christmas dinner or Hanukkah party.

There are sites that aim to help, though. Trip Footprint – currently in beta – will calculate the travel CO2 emissions for your trip for various transportation methods and routes – not taking into account infrastructure costs or secondary travel. I decided to calculate the greenest way for my family of three to travel from Boston to Florida, and according to the site, it’s driving in a hybrid. Green, for sure, but still not something I’m willing to attempt with a toddler (another element of my green threshold).

On the other hand, if I examine the same trip using passengers per gallon – basically, efficiency – modern, fuel-efficient charter buses become the greenest option, mainly because you’re traveling with 50 other people on a packed trip. Trains are the second greenest option – if, that is, there is even a train hub where you’re going.

But what if you’re traveling solo? For trips of more than 500 miles, if you’re traveling alone or with just one other person, it’s greener to fly direct in coach than to drive, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. But again, that packed bus and the train may still the best green travel options, if not at all practical for many or even most people. Unless, that is, you include infrastructure carbon costs for building and road and track maintenance and secondary travel that results from the need to get from a bus or train station to one’s final destination.

Green travel, gah. I feel like this is another one of those areas that it’s impossible to calculate the greenest possible option! How do you approach green travel?

Chag Urim Sameach! If something strikes you as odd about this menorah, perhaps it’s that it was made from a recycled motherboard and features energy efficient LED lights – for $25 it can be yours for next year on the MoMA web site.

In Monday’s post, I briefly touched on how easy it is to shop green but it deserves more than a mention. I can buy everything from organic k-cups to bamboo end tables to fair trade blouses right on Amazon, not to mention in lots and lots of shops. Buying earth-friendly and worker-friendly stuff is pretty easy these days, even if a fair trade or organic label often comes with a higher price tag.

Or is it easier?

There’s obviously nothing wrong with shopping thoughtfully or choosing not to put certain chemicals on or in your body, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with buying the things you need or want. But if you’re going to be paying a premium for a product because it claims to be green or at the very least greener, it’s a good idea to look into whether it’s actually as green as it says it is.

That’s where greenwashing comes in. A lot of products are advertised as being environmentally-friendly or sustainable or ethical because that sells almost as well as sex these days, but plenty of those products are no better for the planet or for people than anything else. Here are some great examples from Wikipedia:

• The Comcast ecobill has the slogan of “PaperLESSisMORE” but Comcast uses large amounts of paper for direct marketing.
• Kimberly Clark’s claim of “Pure and Natural” diapers in green packaging, with the same petrochemical gel on the inside.
• The Poland Spring ecoshape bottle is touted as “A little natural does a lot of good”, although 80% of beverage containers go to the landfill.
• The Airbus A380 airliner is described as “A better environment inside and out” even though air travel has a high negative environment cost.
• Coal is now advertised as a clean, eco option.

My guess? You already know all about greenwashing, but I still thought it was a good idea to toss a little reminder at you. It’s just too easy these days to get swayed by people and companies making all kinds of claims about how their products are better for the planet or better for people. Particularly when the argument seems so logical or you have so many options that things start to get confusing.

Take, for example, home espresso machines, which are often advertised as a greener option than a trip to the coffee shop. Sounds plausible, no? But coffee shops buy in bulk, often use organic fair trade beans, can sometimes return packaging to suppliers, and may use real dishware, plus their overall energy impact is spread over many, many customers. So DIY espresso with a big machine is cheaper in the long run, but not necessarily greener.

But wait! What about espresso makers that don’t use electricity, like the AeroPress or your basic stovetop espresso maker? Then there’s the Presso Espresso, which is apparently entirely recyclable. Wouldn’t one of the those be the truly greenest option – if perhaps the tiniest bit more labor intensive? And so on – you get the idea.

So what examples of greenwashing have you encountered lately?