What is one catchphrase that has recently become more and more popular? The arrival of spring and Earth day only amplifies its emergence. Occasionally against their will, numerous times a day, the unsuspecting consumer is faced with various “Earth-friendly” slogans. 

Words of affection towards the planet appear on bags, mugs, shirts, pants, cars, buses, buildings and the list can go on. The “green living” movement is here to stay. TV programs encourage viewers to buy Earth friendly products. Campuses and job facilities boast about their green initiatives. A new market for specifically “green” jobs is on the rise. All these actions are aimed at doing “a little part” at saving the planet from global warming. With such a noble cause in mind, it seems that no price is too high.

It can no longer be denied: the Earth is affected by global climate change, which was initiated by humans’ misuse of natural resources. The statistics have forced the public to finally acknowledge the problem. In 2002, Colorado and Arizona had their worst wildfire seasons. Extreme heat waves in 2003 caused numerous deaths in Europe and more around the globe. The United States is said to lead the world in pollution, emitting more carbon dioxide than China, India and Japan combined. Based upon such statistics, it is apparent that action against global climate change was long overdue.

While saving the planet is a good cause, the carbon dioxide emissions will not decline if one invests into a “Love planet Earth” T-shirt. However, the media created a strong argument for the positive impact of “going” green, at any cost. Those who consent to help “save the environment” are perceived as “Earth conscious” and their opponents are suppressed. It seems as if suddenly, all spheres of society, from factory owners to private individuals, embarked upon a massive race for who can be the most green.

Green initiatives are as diverse as the people who embrace them. If the planet could be saved based on what kind of cereal a consumer bought, evidently, there would be no problem. The question, however, lies much deeper.

Did advertising and popular culture turn a genuine concern for the environment into an easily solvable problem? It seems that the answer to saving the Earth is only one purchase away. Do you want to live green? Buy a mug. Do you want to live greener? Buy a hybrid car. Choosing an environmentally safe product may simply allow the consumer to have a guilty free conscience, but, in reality, will cost more for the environment. Costs for transportation, packaging and the novelty of green products must all be taken into account. It is better to spend a lesser amount of money on a regular product, or even better, not to buy any product at all.

Some Earth friendly initiatives require no spending on the part of the consumer. Instead of buying a hybrid car, a better choice would be taking better care of the currently owned model.  To save gas, carpool. Instead of buying newer “green” household electric products, once again, take good care of the ones you already own. Instead of buying organic vegetables at Whole Foods, choose to buy them at a local farm stand. However, these simple ways to reduce carbon emissions and spending do not seem to be “popular” enough. It is assumed that if one’s initiatives to be green are not publicly seen, they are not present.

It is interesting to note that criticisms of green consumption have only come from individual activists, and not large environmental groups, such as Sierra Club, or Rainforest Action Network.

Globalization is on the rise, and more and more countries begin to produce in surplus quantities and export their products all over the globe. In order to “stop” global warming with any significant rate, every country on the planet needs to play their part in reducing carbon emissions. However, countries outside the United States may not be as easily convinced into the green movement, partly due to the common belief that the United States is responsible for global warming. Al Gore says it best in his documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” when he says that in order to reduce global warming, every nation needs to contribute their part. Otherwise, individual efforts are meaningless on a worldwide scale.

It is only when buyers begin to diminish their consumerist desires that any change may begin to take place. If one wants to truly go green, it can be done without expensive purchases. Meanwhile, if the voice of the media remains above the voice of reason, the global warming situation will remain unchanged.

Yevgeniya Lomakina is a Collegian columnist. She can be reached at [email protected].