Anyone familiar with green building or the LEED Certification process should know that great emphasis is placed on the reflectivity of open spaces.

Under LEED Credit SS 7.1, for example, parking lots and open spaces must have a reflectivity (SRI) of at least 29 to qualify for credit. Similar, roof installations must contain a percentage of vegetation or reflectivity to achieve credit SS 7.2.

The idea of pavement and roofs being white, instead of black, in other words, isn’t new.

However, in the news this week is a rather radical proclamation by a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in California, who opine that painting rooftops whiter will cause enough sunlight to bounce back into space and cool the planet. They also aver that it will save in energy costs, as the planet – and individual homes – will stay cooler.

Contractors in Louisiana might want to take note of the study, as the state has generally hot summers and year-long weather. There may soon be a market in taking residential and commercial roof installations, and coloring them white.

Marketing the sale of a “white roof” or “white roof coating” has already begun actually.  See this Craig’s list ad, and Spray Foam Louisiana’s website for cool roof systems.

Of course, with any type of green construction, it will be important to insulate your company’s offering from liability. The idea of a “white roof” lowering energy costs for individual homeowners is just that: an idea, and there are many other variables (insulation, roof type, etc.) impacting the energy costs of a home of business.

One of the dangers with “green building” is the promises that come along with the construction offers. Selling your service by highlighting energy savings and performance enhancements is legally problematic if the service doesn’t result in savings and efficiency.

If your company is engaged in a service that promises energy savings, be aware, and speak with an attorney about how you can protect yourself from potential liability by smart contracting.

Around Southeast Louisiana, the green craze is in full swing.  With Global Green’s Green Building Directory (with 400 “green” vendors), press from the Make It Right Foundation, and a host of other things contributing to the green momentum in the area….we asked the question last week:  How much of it all is Greenwashing?

The Greenwashing topic has been subject to some press lately, as Earth Day approaches with the usual proliferation of “green” claims.   Further, just last week, green marketing, industry and government officials participated in a workshop in Arlington, VA to discus how to make green labels more credible.

To put things simply, there simply aren’t any real enforceable standards.

The newly revised FTC’s “Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims” are a good starting point, but it has no enforcement mechanism [read our summary of the guide].

Isn’t This A Consumer Problem?  Not a Builder Problem?

Short answer:  No.  It’s has huge applicability to the builder world.

As a matter of fact, Joel Bittle at GreenBuildingElements.com published a great article on this subject last year:  How Not to Greenwash Your Building Product.

His full article can be read here, but here is a summary – a list he prepared of 7 things to keep in mind when writing out what green building credits your product may satisfy:

1. Make sure your product satisfies at least one green building requirement
2. Do not claim credits that do not apply to your product or to the current building project;
3. If you are not unique, don’t try to sell yourself as unique;
4. Don’t claim that yours is a local product if it’s not harvested/extracted or processed locally;
5. No product is a LEED certified or LEED qualified product;
6. Your manufacturing practices do not affect LEED credits;
7. Don’t sell yourself short.

So what is the future of greenwashing?

There are a few organizations trying to combat Greenwashing.   Check out the GreenWashingIndex.Com for example, or Consumer Report’s GreenerChoices.Org.  Moreover, there are constantly reports on how to evaluate green products – like this report from BuilderOnline.com.

The future of greenwashing is a bit uncertain.   On the one hand, if the advertising continues to work, the advertisers will continue to greenwash.  On the other hand, if it stops working, the problem of decreasing green choices surfaces.

Many argue that simple enforcement is needed.

While regulatory penalites are not a clear and present danger for “greenwashers,” there is certainly the danger that they will be sued civilly for the misrepresentations.  This can be especially relevant when a greenwashed product or service negatively affects a construction project seeking LEED certification.

For this reason, builders and construction service providers should be more dilligent than the average joe, as the potential damages associated with messing up a LEED accrediation can be significant.

Building “Green” and “Going Green” have become buzz words in the marketplace, and to ensure that those advertising green are actually green, the Federal Trade Commission issued a “Guides for the use of environmental marketing claims.”

Compliance under these guides is imperative to running a successful Green product campaign.

The guides apply to “green claims,” which are defined as follows:

labeling, advertising, promotional materials and all other forms of marketing, whether asserted directly or by implication, through words, symbols, emblems, logos, depictions, product brand names, or through any other means, including marketing through digital or electronic means, such as the Internet or electronic mail.

The guides are very broad in scope but do not carry the “force and effect of law.”

Here is a summarized listing of the guides:

General Principles (§260.6):

a.    Qualifications and Disclosures: need to be “clear, prominent and understandable to prevent deception.” Language used needs to be clear in meaning and type size, you also cannot use contrary claims that would undercut the effectiveness of the claim made.

b.    Distinction between benefits of product, package and service: environmental claim needs to refer to the product, packaging, or service. For example if you use “recyclable” then the product must be reasonably and easily recycled.

c.    Overstatement of environmental attribute: should not expressly or imply an environmental claim in a manner that overstates that attribute or benefit.

d.    Comparative claims: Advertiser needs to verify the comparison and the basis for comparison needs to be clear to avoid deception.

Guide to specific Environmental marketing claims (§260.7): These claims must comply with this guide and also comply with the general principles.

a.    General environmental benefit claims: “It is deceptive to misrepresent, directly or by implication, that a product, package or service offers a general environmental benefit.” Broad environmental claims should be avoided or qualified to prevent deception.

b.    Degradable/biodegradable/photodegradable: a producer cannot expressly or imply that a product is one of these three and the claim has to be based on scientific findings.

c.    Compostable: here too a product needs to be backed up by scientific evidence that it will break down into usable compost in order to use this marking. The product must be compostable in a home pile or device.

d.    Recyclable: a product cannot expressly or imply that the product or its packaging is recyclable unless it can be collected and put through an established recycling program. The product must be clear as to what parts of the product can be recycled, if only portions then they must be clearly labeled.

e.    Recycled content: this claim can only be made when materials making up the product have been diverted from the solid waste stream, either during the manufacturing process (pre-consumer) or after consumer use (post-consumer). Recycled does not include recycled raw material or reconditioned and remanufactured components.

f.    Source reduction: a product cannot claim that it or its package has been reduced in weight, volume or toxicity unless this is absolutely true and verifiable.

g.    Refillable: to be refillable the package or product must provide a collection and return of it for refill or the later refill of the product can be done by the consumer with another sold product. If it is up to the consumer to find a way to refill it then the claim is unqualified.

h.    Ozone safe and ozone friendly: if a product contains an ozone-depleting substance it cannot make this type of claim.

The Gist

All in all, a producer cannot (and should not) be misleading, deceptive or ambiguous in its labeling of products.

More in depth versions of these rules are available at the FTC’s web site http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/grnrule/guides980427.htm, along with examples of what is proper and improper.

There seems to be an unusual level of “green” activity in the New Orleans area this weekend, and with a particular focus on green building.

These events build on the Green Building momentum in Louisiana, in addition to recent national news that there’s a possible silver lining to Hurricane Katrina in that the New Orleans construction industry is largely avoiding the global recession.

Here are some highlights from this weekend’s events:

1)  Gambit Weekly magazine had a “Green Building Guide” insert in this week’s edition, co-sponsored by Global Green USA and South Coast Solar providing the city with a green building products and services directory [PDF Version of Global Green's Vendor List].

2)  Louisiana Bucket Brigade is presenting Louisiana’s first ever Earth Day Festival, featuring musical performances on the city’s first Solar Powered Soundstage (April 5, 2009).

3)  New Orleans City Park is having their annual Spring Garden Show (April 4-5, 2009).  For the first time, however, the garden show will present the city’s first “Green Fair.”   According to the Live Green Orleans blog, the fair at City Park’s Botanical Gardens will be the largest Green Fair in Louisiana’s history.

Does New Orleans Need to Worry about “Greenwashing?”
While the green building and green attention is good for New Orleans and Louisiana, the rising profile of “green” living in the city may be cause for concern that the green label will be abused by businesses and marketers.

What is Greenwashing? The term’s wikipedia entry defines it as follows:

Greenwash (a portmanteau of green and whitewash) is a term used to describe the practice of companies disingenuously spinning their products and policies as environmentally friendly, such as by presenting cost cuts as reductions in use of resources.[1] It is a deceptive use of green PR or green marketing.

The problem itself is not new, and the FTC even has a Guide “For The Use of Environmental Marketing Claims.”  In 2007 and 2008, there were reports that the FTC was stepping up its enforcement efforts against untruthful environmental advertising in the wake of increased green claims.

The specific FTC regulations of environmental marketing claims will be discussed in a separate blog post, but for the time being, we’ll just bring up the topic as it relates to the tsunamic of “green” marketing by construction industry firms in the New Orleans area.

While green building is certainly a hot area for the construction industry, there are dangers to making green claims for the sake of good PR and increased business.

In Gambit Magazine’s Green Building insert, Global Green USA’s Matt Petersen wrote the following about its “Green Building Guide:”

On behalf of the entire staff and Board of Directors at Global Green USA, I am pleased to present the first ever Green Building Guide.  The Guide is designed to help you find the green products and serves that will make it easier for you to save money on rising energy bills, improve the indoor air quality and health of your home and do your part to held rebuild a more resilient, greener New Orleans.

That’s a tall order for the 400 vendors listed in the Green Building Guide.

While the Guide is likely a good thing for Louisiana consumers and builders, its important for everyone involved to remember that environmental claims must be substantiated.  More on exactly how later…