Beware of color coding, which can inform but also inaccurately simplify.   Take green, for example, which has come to be associated with the environmental movement, but over the years has also been linked to some differing concerns.  Indeed, environmentalists questioning “green credentials” should realize their litmus might also be testing for: *Enthusiasm for capitalism, since it’s the color of money in the United States; *Military experience, since that’s the color soldiers wear in any number of places; *Muslim piety, since it’s the color of Islam; *Support for Jimmy Carter, since he somehow won with it — rather than, say, the colors of the flag — as the official hue of his presidential campaign (but then the ‘70s really were  pretty weird).  

Better to simply look at the results.  Does an innovation or practice significantly reduce energy and/or waste, and are the trade-offs acceptable?  For that our vision doesn’t need to be green- or even rose-colored – just a sober 20/20.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*


3 × = nine

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>