Greenwashing Versus Voluntary Pollution Prevention: A Test Of Global Understanding
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 01. 4.07
According to a Regional USEPA Office-issued press release, a Vishay Intertechnology Company site in Columbus, Nebraska USA (pictured) is ‘getting the lead out’ of its manufacturing process. The lead solder phase out is being done as a industry/government partnership project. Coincidence or not, getting the lead out of consumer electronic devices is a RoHS regulation-driven necessity in Europe: a fact that made it interesting to see the US-EPA press release wording. As posted to the US EPA Regional Office website in Kansas City, the phase out of lead solder was accomplished through, “ The National Partnership for Environmental Priorities Program (NPEP) [which] encourages public and private organizations to form voluntary partnerships with EPA that reduce the use or release of any of 31 Priority Chemicals (PCs)”. Note our bold emphasis of the word “voluntary.”
Several possible explanations come to mind. The simplest possibility: the Vishay operating site, as yet, sells no products into European markets. In which case, the term “voluntary” fits...maybe.
The press release is EPA’s; and, to be clear, the Agency should have mentioned RoHS as a footnote, or better still given an explanation about what was voluntary about the project in the global context of RoHS and similar regulations affecting elecronic device design.
Is there another way that the partners might have thought of the phase out as “voluntary?” RoHS mandates that consumer products sold in the European Union not contain lead above a certain weight fraction. If they exceed the threshold number, a financial penalty is levied against the distributor. If the US operating site merely supplies electronics components that are assembled by other companies into consumer items for sale, the compliance obligation would be indirect. Not very convincing.
Thus, the first impression lingers: greenwash.
Does it make any sense to complain about bad impressions from a government press release? Progress is progress. Environmental exposure to lead is being reduced. Plus, we noticed elsehwere that this Vishay site had done a great job of looking into ways to prevent pollution and reduce energy consumption. Tell us what you think.
You are definitely on track with this analysis. Anything that benefits the planet is a step in the right direction. I guess this is the final step in marketing "synergies": take what you have done to meet a requirement in Europe and get credit for the fact that it is still voluntary in the USA. I agree that it seems slimy for EPA to be taking credit for actions that supercede the agency's handcuffed impotence. Or perhaps I should be charitable: I hope that the people behind these claims are the ones that will drive real progress when the Administration is once again in favor of enforcing the long term interests of the American economy against the short term interests of American CEOs.
The jump to the U of Nebraska-Lincoln study showed "no brainer" energy audit stuff that should be implemented ASAP, and should have been done years ago.
No word whether they did it or not. At less than a year payback, I sure hope they did and they're presently looking for more.
The 7,580,000 kWh in the memo equates to about 5400 TONS per year of CO2. Just another example of where energy savings and carbon reduction is a HUGE financial opportunity, not a drag on the economy.
Good job, let's do more. Now.