One of the most greenwashed goods I have ever seen is called the “Guiltless Green Home Theater”. Marketed thusly by the Home Theater Specialists of America, buyers of the entire package get an HD projector, 100” television screen, an AV receiver, a Blu-ray player, a control system, 5.1 surround speaker including subwoofer and four 1.75 KW solar panels. In the prototype display there is even “green seating,” a couch and chairs with leather processed without chromium.  “We took the green initiative even further by re-using some of the carpet,” said the HTSA.

With the 4 panels of this size a family can have “19 hours of off-the-grid entertainment every week.”  All for All for $29,575, “a very appealing price for a lot of people,” according to the write up by Richard Glikes, executive director of HTSA.

Now let’s look at the amount of energy produced by this size solar installation. Four 175 watt panels will churn out 700 watts per hour. That is 22 KW a week if the sun is shining, apparently enough for 19 hours of electronic entertainment time. Comparatively the electricity bill at my parent’s four bedroom suburban home uses this much electricity in a week. The whole house.  By installing the Guiltless Green Home Theater system you can also guiltlessly double your home’s energy usage! Of course you’ll be offsetting the energy drain through solar panels but why not just install the solar panels, forget the Blu-ray and go off-grid with your current energy usage?

Next up – electronics consumption. Guiltlessly purchase all new electronics and ensure the continued conflict in Africa funded by coltan mining and a pollution filled future when the tv and projector are sent overseas to be “recycled.”

The weight is lifting off my shoulders already. I’m going to sit down in my chromium free chair, pop some organic popcorn, crack open a locally brewed beer and guiltlessly watch hours of advertising quality programming.

Elizabeth Ulion is a graduate student at Northwestern University.

Are you curious about who is putting out greener electronics and who is failing miserably?  Luckily, Greenpeace has just released version 12 of their “Guide to Greener Electronics.”

“We first released our ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ in August 2006. The guide ranks the 18 top manufacturers of personal computers, mobile phones, TV’s and games consoles according to their policies on toxic chemicals, recycling and climate change,” according to Greenpeace’s website.

Out of the 18 companies, not a single one hovers in the 8-10 range for doing well.  There is only “better” and “bad.”  The list is updated every 3 months and the companies are ranked reflecting the demands of the “Toxic Tech” campaign.  These demands include that companies “clean up their products by eliminating hazardous substances, take back and recycle their products responsibly once they become obsolete and reduce the climate impacts of their operations and products.”  This does not include labor standards, mining or other issues, although these categories are recognized as important by Greenpeace.

Nokia scored with the highest rating, 7.45 out of 10, “for leading competitors on toxic phase out, with Samsung and Sony Ericsson close behind.  However, Apple, Sony, Dell, HP, Microsoft, Lenovo and Fujitsu are in the red zone, with Nintendo at the absolute bottom of the list.  Many of these companies have been criticized for greenwashing, backing out on green commitments or just lacking toxic-free products in the first place.

To consult the full list before you head out to buy any back-to-school electronics, check out Greenpeace’s Guide to Greener Electronics.

Want to rank these companies yourself?  Join SocialYell today and yell your opinions, rate businesses and help our world to become a safer and more sustainable place.

Ashley Strickland is a senior majoring in the journalism at the University of Georgia.  She is happy that Greenpeace is putting these companies in their place.

“

In an interview with Slade at Stay Free Magazine an interesting point was made. What does planned obsolescence mean for our culture?

STAY FREE!: When you talk to people about your book, do you notice a generational divide in how older people and younger people feel about these issues?

GILES SLADE: Yes, younger people don’t want to hear anything negative about the iPod. I might as well put a turban on and grow a long beard. It comes down to the social value of consumer goods as icons. If I’m saying something negative about your tribe’s icon, it’s as if I’m attacking you personally. Also, younger people have much less sense that things should last. I find that really disturbing.

STAY FREE!: It makes sense, though. If you’re born into a world where things aren’t made to last, naturally you won’t expect them to.

GILES SLADE: Sure, but then things less than 20 years old become what we think of as antiques. So your sense of duration, of history, of culture has collapsed and evaporated. If your favorite toys are constantly updated and replaced, how is that going to effect your relationships with people? I think you’re less likely to have lasting commitments to people, to family, to a country, even. There’s a well-known book called Bowling Alone, and I think this is where it comes from. We’ve become so accustomed to things only lasting for a few years we don’t invest in them anymore. We don’t see beautiful things like paintings and rugs as lasting.

What do you think? Yell out your opinions!

Elizabeth Ulion is a graduate student at Northwestern University. A family of quail just walked by her window. Let’s hope they don’t become obsolete.

Photo courtesy of Collin Anderson/Flickr