EPA Stickers

[foodchain]

I think the EPA should be charged with labeling products that are “green” in nature vs. ones that just sell on such a title. I would even go as far as to think it would only help consumer habits if say some green product for sale had a sticker on it. This would imply certain standards to the definition that I think could be handled by scientists. I also do not think it would be to difficult to coordinate also.

[ecoli]

is there an EPA standard for something labeled as being a "green" product?

[foodchain]

is there an EPA standard for something labeled as being a "green" product?

 

Not that I know of, and in any way they do such as making sure something with a certain chemical has some small print somewhere in the packaging chain is hardly worth even talking about for some great overall impact. What I am basically thinking is that a company could make a product, and if it meet certain conditions it would have a sticker which would relate a percentage of why its green. This could include packaging, production processes, fuel types used, so on and so fourth. For each category a potential green product could then have an overall rating, vs. just buying something in a store that states it is a green product and or uses such technology.

 

I think with a sticker only basis you still leave the market open to the private sector but, by far but just more or less give a possible aid for consumer behavior that may be looking for alternative to say products that have no environmental concern built into them from a lifecycle point of view.

 

the company would basically validate why the product is green according to some temporal guidelines, which again would relate to if it uses environmental friendly practices and or procedures, and to what extent in the overall process. this would then ascertain a sticker with the percentage marker, or a class rating scheme I think could even work. such as a p class raring means packaging is fully biodegradable and made from recycled products using other then fossil fuel, or so on. I also dont see why this would be to different from how the USDA operates in America.

[Mr Skeptic]

Would the sticker be made of recycled paper?

[foodchain]

Would the sticker be made of recycled paper?

 

I don’t see why not, but the idea would probably go over better if the company had rights on how the label was produced on the product. Not so much what the label would look like just where it goes, such like with other labels a product might have such as if it is a food sponsored by the AHA. I think some companies or at least products would pick up on it to sell the green angle of capitalism.

 

Such a framework I think it would also not only make information more available to the public but in many forms, such as what is the average cost to eat green locally, or what products are really selling and why. simply put if you could make a trusted system then I think all it could do is help aid a consumer if they understood how the label system works. I would only think at most say four or five classifications, or again a percentage possibly.

 

The big idea I think here is empowering green markets. While government interference may look bad, I do not see how a label could be so wrong, we label for safety anyways on products, so from just that facet I could see how such a label could be acceptable.

[ecoli]

yeah, I don't think an EPA label would be that big a deal, especially if it's use was optional.

 

Where I live, all hybrid cars have "clean pass" sticker's on them, because they're allowed to use the High-Occupancy-Vehicle lane. It's a similar idea. A cheap, politically neutral thing to promote environmental and consumer awareness. It could even work on a local level, with each state's DEC directing things (etc).

[foodchain]

yeah, I don't think an EPA label would be that big a deal, especially if it's use was optional.

 

Where I live, all hybrid cars have "clean pass" sticker's on them, because they're allowed to use the High-Occupancy-Vehicle lane. It's a similar idea. A cheap, politically neutral thing to promote environmental and consumer awareness. It could even work on a local level, with each state's DEC directing things (etc).

 

When you say politically neutral what do you mean by the way? If it is retrospect to modern political parties well the EPA was founded by a republican president. So I would think really its more or less a issue that has been pressed into a political corner really, but does not have to be. I think really by trying to harness the label and or sticker to be economically neutral that it would have no real political gravity, or at least it should not in the face of known and large scale environmental hazards to human health. I think if a company could broadcast that its fish food products would be 100% mercury free they probably would, but in reality I don’t think any company that produces fish can, not in any real world scale surely.

 

With that said the EPA lawful requirement is to preserve human health factors associated with the environment, such as air quality. I do not think this issue would really have to bring up any serious political issues to pass as something mainly bent to support consumer awareness, and again I think balancing this with industry would be more important to its success then trying to drown it in partisan politics. With that I agree with your idea of making it optional save it might take bulk in time before any real impact occurs, or the label itself may fall under the radar of consumer behavior if its in small quantities for a short period of time. Tax break incentives I think like with many products is a possible way at first maybe to compensate for production costs associated with such, maybe like two years, along with making the placement of the label liberal and choice to even use it.

[Rev Blair]

I saw something on the news here a few months ago that had somebody pushing this idea, and I think it's a good one.

 

The thing I saw had a recommended sticker that would be mandatory for any product the manufacturer claimed was green. It had sections that would receive a check mark. I can't remember all the sections (there were ten of them), but there were, "Produced Locally," "Made from recycled materials," and "recyclable."

 

The breakdown of support went like this: The manufacturers and Conservatives opposed it; the Liberals sat on the fence; the environmentalists, NDP, Bloc Quebecois, and Green Party supported it. It might seem like a non-partisan idea on the surface, but the politicians didn't see it that way at all.

[foodchain]

I saw something on the news here a few months ago that had somebody pushing this idea, and I think it's a good one.

 

The thing I saw had a recommended sticker that would be mandatory for any product the manufacturer claimed was green. It had sections that would receive a check mark. I can't remember all the sections (there were ten of them), but there were, "Produced Locally," "Made from recycled materials," and "recyclable."

 

The breakdown of support went like this: The manufacturers and Conservatives opposed it; the Liberals sat on the fence; the environmentalists, NDP, Bloc Quebecois, and Green Party supported it. It might seem like a non-partisan idea on the surface, but the politicians didn't see it that way at all.

 

See this is what I don’t understand. Its not as if its something factually concrete that is being used for any particular system of thought. I mean if you look at points of the modern conservative parties in the U.S you find in conjunction with environmentalism as applied scientifically to be somewhat at odds, which I think really is somewhat of a weak paradox.

 

Now i know that environmental reality is based on facts that deal with a great deal of things, some of it including at large ecology which applies evolution. So I think that angle of environmentalism combined with typically cultural thoughts that surround it such as deep ecology offends people with differences. So government wise I think the best fit decision is one that tries to stick to just science alone. With that said I think you could easily prove how a label to denote a green product compounded with today’s environmental problems would be easy from a science point of view if it stayed as science.

 

Race issues in America are the worst I would think in regards to how much of a issue they become. I think it would be paramount really to keep environmental issues from sliding to such a point. So really again that’s why I think trying to keep such a product as having the only impact of informing consumer behavior about how green the product is really could not be so bad.

 

I mean what could be a valid argument against such? That could be proved to deal with other then pure self inflicted moral obligation plus overall desire to have no change.

[ecoli]

When you say politically neutral what do you mean by the way?

things that are uncontroversial enough that it doesn't become an issue of partisanship, and well generally be passed with a good majority approval.