The following are some of my thoughts about this reading:
First, I thought that the opening hook about the CFL bulbs was so interesting. Especially because of my experience with them. For one, I had no idea that such a bulb existed as early as 1994. The marketing of any such bulb didn’t reach me until last year when one of my friends was in charge of distributing these bulbs throughout our dorm. She had an entire box of them that she was distribuing FOR FREE that an incredibly small number of people were interested in trading their normal bulb in for. I also feel like before this class I hadn’t thought much about how marketing of green products was so interconnected with their success. The fact that changing the name from “EnergyLight” to “Marathon” and showcasing the cost savings rather than the environmentally friendly aspect changed sales so dramatically is incredible.
The article also highlights what we have discussed often in class – that we as designers have to successfully design a product that will be more desirable to customers in addition to green. Almost as though it is an added constraint in the design process because people are not going to purchase something with an increased price simply for it’s “green-ness.” I liked the list of five non-green consumer values associated with green products: “efficiency and cost-effectiveness; health and safety; performance; symbolism and status; and convenience.” I can see how so many green products are strong in at least one of these categories.
This entire concept of marketing the other strenghts of the product rather than its environmentally friendly nature really hit me early on in the class when Karin was talking about working at Nike and how even though they had designed a new shoe that was much greener they weren’t allowed to market it that way. Instead it had to sell because of its improved performance in order to not belittle the rest of the Nike products that were not so environmentally friendly. I feel like for me personally I’d like to know that that shoe is better for the environment, but I see how the company wouldn’t want to show their other products aren’t.
Lastly, during a brainstorming session earlier this year some friends and I were discussing how so many products, especially in this era of high technology, were changing from physcial things to services – online, on the iPhone etc. And I found it really interesting that this idea was included in the article, and that the iPod was considered such a service. I had never thought of it that way, but I see how it does in fact greatly reduce the waste and production costs associated with CDs and other older forms of music.
