Sierra Club Uses Clorox to.....Clean House?

Ever use this stuff?  I certainly have.  To those that know me, this probably explains a lot about my odd behavior.  Yet my "sustainable years" have taught me to be more conscious about the "stuff" I use...and let me tell you something...this is NOT something I've used in recent years nor will it ever be something I'll use again.  So Neal, you ask, if this stuff is so highly toxic and bad for me and my family (read about a few of the rail car spills involving chemicals from this product and you'll know what I'm talking about), then why is Carl Pope and the Sierra Club, one of the oldest environmental groups in the US (dating back to 1892), so quick to not only endorse the use of a new product from this company but grant Clorox the right to use Sierra's name as well?

Read On...

Introducing Clorox Green Works products!  They're new, They're improved, They're....GREEN?

Well, maybe so.  Check out their web site.  There were no doubt many environmentalists up and until about 2 years ago that would have said "the day a company like Clorox makes green products is the day that I start frying-up Little Bunny Foo Foo for dinner." [by the way, isn't there some irony here in that Little Bunny Foo Foo bopped field mice on the head...though I digress].

Yet word is out that Clorox has struck a sweet deal with Sierra for an endorsement and brand license for their product.  Now membership is up in arms (most of them, anyway; there's a few supporters on the blogs, though their support is barely audible at it's loudest point).

"OK, Neal.  So isn't the fact that Clorox is going green a good thing?"  Well, sort of.  Here's my note to Sierra: 

While I applaud the steps, no matter how small, taken by a company as toxic as Clorox, I query the necessity of such a full-scale endorsement without also requiring transparency, cessation of all animal testing, a commitment to reduce or discontinue use of Clorox should the response to the new product be favorable, etc. When a private equity firm purchased one of the filthiest coal-fire operations in the world, TXU, which was the world's largest acquisition to date at $45 Billion, NRDC and ED endorsed the deal only after hashing-out a MAJOR set of criterion on operations and investments going forward.

The Clorox deal begs a variety of questions:

1. What did Sierra, it's members and the public get in return for the endorsement other than just money?

2. Could we not just have applauded Clorox's "first steps" while keeping the carrot in front of the horse towards a broader commitment to sustainability in product and packaging?

3. Have we not simply given Clorox a license to continue polluting, contaminating and harming the public? What incentive will they have to discontinue other products with this deal? I'm reminded of the run-of-the-mill carbon offset programs which are nothing more than a get-out-of-guilt free card -- they do nothing to incentivize more responsible practices and in fact actually encourage an increase in harmful practices.

4. Why is this not front-web page news over at Clorox? It requires at least three clicks to find their "green" product which, interestingly enough, professes to be "as good as conventional cleaners." If this is true, then why are they still selling conventional cleaners, which have "harsh chemical fumes and residue" (taken right form their site!!)?

I must agree that this is a tragic case of greenwashing, lacking any sense of genuineness or consciousness. I envision some high-ranking execs at Clorox having a good laugh while Sierra Club's integrity will be recovering from a harsh, toxic reaction for some time to come.

I challenge Clorox to admit that their products are indeed harmful and that they have FINALLY sought to make a difference by introducing a new product, then committing to a full-scale re-development and deployment initiative, with an embedded packaging program, if consumers like what they see.

Small steps are great, but we mustn't€™t overlook the fact that they are small steps -- and small steps do not give anyone license to claim that they are "green" when there are many larger steps still to take. Greener, perhaps; but NOT green.

If you'd like to join-in on the Sierra blog, click here and then click the link to share comments.

Of course I'd like your comments too, so leave them below.

Neal

Comments

[amee]

very interesting- and i must say i agree- it is great clorox came out with this new product tho i a joke that it is being taughted (sp?) as the be all end all- i used to think you- neal- were making too big of a deal about these "greenwashing" issues, tho i gotta say i am starting to get annoyed with them too-

[michelle]

I think Sierra Clubs endorsement should go to the truly green products. While holding a standard that all products should obtain before being endorsed by them. The truly green products could use the endorsement, and the support. Since their are many products and companies that green wash. And let's not forget REDUCE, in reduce, reuse, recycle.