The False Perception (part three) – Buying Online

So far we have covered the false perceptions of value and externalities.  The third, buying online, is an extension of both of these concepts into a reality that leave very few local companies unscathed.  We all have done it.  We all have researched and found a product at a store, be it shoes, books or furniture, and rather than buy the product, we go home and “Google-it” to see if we can find a cheaper price.  Now of course the pricing fluctuations can be enormous but, in most cases it is marginal.  Usually less than 10%.  I can give an example.  I am in the market for new hiking shoes.  I really like Merrell shoes for performance on the trail but they are expensive… often $110 a pair.  So, to ‘check’ pricing online, I did some research to see if I could find a cheaper price.  What I found was that Amazon sells them for $101 with free ‘SuperSaver” shipping.  Theoretically saving me $9.  But as we learned in our last two parts… at what cost?

Lets start with the obvious… Free Shipping!  One thing you learn after being in the retail world for any given time, is that there is no such thing as free shipping.  The costs are buried in the price of the product and unless you are large giant like Amazon, it is very rare to get huge discounts on shipping from most carriers.  In addition, it would be shipping one item to my house, wasting additional packaging (box, bubble wrap, paper, tape), fuel necessary to drive it to my house, and additional man hours to deliver.

The next less obvious point is that the money you spend in your community, stays in your community.  According to Local First Arizona, for every dollar spent locally, 45 cents is recirculated in your community.  It is payroll for employees and tax dollars for city and state governments, which goes to public services like police, fire, schools, water, sewer, trash services, etc…  Now in this case, Merrell is not an Arizona company but, if I purchased the shoes from a local shoe reseller, then the money I spend still has benefits here.  If I purchase them from a national chain, like REI, then only 13 cents of my purchase stays here.  That’s because the money goes to REI’s headquarters and supports their local tax base.  Now here is where it gets even worse.  If I were to order those same shoes from Zappo’s, a large online retailer of shoes, then zero of my money stays here in our local community.  I might as well just move to where Zappo’s is headquartered, because I am supporting their local tax base and supplementing their services.

So what happens when you purchase products online (when they are available locally) is deprive your community of desperately needed tax dollars, deprive local business of sales that they need to sustain themselves, which in turn, deprives our community of good quality paying jobs, which keeps more people from earning money to make more local purchases, which leaves our government looking around for donations (usually from our education funds) to keep our local economy afloat.

In this digital age, it is almost too easy/convenient to shop online for our products.  We tend to forget that those decisions have repercussions often larger than the money we saved.  So next time you start to push the “Submit” button on your next online purchase, spend a minute to think about how that decision will impact a local business.  One that is tied to your community, provides jobs and benefits to your community, gives back to your community and usually never asks for a bailout as thanks.

In addition you should plan to attend Local First Arizona’s 5th Annual Certified Local Fall Festival this Saturday from 10am to 4pm at Duck and Decanter at 16th street and Camelback (thank you Kimber). You should also check out The 3/50 Project for more information on buying local.

The False Perception (part two) – Externalities

…continued from The False Perception (part one) – Value.

When we started a.k.a. Green, I never thought that we would compete with big box retailers and, as it turns out…we don’t.  We primarily compete with our society’s acceptance of cheap products that are designed to be expendable and are manufactured with many hidden ‘costs’.  A perfect example of these hidden costs is prevalent in the paint industry.  When we first opened a.k.a. Green, one of our paint manufacturers had two versions of the same product – a general line and a ‘PRO’ line.  The pro line was about $8 less per gallon, but both were Zero-VOC, No HAP’s and No exempt solvents.  We smelled a fish.  So we set out to understand why a company would make two products of ‘equal’ quality when they could just make one at a price somewhere in the middle.  Why have a more expensive line?  They told us that the ‘PRO’ line was manufactured with cheaper ingredients, and actually didn’t perform to the same level as their other line.  It had less scrub resistance, less coverage/hide and didn’t level out as well as their general line, but it was cheaper…and that appealed to contractors.  This, we have seen, is a common practice in the paint industry.  Manufacturers need to entice contractors/homeowners with cheaper prices, but to make it work for them financially they have to cut corners and cheapen the product.  In the end, you, the consumer, gets a product made with cheaper ingredients (read: usually more hazardous – thus the formaldehyde issue), at the expense of quality, performance, durability and, while less appreciated…your health.

This practice extends to just about every product we buy.  An example comes from a friend who wished to purchase a lunch box.  She searched many stores in her effort to find this particular lunch box, but ultimately found it at Wal-mart – for 50 cents.  She inquired with a sales associate about the cost and its ability to stand up to usage over time.  The associate said “what difference does it make?  If it breaks, just buy another one.”  Without batting an eye. Want more examples?

We call it ‘The story of a rock.’  There is company here in Arizona which makes products from stone.  They carve giant chunks of stone out of a local quarry and load them into a container.  This container is sent via truck to Los Angeles where it is taken from the truck and loaded onto a shipping vessel.  The ship travels to China, where it is unloaded from the vessel and put back onto a truck.  The truck is taken inland and the container is unloaded at a factory which makes the finished stone products.  The finished products are loaded back into a container, back onto a truck, back to the shipping port, back onto the boat, back across the Pacific to Los Angeles, unloaded, put back on a truck, shipped back to Arizona and unloaded at the factory ready to be shipped to places of sale across the region.  (Deep Breath)  This rock travels halfway around the world and back in spite of the fact that there is a finishing plant with the same capabilities just 30 miles from the mine.  But hey don’t send the rock there because it is Cheaper to send it to China.  Not just cheaper… CHEAPER BY FAR!!!  How can this be?  There are many reasons; Chinese subsidies, US subsidies and tax incentives, subsidized fossil-fuel energy, social inequity, cheap labor, poor living standards, lax environmental protections, free polluting, etc…  And we don’t even bother to think that we pay for these costs.

Cut down the Tree? Sure, No Problem.

So do you know all the ‘expenses’ associated with your purchasing decisions?  What is the ‘cost’ of our addiction to cheap products? We refer to these expenses/costs as Externalities. These are costs that we ‘pay for’ but that are not reflected in the price of the products we purchase. They are pushed off onto the larger society. In business terms, these are costs that occur but don’t show up on a Profit and Loss spreadsheet or in returns to shareholders.  We pay for these costs in tax incentives, government subsidies, environmental damage and occasional cleanup (eg: Superfund), air quality, water quality, lost species, soil erosion, climate change, military engagements, foreign aid, healthcare costs… and government bailouts.  These are the hidden costs of our addiction to cheap products.  Want another example?

Let’s take a look at gasoline.  Right now, we pay about $2.78 per gallon of gas at the pump.  The key is the phrase “at the pump.”  According to Lester Brown, in his (free) book Plan B 3.0 (now available in 4.0), the actual cost of a gallon of gas if you count all the externalities is close to $14.78 per gallon.  Oh, and you pay that… just not ‘at the pump’.  You pay it in the form of taxes which go to oil companies in the form of subsidies and taxes breaks.  As a matter of fact according to experts, the US pays the equivalent to a TARP bailout every year to the oil industry to further our addiction.  That is over $700 billion each year!  That’s $2300 per person per year in taxes that are extended to feed our addiction to gasoline.

So, our big lesson… Currently, there is little room left in the world for quality products.  People want them cheap, and the overwhelming majority are not aware of (and some simply don’t care about) the ‘cost’ that choice brings.  The big question… Can we overcome this tendency before it costs us Social degradation and Ecosystem destruction?

The False Perception (part one) – Value

Recently, I picked up Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture by Ellen Ruppel Shell.  This insightful and well written book is a must read and an eye-opening exploration of our addiction to cheap goods.  Naturally it got me thinking about a.k.a. green and our marketplace locally.

Approaching 5 years in business now, we have had plenty of time to reflect on our journey.  When we started a.k.a. Green, we were beginning to hear snippets of a green dialogue popping up locally and nationally.  Before “green jobs”, before the focus on energy efficiency, before Vanity Fair’s Green issue.  No mainstream attention, yet.  We felt and continue to feel our timing was spot on.  At the same time, we underestimated location.  In our zest for positive change, we were a bit optimistic about the momentum that would be required to overcome the challenges that existed (and still exist) in our marketplace…

 

• a State Legislature that doesn’t accept the science behind Climate Change nor recognizes human contributions to it,
• a Home Builders Association that sees green building as a threat, and lobbies for legislation to prevent the adoption of green building codes or programs (even its own program – the NAHB National Green Building Program),
• a Home Depot’s or Lowe’s on every corner (like Starbucks or Walgreens) – something fairly unique to our city,
• a fast-paced housing market that bred ‘contractors’ as kings whose main concern was time to market rather than their clients’ quality needs,
• cheap land, a political climate that worshipped boundless growth, and an economy lethally dependent on attracting people to the Valley and putting them to work building inexpensive homes and amenities to attract more people to the Valley,
• and a general lack of public dialogue regarding green issues; renewable energy, energy efficiency, public health etc…

This combination of challenges is unique to Phoenix, especially when you compare us to Portland, Seattle, Austin, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, etc… where many of the challenges don’t exist.  Quick and fast has been the story of development here for 40 years; and with it, we have too often sacrificed quality, craftsmanship, durability, planning, education, and just about everything that takes tomorrow into consideration. Tomorrow is here and we are paying for it.

In contrast, however, these challenges are relatively minor compared to the biggest challenge we, as a society, face … that of ‘Value‘. It used to be, in previous generations, that Value, was a balance of durability and affordability.  People then didn’t buy the cheapest car, they bought the best car that they could afford.  They didn’t buy the cheapest TV, they bought the best TV they could afford.  They knew that the cheap products may not last as long, and they looked at their purchases as long term investments. In fact, cheap products were not really common. How many parents/grandparents still have that huge solid wood furniture TV from the 70/80’s?  Don’t be shy, there is one in every family.  You can look at investments in much the same way.  Previous generations looked at investing over the long term, often looking at returns for when they retired.  Furniture was also passed on from generation to generation because it was built to last forever. Looking back several generations, the mantra has always been Quality over Quantity.  But things have changed.

Now investing is quarter to quarter and if companies don’t produce profits for shareholders in 3 months, they will likely go other places.  This also extends to the products we buy.  Nowadays the idea of passing on furniture is foreign… frankly the Ikea shelf falls apart when you move it, forget about trying to ‘pass it down’.  Today our definition of ‘Value’ is defined by price and price alone.  Our mantra has slowly shifted since our parents’ generation, and has now become Quantity over Quality.  How many times have you heard yourself or someone else say “…its OK, it didn’t cost much, I’ll just buy another one”.  We have all heard it and certainly done it.  What we have become is a society that values cheap at the expense of durability and craftsmanship.  We are an ‘Away’ society, meaning that we just throw it away when it breaks and we accept that it will break because it was… Cheap.

to be continued…

The Green Race is on…

This past weekend, Thomas L. Friedman’s op-ed column in the New York Times was titled “The New Sputnik”.   While some will remember the actual 1957 launch of Sputnik 1, the first “satellite” to orbit earth, I immediately recall one of my favorite movie scenes of all time.  In “So I Married an Axe Murderer”, one of Mike Meyers’ characters, Stuart MacKenzie, describes his son’s enormous head: “I’m not kidding, that boy’s head is like Sputnik – spherical, but quite pointy in parts.”  Click the video link below to see why it is so completely irrelevant to Friedman’s column, yet great for a good laugh.

Now back to the serious stuff…

Friedman’s column predicts that current events and developments in China will later be described as the beginning of a Green Revolution.  The Russian launch of Sputnik 1 in 1957 stunned the US, and jumpstarted what was later called the Space Race, an informal competition between the US and Russia to explore outer space.  Friedman recognizes China’s current push to quickly develop enormous clean energy projects, lead the production of electric cars, and become the largest supplier of low-cost solar and wind power generation technologies as the genesis of a new international competition.  This new competition will push other developed (or developing) countries to explore cleaner ways to produce energy, food, and consumer products in order to stay competitive and relevant.  Since Friedman is a 3-time Pulitzer prize-winning journalist, and I can barely recall movie quotes, I will let you read the article for yourself….

“The New Sputnik” by Thomas L. Friedman

When the historians look back at this moment in time and deem it the beginning of the “Green Race”, you can be sure that I’ll take credit for the oh-so-inventive title.

Calling all Decathletes…

Seriously, how many decathletes really follow this blog?  I would guess they are far too busy to care what we have to say.  If you’re not a decathlete, don’t fret.  This is really for you…

It’s not time for the Olympics yet, but it is almost time for the 2009 Solar Decathlon to take place on the National Mall in D.C.  Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, this will be the fourth event in which universities from all over the US, as well as a few from abroad, compete against one another to see who has developed the most superb example of sustainable architecture.  The field of 20 teams this year consists of a variety of public and private universities, and even a few that have joined forces with others to form what I’m calling “superteams” – Team Alberta, Team Boston, Team California, Team Germany, Team Missouri, Team Ontario/BC, and Team Spain.  Unfortunately, you may notice the absence of a Team Arizona.  Considering the plethora of shiny hot rays we have here, Arizona should be perennial competitor in this sun-centric event.

Don’t despair.  For the first time ever, Arizona will be represented in the competition.  Led by one of my former professors, Larry Medlin, the University of Arizona has developed what they call the Solar Energy Efficient Dwelling or SEED[pod].  This interesting dwelling incorporates the obvious and expected solar energy and solar hot water heating elements, but also has a few very unique tricks up its sleeves that help to control light, ventilation, and insulation.  If you know what a trombe wall is, I challenge you to show me one that is as unique as the one pictured below.  Made from recycled plastic, the system provides thermal storage, controls the intensity of light, and still allows for ventilation.  I can’t wait to see this in action.

Quite possibly one of the most unique features of the house, however, just happens to be the adjacent greenhouse.  You might be mumbling to yourself “What’s so innovative about a greenhouse?. I’ve been growing food in mine for years”.  That may be true, but does your greenhouse filter your air and water, provide increased O2 for your home, regulate your humidity, or provide thermal storage for heating and cooling your house?  I didn’t think so.  While past decathlon entrants have incorporated graywater systems, thermal storage systems and gardens, the SEED[pod]’s greenhouse is very unique.  Unfortunately, a unique greenhouse alone doesn’t automatically guarantee them the grand prize.  As the name of the event suggestions, the entrants will be judged in 10 categories – Architecture, Market Viability, Engineering, Lighting Design, Communications, Comfort Zone, Hot Water, Appliances, Home Entertainment, and Net Metering.  It will take innovation and performance in all of these categories before someone walks out with a crown.

The SEED[pod] left Tucson this weekend to make it’s way to D.C. in time for setup and judging, which will take place October 8th-16th.  After a couple weeks of public viewing, the house will then be disassembled and trucked back to Phoenix, where it will be on display at the enormous Greenbuild event being held downtown November 11th-13th.  I will certainly enjoy bragging about my alma mater if they take home the gold, but I am probably more excited just to finally see an Arizona entrant in the competition.  They do represent our great State, so I encourage all of you to lend your support and encouragement.  If you’re at your desk right now, I would like you to yell “Go Cats!” as loud as you can.  One of two things will likely happen.  You will either be jumped by a gaggle of Sun Devil alumni scrambling over cubicle walls, or you will be carted off to the local psych ward.  Either way, you will feel good knowing that you’re doing your part to support your local team, your local University, and the evolution of sustainable design.

To learn more about the Solar Decathlon, go to www.solardecathlon.org.

To follow UA’s Solar Decathlon Team, go to www.uasolardecathlon.com.

Van Jones

So, what do you say about the Van Jones hubbub without starting a political firefight? I can say I don’t feel I know enough about him. I missed his speaking presentation at Greenbuild last year in Boston but I have heard that he is a very dynamic and inspirational speaker, focused on positive change. I only watch Glenn Beck (or Keith Oberman, for that matter) when I am in an airport somewhere waiting for a flight and I try to make sure there is no food in my stomach at the time, so I don’t know much about his campaign to oust Jones or about the campaign conducted by opposing groups to have advertisers boycott Beck’s show for calling President Obama a racist. I DID see a bit of Beck’s teary “what has so divided us?” plea as he ripped into all politicians as evil and I wondered what planet I was on. As many of our mothers used to say “If you don’t have anything good to say….” Anyway, I digress….

What caught my attention was when NBC Nightly News showed an insert shot highlighting Van Jones name, apparently from a list of people who had signed a petition insinuating or claiming that the U.S. Government had known in advance the 9/11 attack plot and let it happen. Jones apparently has said he was just asked to sign some petition at a crowded event and didn’t read it. The detail that struck me was the name “Paul Hawken” a few lines above Van Jones’ name. Paul Hawken is an intellectual and inspirational leader to many in the green building movement and I find it strange that he would put his name to such a document, if it is what NBC portrayed it as. Did he also not know what he was signing? Did Van Jones just sign because he saw Paul Hawken’s name and figured it must be something legitimate? 

I’m not immune to conspiracy theory thinking. I believe it is a good sign of a curious mind. Maybe it’s why my Tivo is currently filled with NCIS episodes. However, whenever I start to consider any conspiracy theory seriously, I’m reminded of two other possibilities:

1) Sometimes you can just piss off too many people. Former Arizona Governor Evan Mecham did this. I watched him get impeached, recalled and grand juried at the same time. No conspiracy to get rid of him was needed because he managed to anger just about everyone, including the state’s university students that I represented. It’s much easier to tear things down than build up something positive. He only understood how to tear things down and people saw that and individually did what they could to stop it. I wish that could serve as a lesson for all the negative television pundits on both sides.

2) Never underestimate the power of negligence and incompetence to create disastrous consequences. See, for example, the recent SEC review of the Madoff fiasco. And that is just the poster child for all the Wall Street/Washington fiascos of the last few years. Conspiracy actually takes quite a bit of smarts, planning and logistics. Negligence and incompetence don’t take much effort. Just think about how much effort it takes to get to know what a political candidate really stands for before voting for them. And how much effort it takes to keep track of whether they are making good decisions. But think about the consequences of neglecting to do this. It would be great if we could support a media infrastructure with our eyeballs and/or our wallets that legitimately did some of this hard work for us. But then again, the media is just a giant corporate conspiracy to dumb down the electorate so that we can be mind-controlled by the Military Industrial Complex, right?

Canalscape Exhibit Opens in November

The Canalscape design competition is complete and the results will be on display in November at ASU (and at Greenbuild?):

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2009/09/07/20090907mon1-07.html

http://canalscape.asu.edu

As I was riding my bike past a canal on Sunday and saw people parking cars in adjacent neighborhoods so that they could jog in the pre-blistering early morning air, I was reminded again how nice and subversive (to the auto-dominated infrastructure) it would be to have a well-developed cultural and transportation sub-system based on the canals and the Greenbelt and other dedicated bicycle and pedestrian paths. What if the canal shores were shaded by solar canopies that generated power while keeping the bike and running paths underneath cool for a longer season? What if there were cafes and cultural activities that you could only get to reasonably by way of this transportation sub-system because there was limited parking around them? What if it was just culturally expected that you arrive by foot or bike? We have a light rail zoning overlay. Why not one for the canals?

I haven’t seen the exhibit yet but I have high expectations for the possibilities.

Sweltering heat doesn’t deter Arizona School from being Cool.

As a former Wildcat, it is with great dismay and humility that I must pay homage to the Sun Devils.  The Sierra Club unveiled their Third Annual Cool Schools list this month.  Dubbed “A Comprehensive Guide to the Most Eco-Enlightened U.S. Universities”, the list is meant to draw attention to universities across the country who have scored well in the environmental categories.

Sitting within Metrosprawlitan Phoenix, and with an enrollment list of 67,000+ students, it’s hard to imagine that the largest university in the country can really be green.  However, the shear density of the campus, the organic waste composting practice , the recycled content supply purchasing practice, the relatively new School of Sustainability, and the School’s dedication to building LEED accredited buildings have helped ASU make Sierra Club’s Cool Schools list for all three years of its existence.   Landing an Honorable Mention in 2007, ASU skyrocketed to 6th place in 2008, and 13th place this year.  Naturally, I was excited to see where UofA fell.  Tucson is generally seen as being a much greener city than Phoenix, so something must have rubbed off on the University – right?  Unfortunately, no.  While I view UofA as a “cool” school, the Sierra Club does not.  My disappointment pressed me to investigate Northern Arizona University’s place in all of this.  We all know the Lumberjacks should have really been called the Treehuggers, so surely they reside somewhere near the top of the Cool Schools list.  Nope.  NAU did manage an Honorable Mention in 2007, but has had a dramatic fall over the last couple years – not making the list of 135 schools named this year.

Wow! I really do have to bow to ASU’s achievement.  We should all take a minute to take a look at some of their practices (http://sustainability.asu.edu/campus/).  While you’re at it, let’s do everything we can to encourage our other State schools to step it up a notch or five.  If the Sun Devils can do it, surely the Wildcats and Treehuggers can practice what they preach and give ASU a run for it’s money.  My wife, a Sun Devil alum herself, has already been talking Green trash….  With Lute Olson out of the picture now, I’m not sure I have much of a leg to stand on in this in-state rivalry.  So, with very little spirit, I must close with an obligatory “Go Cats!”.

Bikin’ In Tempe, Bikin’ in TempE!

A breath of fresh eco-friendly air will be blowing through Tempe starting August 24th: The Bicycle Cellar is coming!

The Bicycle Cellar from on Vimeo.

 
Yes, we knew that the Tempe Transportation Center was going to be special and spark new ideas with a conscious nod toward sustainability, but it is exciting to see the ideas actually happening! Having a bike storage center/showers/lockers/retail/repair operation at the TTC has been a dream of Tempe Transportation’s Bonnie Richardson for years during design and construction. After hours access to your secured bike for when you get back on the light rail from a night out on the town?! That rocks!!

With the lightrail connected to buses and now this connectivity to cycling and then a future link to a tram around Sky Harbor, we’re seeing the beginnings of a new transportation system not crushingly dependent on fossil fuel automobiles. But wait! Will the Chevy Volt really get 230+ mpg? What’s happening here???

Next thing you know, we’ll be seeing more permeable concrete (helping with water infiltration and heat island), more rubberized pavement, streets in lighter colors (to reflect more of the heat rather than adsorb it), and walkable community planning!! We see light way off at the end of the tunnel – and it’s the headlight of a cyclist heading home from The Bicycle Cellar.

ERIC Sprints Into Action

You’d never know from the looks of it yesterday that ERIC (the Education Recycling Information Center) was on the fast track. The mascot is a cute turtle, after all. This mobile educational unit of the City of Tempe Solid Waste Services Department was unveiled on Wednesday, 7/1/09 in front of 50 or so government and community education leaders from around the Valley and the state.

ERIC makes his debut

The center will make the rounds to community events and schools to teach kids big and small about recycling, it’s impact, and what happens with recycled materials. The City of Tempe and ADEQ funded the unit. Quality Vans managed the project and fabricated the trailer with educational displays designed and fabricated by Nicomia, materials and technology consulting by a.k.a. Green Services, and a range of services provided by others.

ERIC's shell introduces visitors to a range of recycled materials

The unit itself is an example of walking the turtle talk. In order to keep power consumption low, tubular skylights light up the interior (donated by Velux) and innovative reflector spot CFL bulbs are used in tracklighting to light the displays. Compact LED can lights in the tight ceiling provide space lighting on overcast days. So, not only is the lighting extremely energy efficient, but it adds very little heat load to the inside space.

The flooring is recycled rubber Nike Grind from old shoes, donated by Nike. Ground cork provides a warm ceiling tile. The interior wood is FSC-certified and has no added-urea formaldehyde, and the adhesives and sealers are low VOC.

Visitors learn from hands-on, visual displays

The project was running on a fast track in order to meet an ADEQ end of year deadline, but you would never know it based upon the stellar outcome. We are proud to have participated in this important community education tool and look forward to seeing ERIC at upcoming events.