While I think it is great that Clorox has decided to join the "green" movement, there are a few things I just don't get. Because Clorox now sells a line of "green" formulated products, are we to ignore the fact that they continue to sell highly toxic and environmentally unfriendly products containing bleach? Have they really gotten religion or just dollar signs in their eyes? And why is the Sierra Club putting their logo on this product line? Answer: They are being paid! As the article points out, "Clorox will pay the club an undisclosed fee based partly on sales." Sierra Club - my opinion of your organization just dropped a few notches!
Erin Thompson, campaign organizer for Women's Voices for the Earth, makes an excellent point - "We'd like to see them [Clorox] incorporate these practices into all their products. Why sell one set of products that have hazardous ingredients and others that don't?"
Jeffrey Hollender, the CEO of Seventh Generation, had this to say in response a NYT article that posed the question, "Can Burt's Bees Turn Clorox Green?" - "Any large company that wants to be more “green”, socially responsible or a better corporate citizen will only become so because their senior management is committed to the cause and has developed a business case to support the transition together with a strategy to transform their internal culture. “Green” is not something a company becomes because of a new product line, a marketing campaign, a decision to be carbon neutral or even the selection an enlightened new CEO. “Green” is about the inside, not the outside of a company. It’s about its DNA, its culture, and its very reason for being."
Amen!!
So, while it is great that Clorox will help create awareness in the market with its new product line, I will choose to support companies like Method and Seventh Generation - companies where "green" is part of their DNA, culture, and reason for being.
Llana DeBare, Chronicle Starr Writer Clorox bleach and Liquid-Plumr will gain some unlikely siblings today - a line of green cleaning products. The Clorox Co., the Oakland firm that introduced bleach to American
households a century ago, is adding a series of natural, biodegradable
household cleaners called Green Works to its $4.8 billion family of
cleaning and household products. As the first major consumer products firm to launch such a line,
Clorox has the potential to move green cleaning products beyond the
niche of Whole Foods-type stores and into the wider world of Wal-Marts
and suburban supermarkets. And its new Green Works products will carry the logo of the Sierra
Club - a partnership that may raise eyebrows among some of the club's
members. Small companies like Seventh Generation and San Francisco's Method
Products have made natural cleaning products for years. But they amount
to only a tiny sliver of the market. Americans spent over $432 million on all-purpose cleaners in 2007 -
but only 1 percent of that went to Method and 0.3 percent went to
Seventh Generation, according to Information Resources Inc. By comparison, Clorox makes three brands of conventional all-purpose
cleaners - Pine-Sol, Clorox Clean-Up and Formula 409 - that together
raked in 41 percent of consumer sales. But the green market started looking increasingly attractive to
Clorox, which manufactures STP auto care products, Hidden Valley salad
dressings, Glad plastic bags and Brita water filters along with
cleaning brands such as Liquid-Plumr and Pine-Sol. That's because the overall $2.7 billion market for household cleaning products isn't growing - but the green niche is. Sales of natural cleaning products rose by 23 percent between 2006
and 2007, according to SPINS, a market research and consulting firm for
the natural products industry. And Clorox's own research concluded that almost half of all
consumers would be interested in natural cleaning products if they were
as effective as traditional ones. So company scientists set about creating cleaners that were at least
99 percent natural, biodegradable, nontoxic, made from plant- and
mineral-based ingredients rather than petroleum, and not tested on
animals. Clorox chose to keep its own logo on the Green Works label - unlike
companies like Colgate-Palmolive, which bought Tom's of Maine, the
natural toothpaste maker, in 2006 but leaves all mention of its
ownership off of Tom's product labels. But Clorox also sought some way to reassure customers that its
environmental claims were genuine, and not just hype or "greenwashing." It received certification as a safer product by the Design for the
Environment program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. And it
approached the Sierra Club for permission to include the club's logo on
Green Works labels, beginning this spring. The Sierra Club asked several of its volunteer committees to review
Green Works and ended up approving the use of its logo - the first time
it has given its blessing to a household cleaning product. In return,
Clorox will pay the club an undisclosed fee based partly on sales. "We hope we are transforming the marketplace by doing this," said
Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope. "These products are clean,
they're green, they're not going to hurt you, and they're not going to
hurt the environment." However, some other activist groups raised questions about Clorox's
overall environmental commitment - given that its Green Works products
remain outnumbered by its conventional cleaners. "We'd like to see them incorporate these practices into all their
products," said Erin Thompson, campaign organizer for Women's Voices
for the Earth, a Montana-based group that advocates for fewer chemicals
in cleaning products. "Why sell one set of products that have hazardous
ingredients and others that don't?" Some environmental experts questioned the Sierra Club's decision to
back Green Works without a standardized review process that applies to
other products, too. "It sounds risky both to Clorox and the Sierra Club," said Scot Case
of TerraChoice Environmental Marketing, which runs a Canadian program
called EcoLogo that sets environmental standards for products. "I would
want to know exactly how the Sierra Club made its determination. Unless
they are going to publish the standard that products have to meet, it
sounds like a form of greenwashing."
Monday, January 14, 2008
Frank,
I can absolutely appreciate what you said and completely agree that we can (and need to) reduce the amount of bleach in our day-to-day lives! I also love the mantra - Do it, be it, say it! I think that is great. I just want people to try the GreenWorks line before they discredit it. Clorox might be a me to company with regards to going green but in doing so they just might have developed a powerful "green" product line as a result. Just food for thought. My thought is that as long as people debate these environmental issues... then it means people are paying attention!
Posted by: Dan | February 20, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Dan,
Thanks for your comments! While I don't disagree that there is still a need for toxic chemicals like bleach to kill staph infections, we don't need bleach in our day-to-day lives. I think that it is safe to say we overuse bleach and many other chemicals when more benign, environmentally friendly products would do the trick. I guess that what bothers me about Clorox waving the green flag is that I question their true motivation. Companies like Method and Seventh Generation were founded on environmental principals and these principals drive their products and are part of their DNA. It appears to me that Clorox has recognized the opportunity and jumped on the bandwagon in order to make a buck. That being said, as another reader commented, they are bringing awareness to the market and hopefully encouraging more consumers to use more environmentally friendly products and that is a good thing.
A friend of mine who is in marketing for a major soda brand and is passionate about the environment taught me a mantra he uses in his organization - Do it, be it, say it! It appears to me Clorox skipped the second step and jumped to waving the flag.
Posted by: Frank | February 20, 2008 at 08:05 AM
I don't agree that this is a case of "greenwashing" just because Clorox still sells the more traditional, less environmentally friendly products. There is still a place in today's world were less environmentally friendly products are needed. Which product would you use to remove staph infections or to clean up MRSA outbreaks? Are you going to use a "Green" All-Purpose cleaner? Something from the Seventh Generation line? Well then you will not be getting rid of the problem. These new green products are great and they have their place but you still need strong disinfectants. You still need powerful cleaners to help protect our children. Clorox maybe late to the game - but I recommend trying their green products first before calling it a case of "greenwashing".
Posted by: Dan | February 19, 2008 at 08:17 PM
Of course it is "greenwashing" but this is BIG BUSINESS and we should embrace any positive change they make. It's great that there are companies that have "green" in their DNA but that doesn't mean corporations that are just waking up to the environmental impact of their products should be criticized. Of course they are doing it for more market share. So what? The end goal is a more sustainable planet. If we can get momentum going in that direction it is a win for everyone.
Posted by: Toni Brayer, MD | February 11, 2008 at 03:20 PM
totally agree. If this really "green works" why not stop making all the other evil crap it works as good as. Then we'll believe you, and make it the same price so there is real choice for all. Keep up the good work spreading the word frankly green.
Posted by: jallsopp | February 06, 2008 at 10:22 PM