I’m an admirer of GE, chief executive Jeff Immelt and the company’s Ecomagination initiative. Its influence on the rest of business has been huge. But GE’s latest product, a credit card to help people offset their carbon emissions, leaves me with mixed feelings. That’s the topic of today’s CNNMoney.com column.
Ordinarily, I tend to applaud even incremental efforts by business to address environmental and social problems. But I’m starting to worry that we are approaching the issue of climate change like GWBush approached the Iraq War–without a full assessment of the costs, without asking anyone to sacrifice, with politically easy but unrealistic solutions. (Yes, changing lots of lightbulbs can change the world. No, that won’t reduce carbon emissions by nearly enough…).
Here’s how the column begins:
With much fanfare, General Electric today introduced a new platinum credit card which, instead of offering cash back or frequent flyer miles, promises to help consumers fight global warming.
Unveiled at a crowded press conference at Seven World Trade Center, one of New York’s most environmentally-sensitive buildings, the new Earth Rewards MasterCard — which, of course, comes in several shades of green — may be the purest example of GE’s Jeff Immelt’s oft-stated belief that “green is green.”
As Lorraine Bolsinger, the GE executive who oversees its Ecomagination campaign, put it: “What’s good for the environment can be good for business, and what’s good for business can be good for the environment.”
“Together, we can advance the fight against global warming,” said Tom Gentile, the chief marketing officer for GE Money, the giant conglomerate’s consumer finance arm.
Forgive me, but I don’t buy the idea that we can shop our way to a cleaner planet. It sounds too good to be true, and it is.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
You raise a good point — our consumerist mentality and habits are at the root of the problem — but I think your concern about the card per se is misplaced. An affinity card, like our choice of car, says something about us (or at least we think it does). We are, in part, who and what we affiliate with (mot to mention what we drive). Is this silly? Absolutely, but it’s also true at a fundamental level of how we humans derive our sense of self; if you don’t believe me, interview people in the process of choosing their next car. Here’s my first hypothesis about the new card: most of the people who will get this card (me, for example) will already be engaged to a large degree in attempting to reduce their carbon footprint. You don’t have to worry about them deceiving themselves into thinking that the more they spend, the more they are helping avert the climate crisis. And here’s my second hypothesis: an important minority of people who get the new card will be less far along in their process of carbon dieting; for these folks being a card holder will serve as a daily reminder of who and what they are attempting to affiliate with, and therefore how they should behave. For these people, the card may actually help move them to behavior change. Never lose sight of how sensitive we humans are to subtle cues in our environment, especially cues that we specifically created (or selected) to tell other members of the tribe something important about us. TTFN….gotta go get in line for my Earth Rewards card.
Great comments, Ed, and they reflect what was said by pollsters from Roper at the GE event yesterday in New York. Someone at the event also suggested that the Earth Rewards card is “sexy,” that a guy who uses it to pay for drinks at a bar will likely impress his date. I don’t know about that but there is a viral and educational quality to the card that I acknowledge.
What’s really at issue here is a deep question of how far business can go when it comes to solving environmental problemns. If one solution is to consume less, can business lead us there? I think not.
Marc, Thanks for the information and the perspective. From a post on my blog: “I say a credit card is a perfect metaphor for the entire climate change debate. We’re dedicating one percent of our resources to a serious problem and then leaving it for future generations to take care of.”
Well said, Nathan, wish I’d thought of that!
Thanks for the article, Marc. I think that the GE card is in tune with where we need to be now in our troubled evolution to homo decarbonus… right now, most people are only ready to make small changes to help protect our future. Carbon offsets are a heck of a lot better than airline miles… which might induce you to take a gratuitous trip to Hawaii… but, for now, I’ll take what I can get. And, if a lot of the recent reports are right, 1% of GDP may actually be enough to stabilize CO2 at 450 PPM… because the gains from improved energy efficiency pay for most of the other measures we need.
Let’s just hope people are using the card to pay for improved insulation in thier attics, rather than airline travel. The net effect of this card has a lot more to do with what the money is spent on than the 1% on carbon offsets.
While the card is not the answer to climate change, I think it’s fascinating in that such a awareness and brand-building move is even possible. Imagine a company trying to launch a carbon off-set card even five year ago. I think the response would be “huh?” followed by a giant marketing thud. It signals a mass market step in the right direction and I hope the momentum continues.