Okay okay, so this is a traditional billboard and not the incredible energy-producing Windvertising billboard, but I still have to point out the well-executed messaging and placement from Mythic Paint.
It’s not everyday you see great marketing from a paint company, in fact some may even draw criticism for their green messaging. Even better that Mythic Paint seems to be the real deal and committed to removing all toxins from their products, not just VOCs.
Kudos to you Mythic Paint.
Greenwashing isn’t black and white. If there are different levels of being green, then there must be different levels of greenwashing. I’ll be the first to admit that I have a hard time seeing through the marketing slogans and clever copy. I don’t know all the chemicals I should be looking out for in products. Sometimes, I’m unfamiliar with the recyclability or manufacturing process behind a material. Sometimes, I need help or a second opinion.
Well, my best friend, the Internet, does not let me down. Enter The Greenwashing Index, a site promoted by EnviroMedia Social Marketing with the help of the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication. The smart folks behind the Index understand the idea that greenwashing isn’t cut and dry and have devised a one-to-five rating scale accordingly.
In true Web 2.0 form, users on the site can also comment and rate ads posted by other users. I used to rely on the green blogosphere to call out examples of greenwashing, but now there is a centralized system for the sharing and rating of these examples.
The site seems to be starting off slow as far as traffic goes, so I’d like to take a second and ask you to check it out. Hopefully, over the next few months, The Greenwashing Index will gain enough popularity and begin to positively influence green marketing.
Disclaimer:
I have no connection at all to the site or the organizations behind it. I think the site fills a needed gap in green marketing and want to see it do well.
Previously we have discussed the use of The Interstate Land Sales Act (ILSA) as an escape mechanism for purchasers trying to walk away from contracts to purchase either homes or condominiums. Today we will examine the Act in greater detail.
In order for the sale of a condominium in Florida to be exempt from the federal act, the contract must unconditionally obligate the developer to complete construction within two years and must not limit the purchaser’s remedies of specific performance or damages. A developer may not claim an exemption under the Act when damages for a violation of a two-year construction provision are limited to the return of the deposit or specific performance.
According to 15A Am. Jur. 2d Condominiums and Cooperative Apartments § 15:
The Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act is applicable to the sales of condominiums. The Act prohibits a developer from selling or leasing land in a subdivision through the use of means or instruments of interstate commerce or of the mails, unless a statement of record is in effect and the developer has furnished each purchaser with a printed property report. This property report must be provided before the purchaser signs any contract for sale or lease of the property. If such a report is not furnished in advance of the transaction, the purchaser has the option of voiding the contract.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has stipulated that the condominium will come under the Act if the unit will not be completed within two years, or if the significant recreational or other common facilities are being constructed which will not be completed within two years from the time the first purchaser signs a contract. For a condominium unit sale to be exempted from the reporting requirements of the Act, the construction of the condominium must be completed before it is sold, or it must be sold under a contract obligating the seller to erect the unit within two years from the date the purchaser signs the contract for sale. It is immaterial that a condominium may have actually been completed within two years for determining whether the sale is exempt from the reporting requirement, and if there is no specified date of completion in the purchase contract the sale does not come within the exemption provided under Act, and the purchaser may exercise the statutory right to withdraw from the sale.
Under §1702 the following exemptions from the Interstate Land Sales Act are established:
· (a)(2) Sale of land on which there is an improvement or a contract obligating seller or lessor to erect a building within 2 years
· (b)(1) There are fewer than 100 lots
· (b)(2) If in the 12 month period starting with the sale of the first unit not more than 12 units or lots are sold or leased
§1703 Establishes the Requirements Respecting the Sale or Lease of Lots
· (a)(1)(B) Property report must be provided in advance of signing contract for purchase
· (c) When the report is not provided prior to signing the contract for purchase, the contract may be revoked within 2 years from the date of signing
The Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act is a valuable tool in the arsenal of any attorney representing a purchaser seeking to revoke a contract. With the reemergence of the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act developers must rethink their traditional sales contracts as well as learn about the proper process for registering a project with HUD so that their project is outside the scope of the Act.
This post can also be found at the author’s other blog here.
As Goethe said “Knowing is not enough; we must apply!” Simply being aware of the Interstate Land Sales Act is not enough, we must learn what It means and then apply that knowledge to rescind contracts or protect ourselves from law suits in the future. Have you heard of the Interstate Land Sales Act? This is a question that developers may soon be facing in courtrooms and arbitrations across the nation.
The Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act 15 U.S.C. §1701 et seq. is being used by home purchasers across the nation but particularly in Florida, Tennessee, Nevada, and New York City as a grounds on which to escape contracts for the purchase of a condominium.
In West Palm Beach, Florida the Palm Beach Post recently announced three lawsuits were filed against the developers of Two City Plaza, City Place South Tower, and City Palms. To date only 166 of the 1.175 units marketed during the height of the Florida real estate craze have closed. The buyers allege that the developers failed to deliver the units within 2 years and are therefore in violation of the Interstate Land Sales Act. Interestingly, several of the plaintiffs said they would have been able to close on the units if they were delivered when promised but due to the current economic situation are unable to do so now.
In Nevada, the Las Vegas Business Press recently reported that a suit has been brought on behalf of 200 homebuyers for condominiums at the Cosmopolitan a 2,998 unit condo-hotel. The Cosmopolitan project which has undergone an ownership change and several interior redesigns is now slated to open in June of 2010, approximately a year behind schedule. The attorneys representing the condo purchasers have amended their complain to include a violation of the Interstate Land Sales Act as the purchasers were never provided a property report as required by the Act prior to signing their purchase contracts.
The Press Register of Alabama has also reported that a condominium project in Orange Beach is now scheduled to open 18 months behind schedule. The developers have obtained extensions from 40 of the 69 owners but are potentially facing a law suit based on the Interstate Land Sales Act. The developers are claiming that they will not be liable under the Act as the units experienced delays due to Hurricane Katrina which destroyed a facility manufacturing pilings for the condo project and that Force Majeure clauses in the contract allow for delays due to an act of God such as the Hurricane. The developers are making efforts to work with the purchasers including partial rebates of the purchase price and $10,000 worth of complimentary upgrades. I will continue to monitor the Phoenix West II project and update my readers if any law suits involving the act are filed.
The Nashville Post has reported several Interstate Land Sales Act law suits against the developers of Ashland City’s Braxton and the Gulch’s Terrazzo and Icon condominium projects. The plaintiffs in these cases allege that the buildings were not constructed within 2 years and that the developer’s failure to provide a property report allows for them to walk away from their contracts with their deposits.
Stay tuned this week for a more in depth discussion of the Interstate Land Sales Act and its various provisions.
It’s easy for me or anyone to criticize the abundance of greenwashing in the world. Examples are everywhere from mainstream TV to trade publications. So today, I’d like to take this space and highlight a few examples of green marketing that prove this niche can set the bar high.
I apologize for not embedding images into this post, but WordPress seems to be hating everything I upload and won’t show the images.
GE Digital Hologram Ad
Say you’re GE. You have all the money in the world to spend on marketing your windmill technology. What would you do? How about create an unbelievable interactive digital hologram? Will this tactic engage a large audience? No. There’s too much required participation and technology. But it’s an innovative idea and it’s used for a sustainable cause.
MTV Global Warming Outdoor/Ambient Advertising
I love well-executed ambient advertising. MTV does a great job promoting their corporate sustainability with this well-placed ad.
Denver Water
In my opinion, Denver Water’s recent campaign to promote the conservation of water is one the best green-related campaigns so far. From billboards to grocery store conveyor belts, Denver Water really did a wonderful job.
Volkswagen
Can a car company be green or is this issue comparable to the saying about the bear and your friend– you don’t have to be faster than a bear, just faster than your friend next to you. As long as your car company is greener the most others, you’ll be okay. Volkswagen seems to be a step ahead of the competition by spreading the message about the company’s sustainable initiatives and not just best-in-class mpg.
What are your favorite pieces of green-related marketing? Post a link in the comments and let us see a few more examples of those doing it right.
Great River Enegy recently released a white paper detailing the construction of their Maple Grove, Minn. headquarters, the first building to achieve LEED Platinum in the state. The text of the white paper can be found here.Great River Energy not only built a sophisticated building which scored 56 points but also built a structure which can be used to educate others.
The key features of the Great River headquarters are:
- Uses 50% less energy and 90% less water than a structure built to just state codes
- Utilizes an in lake geothermal HVAC system
- In floor displacement ventilation system
- Daylight harvesting
- 72 kilowatts of on site solar power and a 200 kilowatt wind turbine
- Only cost 10% more than a traditionally built structure
The Great River Energy headquarters is an excellent example of how proper research, communication between all team members, and follow up evaluation and corrective action can create a building that is not only sustainable and efficient but also an excellent educational tool to spread the message that green building does not need to break the bank.
We need to rethink the way we evaluate buildings and energy usage for as the CEO of Green River Energy said: “At Great River Energy, we know the cheapest—and cleanest—kilowatt-hour is the one we don’t have to produce. So conservation and energy efficiency have become our first
fuel.”
I attended an event yesterday afternoon sponsored by the International Association of Business Communicators of Pittsburgh titled, “Going Green: Communicating Environmental Messages.” Between greenwashing, half-truths and just poor communications, green messaging is for the most part misunderstood by traditional marketers. I expected this event and its panel members to address this issue, but instead it seemed to only reinforce how to ‘be green.’ The only key takeaway common to all three panelists was one word, LEED.
LEED is great. It’s the benchmark, the mainstream, well-known rating and certification system. LEED is the lighthouse for all those floating off shore uneducated about green building. If our clients’ products contribute to LEED certification, you bet we convey that in our messaging. But LEED isn’t the end-all-be-all, and I have to question the longevity, validity and long-term marketability of LEED-related messaging.
One of the panelists from the Green Building Alliance of Pittsburgh hit the nail on the head when she said that it may be great that your product contributes to LEED certification, but there are other factors that make your company or business green. Is your manufacturing, packaging or shipping processes cleaner or more sustainable? It’s great that your windows are more energy efficient and made of recyclable aluminum, but so are many other manufacturers. What else are you doing?
I think we’re almost past the point of simply noting the recyclable properties of metal products. If your company wants to be green, tell me where that metal comes from. China? Fail.
I also think we’re rapidly approaching another level of greenwashing, one comprised of only product based green messaging. Any manufacturer can revise their messaging to include LEED benefits, but are they considering revising their products and corporate sustainability? This will be the next level of green messaging.
Unfortunately, the demand for the new green messaging will be market driven. Like LEED, it will take a few years before corporate sustainability becomes the new standard when choosing products. Currently, it’s sufficient to choose a product that contributes to LEED certification. But also just like LEED, this will end and manufacturers will have to find a new way to ‘be green.’
Times are tight, credit is hard to come by, and their is a significant surplus of built residential and commercial property sitting idle. Will the current economy hurt the green building movement or is the industry recession proof as a recent string of articles would like us to believe?
In a March, 16th interview with Peter Morris of construction consultancy Davis Langdon, the folks over at Business Week attempted to look into the crystal ball and see what the future holds. The interview raised several interesting issues regarding the value of green building, particularly in light of the current economy and the fallacy of life-cycle cost analysis based on straight line models. As Morris said: ” Trying to prove the value of green just on pure economics always seemed to me not necessarily dishonest, but it was like trying to catch people’s pocketbooks as opposed to their morality” Should we reconsider the manner in which we educate the public about green building and its “value”? I think the answer is clearly yes.
One of the biggest obstacles green building has faced has been proving its value in terms of economic benefits to the owner. Many of the early green buildings were unable to live up to their projected cost savings due either to flawed analysis of features cost saving potential or due to improper operation of the building after occupancy.
I propose the following methods to deal with this problem:
- Make enhanced commissioning and education of building occupants a prerequisite under green building certification schemes.
- Encourage post occupancy efficiency reviews to correct problems with both building systems and occupants habits.
- Emphasize that their are benefits to going green which cannot be measured in simple economic terms.
I recorded some test results today at our home office that I thought was an interesting case study in color temperature consistency, it launches an interesting question when it comes to LED’s.
First the background-In an effort to cut costs our budget people looked at the light bulbs we buy most of for our existing stores and went ahead and researched cheaper replacements. The lamp in question is a 35w halogen MR8.
We set up a 2000 hour test of the these lamps setting a base line at zero hour for illuminance and color temperature. Five different manufacturers were tested, each using 14 lamps. We recorded the data both from lamp to lamp and over time in 500 hour intervals. This interval was the 1000 hour mark. I won’t go into minute details on the test results but suffice to say even with our specified brand (the best performing of the group) there was major inconsistencies from lamp to lamp in both color temperature and measured illumination. Swings of as much as 200 kelvin could be reported in our best lamp and far greater in our worst.
The MR8 has never been a lamp with a good reputation, mostly because of the kind of performance issues we found in this examination. But it begs the question if our existing halogen sources are this inconsistent what is holding us back from more wide-spread use of the LED as a replacement? It’s detractors (I among them) saw color temperature as one of the biggest barriers to adoption, but after this test, I’m beginning to wonder if the right answer is a light source I won’t have to touch for 40,000 hours.
