January 3, 2007
NOT THE BRIGHTEST BULB (OR IDEA) IN THE PACK
The New York Times ran a piece yesterday on retailing giant WalMart's efforts to speed consumer adoption of compact flourescent light bulbs. Utilizing the clout it has with its suppliers, the company is strong-arming bulb makers into producing more energy efficient bulbs than the incandescents that have been the household lighting standard for basically the last century. And certainly, energy efficient bulbs would reduce energy consumption in the U.S.
A compact fluorescent has clear advantages over the widely used incandescent light — it uses 75 percent less electricity, lasts 10 times longer, produces 450 pounds fewer greenhouse gases from power plants and saves consumers $30 over the life of each bulb. But it is eight times as expensive as a traditional bulb, gives off a harsher light and has a peculiar appearance.
A big problem is that consumers don't really care for them. Compact flourescents have been on the market in some form or another since 1979 and according to the Times article, only 6% of U.S. households have even one of them plugged in for savings. Another problem is that disposal of millions of compact flourescent bulbs into landfills could release a signicant amount of poisonous mercury into the environment. Don't think that trial lawyers wouldn't jump all over that one. I can see WalMart execs 30 years from now hauled before some Congressional committee:
"Now, Mr. CEO, are you telling us that your predecessor used his formidable retailing organization's power to force consumers to buy a more expensive product that has now poisoned the water and air that our children are drinking and breathing today?"
WalMart execs are trying to forestall just such a situation by proposing recycling centers for consumers to drop off their used bulbs at WalMart stores. This idea brought to mind a speech I once attended that was given by Wayne Huizenga, then the owner of Waste Management International and Blockbuster video. Huizenga was a wonderful speaker and had a lot of interesting things to say. The theme of the event he was attending, however, was Socially Responsible Business, something I don't think the trash hauler and video rentor had given much thought to.
During the Q&A period, a young woman stood up and asked if he'd considered integrating Waste Management's disposal functions with Blockbuster's entertainment distribution functions. More specifically: would he consider putting recycling drop-off stations in his numerous Blockbuster stores so customers could drop off their empties while returning their movies. To his credit, Huizenga handled the question somewhat gently so as not to hurt a young woman's feelings. I got the impression that if this had been suggested by one of his employees, said employee would have been out on his ass and in the unemployment line before the meeting broke for lunch. The essence of Huizenga's reply was essentially "That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Why the hell would I want to turn my chain of family entertainment stores into waste transfer stations?" That is paraphrasing.
But some C.E.O.'s aren't content to provide millions of customers what they want or need. They've got vision, or visions of a better world shaped by their executive insight into what is best for that world and its inhabitants. Said people generally do less harm when their career ascension is limited to the corporate level of Store Greeters. WalMart C.E.O. H. Lee Scott Jr. is such a man. He is no mere merchant providing goods and services for a living. He is a pioneer and force for good! In fact, I get the impression that everything Mr. Scott does resonates with an exclamation point behind it in his mind. Including literally SAVING THE WORLD(!):
And it would have stayed that way unless Wal-Mart decided to go green. More than a year ago, Mr. Scott, the company’s chief executive, began reaching out to some of environmental groups, telling them that Wal-Mart, long regarded as an environmental offender, wanted to become a leader on issues like fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions.Mr. Scott viewed such a move as a way to use Wal-Mart’s influence to improve the environment, cut costs and, of course, burnish the company’s bruised image. In September 2005, Mr. Scott and Andy Ruben, Wal-Mart’s vice president for strategy and sustainability, drove 6,000 feet to the Mount Washington Observatory in New Hampshire with Steve Hamburg, an environmental studies professor at Brown University, and Fred Krupp, the president of the advocacy group Environmental Defense.
At the summit, where scientists measure climate change 24 hours a day, the men discussed global warming, acid rain, the hole in the ozone layer and what Wal-Mart could do about them.
“You need to look at what is being sold on the shelf,” Mr. Hamburg recalled telling Mr. Scott over a dinner of turkey and mashed potatoes. He began talking excitedly about compact fluorescent bulbs. “Very few products,” he said, “are such a clear winner” for consumers and the environment.
Soon after returning from the trip, Wal-Mart publicly embraced the bulbs with the zealotry of a convert. In meetings with suppliers, buyers for the chain laid out their plans: lower prices, expanding the shelf space dedicated to them and heavily promoting the technology.
Doesn't anyone pine for the days when "zealotry" was used with some negative connotations? I personally find fanatical partisanry on behalf of goals and groups somewhat disturbing. And don't tell me if that mentioned meal's menu included gluten-free rice cakes and tofurkey those details would've made it to print. "See, doomsaying scientists having dinner with powerful corporate executives is just plain ol' folks like you and me."
So Mr. Scott is intent on ramming compact flourescent light bulbs down his customers' throats. And if that means giving up valuable shelf space for educational displays, profits (and shareholders) be damned! Mr. Scott might want to give some thought as to why a product that's been on the market for almost 30 years, serves the environment, and saves customers money has not taken off. Such things generally "sell themselves" as the saying goes. I doubt it's lack of consumer education. It's probably because consumers don't like them.
Mr. Scott should use his considerable clout to pressure existing or start-up lightbulb producers to do something really innovative, like create a marketable product that people will want to buy wherever the hell it's located on a shelf. There's a reason one has to reach way up high to the top shelf to get your toilet paper: that shit sells itself. And given Americans' propensity to buy almost any piece of crap that might save them a few bucks down the line, building a better lightbulb that people might actually want shouldn't be that big a job.
Tagged:Posted by Lexiphane at January 3, 2007 6:02 PM
| Politics & PolicyTrackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lexiphane.com/mt/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/1043