Let’s give Radiohead credit for trying. As they point out on their blog, for a modern rock band touring is highly inefficient - 125,000lb / 55,000kg of Sound, Lighting, Video, Band Gear, Office and Catering equipment needs to be moved between every show. They have looked into alternative methods of transportation such as rail but that didn’t work out. They have managed to find a way for their truck drivers to cool their cabs while they sleep without running their diesel engines all night which helps. What they seem to have overlooked is the geographical position of where their shows are taking place.

An article in Billboard points this out - Adding fuel to the fire is Radiohead’s self-stated intention of making its summer tour as environmentally friendly as possible. According to one fan post, “One-third of the concert-goers that night were driving around in circles, burning fossil fuels all the while. This is your save the Earth tour … and yet you play in the middle of nowhere with no public transportation leading there. You owe us!”

And from another, “If you gave even one tiny llama turd about environmental impact, you would never have scheduled a show at a venue 40 miles away from downtown D.C., nowhere near public transportation of any kind.”

Here in the Northwest the band is skipping Portland and Seattle to play the White River Amphitheatre which is located in Auburn, Washington, on the Muckleshoot Indian Reservation 15 miles northeast of Tacoma and 35 miles southeast of Seattle. So for Portlanders or folks from say Idaho, Montana and even Washington, it means jumping in the car and driving for hours not to mention that gas is now $4 a gallon….time for a rethink I reckon.

If you are firmly committed to using only truly green products and if you care deeply about a company’s carbon footprint it would be hard to have much sympathy for Fiji Water. Without digging too deep online I found many articles that have assessed the cost and energy that is required to bottle Fiji Water and transport it to the USA. For instance, Ask Pablo at the Triple Pundit website calculated that “a bottle that holds 1 liter (of Fiji Water) requires 5 liters of water in its manufacturing process (this includes power plant cooling water).” And to deliver one bottle of Fiji Water to the USA consumes “81g of fossil fuels, 720g of water, and 153g of GHGs per bottle delivered to the US from Fiji.” Clearly this is not good news for a product that promotes distance and exoticism as its marketing advantages.

To counter this criticism the company has embraced openness and has a blog, the Fiji Green Blog. While this is a welcome move it also puts the company in to an awkward position. Their willingness to accept open comments on their site is commendable - check out the critical comments posted on the blog by the public. I have to take issue with the blog’s title though - Fiji Green. The company’s main web site is also titled Fiji Green. The use of the word ‘green’ suggests the influence of a marketer here and there is a danger in labeling a product ‘green’ when it is clearly not - the public is suspicous.

Media Post reports “According to an Ipsos Reid study conducted this spring on behalf of Icynene, seven in ten Americans either ‘strongly’ or ‘somewhat’ agree that when companies call a product “green” (meaning better for the environment), it is usually just a “marketing tactic”. Consumers appear to be wary of companies who label their products as being green, or environmentally friendly, acknowledges the report. In the US, 75% of the men believe that labeling a product green is just a marketing tactic, compared to 65% of the women.” And AdAge.com reports that although consumers “have better-than-average recall when it comes to remembering green advertising. The bad news: They aren’t buying into the claims.”

Fuji Water then is between a rock and a hard place - it needs to rethink how it markets its product to green consumers. The only bottled water that’s truly ‘green’ is the water you pour into a recycled container at home yourself from the kitchen sink. That action doesn’t conjure up visions of tropical jungles and faraway destinations but it will help reduce the environmental impact of shipping bottled water halfway around the earth.

Back in 1992 the US Government released a pdf of how to discern if a product that is marketed as ‘green’ is truly ‘green’ and made from recyclable material. And Earth Day is April 22nd.

Update April 18th 08: Bottle Maker to Stop Using Plastic Linked to Health Concerns, Canada Likely to Label Plastic Ingredient ‘Toxic’