“Toy Story” and Sustainability
Last year, there was a furor over lead paint in some children’s toys from China. In response, Congress passed a law requiring extensive testing of all products aimed at children. The law of unintended consequences reared its ugly head. Find out why this situation shows companies the need to be proactive in their sustainability programs.
Taking a meat-axe to a situation that required a scalpel, in the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, Congress required that “all products aimed at children under 12 be certified as safe and virutallly lead-free by independent testing”, according to an editorial in last week’s Wall Street Journal. So far, so good, for anything made with paint or anything else that a kid can put in her mouth. But what about bicycles and children’s books? They’re covered too. What about the cost of testing? A friend told me last week that he knows of one well established German toy manufacturer that is pulling out of the US because of the cost of testing to “prove the negative” and the potential liability lawsuits. I learned in college about the health problems of heavy metals; the problems with lead (for example in gasoline) have been known for a long time, so I’m totally supportive of the ban, but how to prove the negative? Lead happens to make paint look better; but many paint companies have taken the lead out. Lead went out of gasoline 20 years ago, so why are companies still using lead paint in toys? What this situation illustrates to me is that, if a company just follows a “compliance” mentality, it will always be caught in a response mode as social tolerances for contaminated products and various services change. And they are changing rapidly today. The Obama presidency, coupled with the worldwide financial meltdown, is just the beginning of at least a generation of more activist government at all levels, in my opinion. Why not take a proactive stance and use sustainability rubrics such as The Natural Step to look at the “environmental footprint” of all your products and projects, the energy use, carbon footprint, water footprint, etc., before social mores and regulatory requirements change? For example, California now requires a carbon dioxide mitigation strategy for all new large developments? Why not assume that this will be the law in every state, if you’re a developer, and start to plan your projects accordingly? Then, use the fact that you’re “out front” for marketing advantage?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 01/19/2009 at 08:33 AM
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.Next entry: Video: How Will Obama Impact Green Building?
Previous entry: Business Guide to Low Carbon Economy Shows How to Green Existing Buildings and Businesses
Subscribe via RSS
Subscribe via Email