digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

See the original image at ecogeek.org

Green Gadgets Shown To Be Eco-Hazards

ecogeek.org — With everyone and their mother jumping onto the green bandwagon, we ’re bound to have a whole bunch of non-sustainable junk items pawned off as “green” by the loosest of standards, and a whole bunch of greenwashing. It’s something we have to be wary of and keep a diligent eye out for posers.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • muxaulo, on 07/16/2008, -1/+12In advertising the old 'sex sells' adage has always been around; sure seems like 'green sells' may become the new adage. Maybe they'll combine the two, the sexy green sheen of marketing.
    • shutaro, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4Green women?
    • JeremyGrieves, on 07/17/2008, -2/+0Sex with a tree, Playbark!

      See what I did there? I took the name "playbody" and replac...
  • dougvfr750, on 07/16/2008, -1/+7Green index for products?
  • cdtoad, on 07/16/2008, -1/+12Yes... always be suspicious of anything with the G.E. brand until they clean up the Hudson river. 32+ years and the people of NY State are still waiting.
  • K1I2M3, on 07/16/2008, -1/+5Never heard of EcoGeek before, I'll have to check that out more regularly. This greenwashing thing can get a little out of hand sometimes. My favorite is seeing t-shirts that say "Green is Love", or some other cheesy line, and they are imported, made with cotton sprayed with pesticides and cost way more than a regualr t-shirt because being "green" is so trendy.
  • FHIwindows, on 07/16/2008, -1/+8Most of the packaging scares me off before I even buy green gadgets. If a gadget the size of a mp3 player is packaged so it will fill my garbage can then I don't need it!

    It's not often that I buy a green product that uses recycled packing material or material that can be recycled.

    IMHO, most electronic gadgets are not needed and labeling them as green so people buy them creates a circle of fools.
    • hasansexy, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1^Copy paste from comment section from the article.
  • psogle, on 07/16/2008, -0/+3Its sad that companies are going to the lengths of advertising things as green when they are no where close.
    • bixby1, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2i give 'em credit for trying. right now that's better than most. but i'm a glass half-full kind of pimp, player, hustler.
  • LavaWarrior, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2Aren't there laws against companies lying about their products being "green" when they are actually worse than others?
  • SIRBERUS, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4I wish "blue" was designated the eco-synonymous color back in the day... would have made for prettier gadgets now.
  • eyloni, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2I hope people begin to be diligent about the green credentials of a product just as much as they are diligent about finding the best prices, models, and reading other user reviews before buying. Is it recycable? Toxic? Fairly manufactured? Find it out.
    • tony23, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Given that people (in general) can't be diligent to learn about the food they eat or the drugs they take, I seriously doubt they will be diligent about this.
  • T-Maaz, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1... aaaaand EcoGeek is down. *thunk*
  • PeachesTheCow, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2Well, yeah, most of this is bs. But it's all a good stepping stone. I don't think it's progressive to bad-mouth 'green gadgets' too much as it just adds noise to the world.

    Peaches says moo!
  • Ransack, on 07/16/2008, -1/+8The link is to a lame blog that doesnt even have a clear link to the actual article which is at http://www.pdeproduce.com/designers/nick_bampton/i ...
    • TheBuzzKiller, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3thanks, getting pretty tired of blog spam
    • bmcnally, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Even that's not as substantial as the Digg title had me believe.
  • justananomaly, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1I guess they should have reviewed them more...
  • kevintmckay, on 07/16/2008, -1/+4In general the less stuff you buy the greener you are.
  • gofalcons, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3It's funny how much people like me get bashed for saying that this "green" ***** is just a marketing scheme, however, things like this continually prove us right. "Buy this "green" paperweight and protect the environment, because if you don't, we're all gonna die!!!!111" They are all posers and this is all just a scam leading up to a Global Carbon Tax. All they have to do is continually beat it into your head now so that 50 years down the road, our kids will believe it as fact. Just like the 4 *now 5* food groups. You know who came up with that crap? The dairy farmers of Association of America, look on the bottom of anyone of those charts. How else could people be convinced that humans NEED cow's milk to be healthy? That doesn't even make ***** sense. But they indoctrinated kids with it 50 years ago and now it's accepted as fact *by mainstream society at least*.
    • NebCanuck, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Why is it that people rant about companies using these things as marketing? Glad you realized it -- what you're saying is only the fundamental nature of corporations!!!

      Let's face it. It's not news to say that companies are only in it for the money. That's all companies are ever in it for. Never will a company truly be aiming for innovation, or moral correctness, or environmental safety, just for the sake of doing so. Why would they? Companies are above any single individuals. They operate according to markets, and with the sole goal of making money, because that's simply built into the definition of "company." A CEO who tries to convince his corporation to lose money for the sake of being green won't succeed -- or if he does, it's only because acting in this way actually convinces buyers to buy the product because the company took the moral high road, thus defeating the CEO's initial sacrifice.

      If anything, we should complain that our economic system is one that requires constant consumption to keep people eating. When people could produce their own necessities, there was less need for them to buy. The flawed system makes it impossible for your rant to be anything more than redundant.

      On the flip side, there is almost certainly some merit in reducing our impact on the planet, if only for our own survival. As such, it's not necessarily a bad thing that people are being conscientious of environmentalism. Does it come along with lots of profits for the companies? To be sure. But that doesn't defeat that there's a good core there that should be played up. If anything, people should really be stepping beyond the constraints of the market to push it even faster down the "green" road. That's what this article's trying to do.
      • gofalcons, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Definitely I agree that pollution is bad, the alarmism is what I don't agree with. The fact that the "apocolypse" is being shoved down our throats based on what a few scientists believe troubles me. I don't like that anymore than the Christian fundamentalists telling me Jesus is coming back and I better start believing what they believe and donate money to their church or I'm gonna die. But I honestly do thank you for the well presented and civil argument, it's refreshing to see that, especially on Digg.
    • DrJG, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Anything can be misused or falsified. People have used the catchphrase of the day and made it into a bad word in every era, including that of science.

      What you call "on the flip side" in your next paragraph is important - saving the planet - there it is in a nutshell.
  • bigsteve3OOO, on 07/17/2008, -2/+1um hey man lets stop cutting those fire lanes man they like um aren't natural man like dig it like if the earth goddess did not want forest fires she would have made natural fire lanes man.









    get a job hippie. you green morons have hurt enough stuff admit it you are well intentioned idiots who need to go smoke dope and STFU
  • koranpaul, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0This isn't about green gadgets being bad, it's about a guy making green gadgets. I don't even think Apple advertises their stuff as green.
  • Yage2006, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3CF bulbs are going to be a HUGE problem because 80% of the people using them are to dumb or careless to dispove of them correctly.
    Most people don't even know what to do with them or where they can bring them .
    This should be stopped in favor of LEDS.
  • KaJuN4, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2"but in actually can’t be recycled, can’t be upgraded, and toxic substances are used in its manufacturing."

    Oh you mean like the Toyota Prius? I'm all for helping the environment but having all this "green" crap constantly shoved down my throat is annoying and pointless. If you can show me irrefutable evidence that humans are directly responsible for climate change then I'll "go green". Until then stop bothering me about it.
  • CZechmate74, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1The "Green" bandwagon is exactly where everyone and their mother should be. o_O .......blrf!
  • DrJG, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Anything can be misused or falsified. People have used the catchphrase of the day and made it into a bad word in every era, including that of science.

    But the article makes some very important points. I have always wondered why everyone thought it was such a good idea to throw things so immediately when living in U.S., and thought it was a bad idea to disrespect human labour and earth's material that went into waht people threw away in so short a time. Even so silly a thing as a can of coke - those days in India the glass bottles had to be returned, and noone would throw them, they cost money. So do your cans, but the cost is factored in and you are paying it willy nilly, no option there, so throwing seems like what you have to do since your money is thrown anyway when you buy that can - of ocurse it goes without saying you are paying for water with sugar and probably addictive substance, and for good health of your body and your pocket you could do without the latter two.
  • stealthc, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Inherently linked with the "green" meme is that consuming less (meaning spending less, having less, and altogether being poorer) is better for Mother Gaia. This is pretty convenient. A company can then build ***** tables made out of cardboard and the trend-chasers and hipsters who crave that sense of superiority will pay through the nose to have them. It looks like a homeless person's furniture, so it must be "green!"

    Absolutely brilliant. The "green" campaign has made expensive, self-induced poverty FASHIONABLE. Ugly lighting, cramped cars, clothing with no durability... all these things make us worse off rather than better, but now people can charge a premium for making people poorer all in the name of mother earth!
  • bmcnally, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1If it helps my bottom line, I'll buy green. I'm not shelling out extra money for helping the environment.
    I've always "Reduced, Reused, and Recycled" - it just made economic sense.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.