How often have you felt reassured by ads touting the green credentials of a particular product of service? I think back to the low-fat food craze of the 1980s, when the food industry was happy to promote the idea that you could eat as much of their low-fat product as you wanted, since fat was the big bad enemy to avoid at all costs. These days, the finger of dietary blame is firmly pointed at sugar, with the food industry eager to develop and sell low- and no-sugar products at premium prices. Are we in recent times failing to see that substituting one “evil” for another does little to nothing to decrease overall consumption of limited resources?
Let’s look the issue of consumption from a supply-chain perspective. With the great availability of products claiming low carbon footprint (seeking to free us of climate guilt), is it possible that we are maintaining or even increasing our consumption levels, still subject only to the limitations of our wallets? It is also possible that we are oblivious to the true cost of what we consume?
Two consumption scenarios come to mind: vehicles and smartphones. While it is laudable that much has been done to reduce tailpipe emissions, the size and weight of vehicles is such that regardless of the apparent type of energy used to propel the vehicle, so much of it is necessary to get from point A to B (not to mention that with urban sprawl and demographic trends, the distance from A to B is getting ever longer) that there will be a significant environmental cost. Electric vehicle makers are glad to tell us that their products are zero emission, but that doesn’t tell us anything about the true environmental impact of the product. Where does the electricity come from that charges the vehicle? What about critical minerals (most notably lithium) needed to make batteries, the most critical part of an electric vehicle? Chile (forming the “Lithium Triangle” with Bolivia and Argentina) has the world’s largest lithium reserves, but these deposits are located in sensitive areas where open pit mines would destroy indigenous territories and unique ecosystems. You won’t see any references to the source of lithium in any vehicle ad.
How about smartphones? One of the most important materials required in smartphones is called coltan, which is found in abundance in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to imagine that production methods in the DRC are unsafe at best and downright deadly at worst. Decades of war perpetuated by about a dozen nations (many in service of “western” interests) have kept the DRC in a lawless state, where no human rights are sacred. If you thought blood diamonds were the extent of the supply chain problem in Africa, it will shock you to read that since 1996 approximately SIX MILLION have lost their lives in the DRC alone in the struggle for control of mind-boggling resource riches. Now, let’s think about smartphone advertising. The focus is always on features and convenience, with maybe a nod to recyclable materials, but we are not told anything about where the raw materials are sourced. Is it because Big Tech doesn’t know where its raw materials come from? Ten trillion dollars (the approximate market value of the world’s 5 most valuable tech firms) says they know but don’t care, because that information is harmful to shareholder value (and those shareholders are, you guessed it, not of African descent). The illegitimate transfer of wealth from melanated regions into non-melanated hands continues in a sanitized and stage-managed fashion, where companies are happy to pay someone to “greenwash” their organization instead of showing any real concern for the systemic damage being wrought to millions of humans who are disregarded as distant “others”.
Now, what shall we do as consumers? As with diet, for most of us it is unrealistic and unsustainable to swear off fat or sugar for any extended period of time, but we can exercise moderation. We can buy a vehicle that is not overly large or unnecessarily powerful. We can buy technology only as often as we really need it, not when the product planners and marketers urge us to. And, by being aware
of the true damage our collective actions are causing, we can advocate for real change by calling out the misdirection and outright lies put out by the capitalist machine and lead our communities to greater power and self-sufficiency.
Ray Fankhauser is Chairman of Fankhaus Valley Consultants, a global strategy firm, Senior National Program Manager at ADRA (Adventist Development and Relief Agency) Canada, and Chair at TEC (The Executive Committee) Canada. Reach out to him at ray.fankhauser@fankhausconsult.com.
