Teresa Boardman brings up several good points about the “green” revolution in her article “Not buying into the ‘green’ movement.” Boardman believes that product manufacturers advertise their products to be better for the environment in order to prey on buyers’ wishes to follow pop culture and become part of this trendy movement. Although these reformed products are better than the original through small changes in packaging or shipping, Boardman points out that often the products themselves are unnecessary and add to the depletion of our resources and the harming of our environment, proving the term “green” to be a marketing gimmick.
Boardman then discusses “green building,” pointing out that although the changes are a step forward in bettering our environment, that more could (and should) be done. Boardman proposes repairs and green renovations on existing homes in order to “recycle” them. Today there are so many older homes that are often torn down in order to build bigger and more contemporary houses by large development companies in order to make big profits. But what if those sames companies bought the existing homes and renovated them into true green, recycled homes? That would be the most efficient use of resources and lowest impact on the environment. However, are the recycled homes something home buyers would really go for, or would they prove Boardman’s theory that the green movement is simply a marketing gimmick to sell new earth-damaging products?