Since the early days of the internet, people have used search engines to find stuff on the web. And ever since those early searches, SEOs, SEMs, strategists, researchers and other quantoids have aggregated that data to track social trends. This decidedly new source of social data gives new and virtually instantaneous insight into the public consciousness — from the mundane and minute to the memorable and macro. To make sense of all that raw data and to find patterns of social significance, every year Google publishes Zeitgeist, a collection of the year's most popular search trends at the world's most popular search engine.

Google does not give "green" search terms their own category, however, green-themed lists are sprinkled throughout the Science, Tech & Gadgets, Quirky and Lifestyle categories.

And while green topics are not as frequently searched as pop culture and tech, major environmental disasters often trigger robust trends in search, especially at Google News, as was evidenced in 2010 with the search trend "oil spill" topping the Google News list and again in 2011 with the search trend "東京 電力" (TEPCO) topping the Google News list and the global #8 Fastest Rising Search, in reference to the combination earthquake, tsunami and nuclear power plant accident in Japan.

Appearing as a variety of Top 10 lists ranging from high-tech to re-use and everywhere in between, the 2011 Google Green Search Trends are much more benign than the disaster-themed searches mentioned above. The lists below give a good picture of the kind of green information people are looking for when they begin typing into those little search boxes. Here's a rundown of the 8 green-themed Top 10 search term lists for 2011 (with links to each collection available by clicking on the category heading). Note: while the list below is tailored for U.S. searches, the Zeitgeist tool allows users to drill down to other geographic regions as well.

Alternative Energy

1. Solar
2. Nuclear Power
3. Wind Energy
4. Ethanol
5. Biodiesel
6. Biomass
7. Fuel Cell
8. Geothermal Energy
9. Flex Fuel
10. E85 Gas Stations

Sustainability

1. sustainable development
2. sustainable energy
3. sustainable agriculture
4. sustainable design
5. sustainable living
6. sustainable communities
7. sustainable farming
8. sustainable fish
9. sustainable growth rate
10. sustainable food jobs

Environmental Questions

1. How to compost
2. What is vegan
3. What causes earthquakes
4. Is Fish meat
5. What is led light
6. How to dispose paint
7. What is deforestation
8. What is fracking
9. What is carbon footprint
10. Is styrofoam recyclable

What people are reusing

1. Reusable Bags
2. Reusable Diapers
3. Reusable Water Bottles
4. Reusable Keurig Filter
5. Reusable Canning Lids
6. Reusable Stras
7. Reusable Ice Cubes
8. Reusable Hand Warmers
9. Reusable Swim Diapers
10. Reusable Air Filters

Hybrid & Alternative vehicles

1. Prius
2. Chevy Volt
3. Smart car
4. lexus Hybrid
5. Honda Hybrid
6. Nissan Leaf
7. Ford Fusion
8. Hybrid Suv
9. Hyundai
10. Tesla

Waste Disposal

1. Garbage Island
2. E Waste Recycling
3. Apple Recycle
4. Trash Pack
5. Zero Waste Home
6. Free Junk Removal
7. Is Styrofoam Recyclable
8. Recyclebank Codes
9. Earth911.com Recycling
10. Oil Recycling Locations

DIY

1. diy glitter shoes
2. diy ombre hair
3. brooch bouquet diy
4. diy feather earrings
5. diy friendship bracelets
6. diy bracelets
7. diy valentines gifts
8. fabric flowers diy
9. diy nails
10. halloween decorations diy

Quirky Environmental

1. Wild Kratts
2. Backyard Chickens
3. Staycation
4. Bioluminescent Bay
5. Dirty Dozen Foods
6. Composting Worms
7. Gila Monster Facts
8. Earless Bunny
9. Food Fight Grocery
10. Grade F Meat

Rare Wild Animals

1. Red Panda
2. Ocelot
3. Tapir
4. Bald Eagle
5. Giant Panda
6. Cheetah
7. Polar Bear
8. Blue Whale
9. Komodo Dragon
10. Clouded Leopard

Photo credit: Some rights reserved by quinn.anya

Related posts:

1. Green on Facebook Aims to Fend-Off Coal Criticisms
2. 10 of the Hottest Green Cars at the 2011 Detroit Auto Show
3. Tweetin’ for Good: Toyota Connects with Sustainable, Charitable Twitter Hub

Ever since news broke that California-based solar company Solyndra, a recipient of a $535 million loan guarantee from the Obama administration, was going belly-up, the solar industry has been up against it. Ranging from an under-informed and poorly developed (but well-coordinated) critique of President Obama's economic and energy policy, to Congressional hearings on the solar industry and the loan guarantee program, industry groups and renewable energy advocates have been forced to play defense.

But as the very public trial hearing of solar power gets going on Capitol Hill on Friday, solar industry representatives and thought leaders hope to shift the conversation to a more productive place by holding a virtual conversation about solar energy and sustainable buildings on the social networking platform, Twitter.

Dow Corning, along with the Solar Energy Industry Association and the Solar Foundation will host this virtual event in conjunction with the 2011 Solar Decathlon, which kicked-off on Thursday just a short walk from the very congressional hearing room where Republican lawmakers will be grilling Solyndra executives on Friday.

Also joining solar industry representatives for the event will be thought leaders from George Washington University Solar Institute and the Center for American Progress.

To get involved with the conversation or just to follow along, check out Twitter from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm EST on Friday, September 23, 2011, using the hashtag #DCsolarchat.

Photo: Some rights reserved by NREL Solar Decathlon

Related posts:

1. Solar Industry: Solar Could Meet 15% of US Demand by 2020
2. Intel’s 8 New Solar Projects Raise the Bar on Tech Industry
3. Tweetin’ for Good: Toyota Connects with Sustainable, Charitable Twitter Hub

If electric vehicles are ever going to grab more than a sliver of the U.S. auto market, there needs to be a robust infrastructure of EV charging stations. At least that is the common wisdom. But public charging stations also act as infrastructural billboards; market signals to the consumer that public charging is simple and readily available. In other words, the benefits of new electric car charging stations are not only the tangible kind — that they provide a place where people can charge their car's batteries and (perhaps) spend money at the business associated with the charger —  the benefits also come in more abstract forms — they help erect the psychological infrastructure many consumers need to be in place before they jump into EV ownership.

But a third dimension, one that has both tangible and intangible properties, sees the addition of new EV charging stations can as powerful marketing tools, especially when the charging stations being installed have all the familiarity of the traditional gas station but include the unmistakable connection to clean energy roots via the solar panels they are attached to.

Beginning last week with stations at Serra Automotive in Grand Blanc, Michigan and American Chevrolet in Modesto, California, GM is outfitting at least 26 dealerships with solar canopy arrays to charge and display the plug-in Chevy Volt in its clean energy habitat. Each installation will allow the simultaneous charging of 6, 12,18 or 24 vehicles, depending on how many solar canopies the dealer chooses to install.

“The question isn’t whether to install a solar canopy, it’s where and how many,” said Joe Serra, president of Serra Automotive in Grand Blanc, Michigan.

The solar canopy projects are being installed by Michigan-based Sunlogics, a global developer and operator of large-scale solar power projects that just received $7.5 million in investment capital from GM Ventures, the $100-million venture capital arm of GM. The addition of Sunlogics brings the number of companies to six in the GM Ventures portfolio, all of which are developing technologies in the sustainable mobility sector.

According to GM, each 20-kilowatt canopy will generate electricity equivalent to 12 full vehicle charges per day and excess electricity created will help supplement the dealership’s electrical power needs, providing as much as one-quarter of a dealership's electricity.

“The beauty of this program is that there is no capital cost required from the dealership,” said Dave Halvorson, president of American Chevrolet in Modesto. “Not only do we generate the solar energy to increase our reliance on renewable electricity, but the Green Zone is a billboard of our commitment to the environment."

But GM isn't the first car company to turn to solar for EV charge stations. Japanese manufacturer Mitsubishi announced its own plan for solar-assisted electric car chargers. Mitsubishi will be dropping the  all-electric i MiEV onto the U.S. market in March, 2012.

The 100%-electric Nissan LEAF, another plug-in already garnering attention in the U.S. also has a growing infrastructure of dealer-based EV chargers to back up the fleet. And what Nissan's charging network might lack in flash and symbolism, as compared to the new solar canopies at a couple dozen GM dealers nationwide, it makes up for in sheer scale. Every single Nissan dealership in the U.S. is expected to be outfitted with public EV chargers by year's end, if not sooner.

So while it may be too early to say GM has hit a marketing/PR home run or gained any advantage over Nissan with the introduction of the innovative solar-powered EV-charging stations at select dealerships nationwide, I don't think it's too early to suggest they could have come up with a name that was a little less corny and a lot less trite than "Green Zone."

But if that's all they did wrong, they're doing all right!

Related posts:

1. Tennessee Gets in on Solar EV-Charging Stations
2. GM Now Taking Orders for Chevy Volt
3. Google Maps Adds Electric Vehicle Charging Station Layer

The other day I was stopped behind a taxi operated by one of the Denver-Boulder area's big taxi companies and saw the words "Sustainable Development" plastered across the back of the car, a Toyota Highlander Hybrid. Along with the curious nod to the environmental paradigm, the word "Hybrid" and the taxi company's phone number were both printed in the same font and size on the back of the taxi.

Now, I get putting the phone number up there, that's just common sense. It's also apparent why the word "Hybrid" was put on the back of the taxi; to bring attention to this and other hybrid vehicles now operated by the company. But what's up with the shout to "Sustainable Development"?

In hopes of learning more about this curious use of the phrase, I went to the company website, perhaps thinking I'd find that "sustainable development" is actually the name of some project or initiative the company was running to green their operations or operate more sustainably. No such luck. All I learned was that the company had purchased some number of hybrid vehicles (exactly how many was not made clear) to use in their fleet.

Hats off to this taxi company for partially upgrading its fleet to hybrid vehicles. And while I definitely don't give the company low marks for using the hybrid vehicles as billboards showcase their sustainability efforts, they could make a lot more sense doing so. It just doesn't fit. In fact, without some clarification or explanation, it's straight up incoherent. Sustainable development is a paradigm, it's an academic discipline, it's a broadly-defined and sometimes vague eco-socio-economic ethic that has lost much of its original meaning. But whatever it is, it doesn't belong on the back of a taxi.

Related posts:

1. Communicating Green… without the Greenwash
2. Anatomy of a Corporate Greenwash
3. Corporate Cooperation: Nike, Best Buy, Yahoo to Share Sustainable Patents

Small reusable bag company ChicoBag is under fire from three of the country's largest plastic bag manufacturers for "false and/or misleading description of fact in interstate commercial advertising", according to the complaint filed jointly by Hilex Poly, Superbag Operating Ltd. and Advance Polybag.

Billion Dollar Plastic is asking ChicoBag to correct the disputed online content and pay damages of triple the profits from a "misleading promotion" found at 14 Carrot Whole Foods in Lexington, South Carolina.

Is this a frivolous lawsuit aimed at subduing an outspoken environmental protagonist (ChicoBag CEO Andy Keller) and defaming his company, or an anti-greenwashing crusade to bring fairer practices into the marketplace?

Marketplace Mashup

Plastic bag manufacturers are facing attacks from all directions. Twenty-one communities have taken action to ban single-use plastic bags, while state legislators in California and Oregon are working towards statewide bans.  Some governments have already banned plastic bags completely (Uganda, Bangladesh), and Rwanda is limiting production to bags no more than 100 microns thick.  Ireland, China, Kenya, and Australia have levied a tax on the single-use shopping bags, and more countries are poised to follow.

A "Bag the Ban" campaign addresses this growing environmental, social and political movement, but as more city, state, and retailer ordinances are banning their product, this whimper from plastic bag manufacturers comes as no surprise. Why target Andy Keller and ChicoBag?

Plastic's Ungainly Offspring: The Bag Monster

Disgusted by the plastic grocery bags dominating his local landfill, Andy Keller embarked upon a mission to replace single-use plastic bags (in circulation since the 1950s) with portable, durable, reusable bags. Since ChicoBag brand reusable bags came to market in 2004,  the plastic bag industry has had competition.  ChicoBag's clever, compact designs and awareness campaigns like the Bag Monster (shown below) have stirred up the satchel sector.

The Case

Plaintiffs--Hilex Poly, Superbag Operating Ltd. and Advance Polybag--point to ChicoBag’s "Learn the Facts" page and argue that certain statements are inadequately cited and/or false.

The Plaintiffs attempted to address their concerns out of the courtroom late last year, but could not resolve their issues, explains Phil Rozenski, Director of Sustainability and Marketing for Hilex Poly to Earth and Industry.

"It's important to understand that we are competitors," Mr. Rozenski says. "All people within our marketplace need to practice fair marketing--this is something that impacts everybody in the marketplace."

The lawsuit is making its way through the US Circuit Court in South Carolina, a state that does not provide anti-bullying protection (and is home to Hilex Poly HQ).  Statutes like California's SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) are in place to protect First Amendment rights and frequently contain claims for libel, slander, malicious prosecution, and defamation.

The Plaintiffs have taken specific issue with the following statements:

• On its website, ChicoBag states that “A reusable bag needs only to be used eleven times to have a lower environmental impact than using eleven disposable bags."; "Only one percent of plastic bags are recycled.” But Big Plastic says that the EPA article cited by ChicoBag doesn't make this statement or provide any evidence that such a claim can be substantiated. Note: The EPA published a more recent statistic of 11.8%, to which Andy Keller responded, "If we're talking about 1 percent, 5 percent, 12 percent - that's still anemic. That's my point."

• According to ChicoBag,  "Somewhere between 500 billion to one trillion plastic bags are consumed worldwide each year.”  The plaintiffs say that the National Geographic article cited by ChicoBag "does not make this statement, refer to number of bags used worldwide each year, or provide any evidence that such a claim can be substantiated". Note: The National Geographic article refers to the website Reuseit.com's "Facts About the Plastic Bag Pandemic", which also fails to properly cite the statistic.

• ChicoBag's website states, “The world’s largest landfill can be found floating between Hawaii and San Francisco. Wind and sea currents carry marine debris from all over the world to what is now known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. This ‘landfill’ is estimated to be twice the size of Texas and thousands of pounds of our discarded trash, mostly plastics.” Again, the plaintiffs argue that the National Geographic article cited by ChicoBag does not make this statement and take issue with the "implication" of a "landfill comprised of 'mostly plastics' " Note: Mr. Keller may have done better to link to global research by 5 Gyres.

• “Each year hundreds of thousands of sea birds and marine life die from ingesting plastics mistaken for food.” ChicoBag credited this statement to the LA Times.  The plaintiffs say this source never provided any evidence to substantiate its claim, and the implication of this statement, that " 'ingestible plastics' are comprised of mostly plastic bags [...] is false, misleading".  Note: A study of 38 green turtles found that 61 percent had ingested some form of marine debris including plastic bags, cloth, and rope.

Rozensky also says that a few of ChicoBag's cited documents must have been altered or fabricated.  One attachment leads to PDF documents that "clearly show" they were taken from the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.  And in another article, credited to a federal agency (presumably the EPA), "[Mr. Keller] added and changed their material and used their letterhead to make it look like an official document".

These accusations of malicious and willful deception add a troubling depth to the case, but a lawsuit of this nature is not likely to save the industry from being phased out by provocative advertising and green trends and might be difficult to won.  To be awarded damages of any kind, lawyers will have to prove that any degree of exaggeration on the part of ChicoBag was sufficient enough to change an (already environmentally conscious) consumer's mind and shopping behavior.

"We think if people choose to use reusable bags, that's fine.  We have sold reusable bags in the past and we have the capacity to do that," says Rozensky.

May we suggest increasing this "capacity"?

Video from Earth and Industry's Inside Look at Hilex Poly

Image Credits: Mike Licht, Zainub, ChicoBag

Follow Allison Leahy on twitter or reach her by email.

Related posts:

1. An Inside Look at the World’s Largest “Bag-2-Bag” Recycling Facility [Photos, Video]
2. KFC Begins Rolling Out Reusable, Recyclable Containers
3. Really? Should Nestle Be Winning Awards for Its ‘Eco-Shape’ Plastic Water Bottle?

It seems just about every company is making environmental claims about their products these days.  "Going green" offers an increasingly powerful advertising angle and a million ways to capitalize (and make a positive difference).  But with more eco-labels than you can shake a stick at, how can you be sure product claims are spurring a sea change that runs deeper than sophisticated, eco-design biodegradable packaging?

Greenwashing is a nagging concern for consumers, and the environmental policy landscape isn't all that friendly for emerging green product manufacturers, either.  That's why Green Products Roundtable (GPR), a "consensus-seeking entity" with members including The Dow Chemical Company, Five Winds International, Staples, Rainforest Alliance, the DOE and EPA (the latter two are non-voting participants) has published "Accelerating Green Commerce", a 43-page report asking the FTC to tighten-up their current Guide for Environmental Marketing Claims.

Under the GPR's proposed guidelines, it would no longer be acceptable for a table to be labeled as a 'sustainable wood table'.  The advert and label would have to clarify that they  have sourced the wood from a forest that was certified to a sustainable forest management standard, and further identify that standard.

The barrage of misleading and deceptive environmental marketing claims and product (brand) names bombarding consumers today is desensitizing consumers to valid and credible messaging  -Consensus Guidance sent to the FTC [PDF]

Asking companies to elaborate upon problematic marketing terms such as biodegradable, sustainable and recyclable will give deeper meaning to the terms, while quantifying broad claims like 'made with natural ingredients' and 'this product saves trees' are other ways the Green Products Roundtable hopes to encourage better business practices.

The document is intended to help inform anyone who is attempting to evaluate “what is a credible eco-label”.  The document should be helpful for entities involved in making, interpreting, using, or substantiating environmental claims on products.  These entities include, for example,  product manufacturers, retailers, consumers, institutional and commercial buyers, developers of environmental product standards, eco-label issuers, certifiers, dispute resolution entity, federal government, accreditation bodies, other interested stakeholders, and an authoritative or coordinating entitity.  We expect that the information below would also be used in conjunction with the FTC’s Guidelines for Environmental Marketing Claims   -Accelerating Green Commerce

For a modest annual fee of $175 companies are welcome to sign their Green Marketing Pledge which acts as a promise of compliance to GPR standards.  If a company breaks the pledge (or the FTC guidelines) there is no liability, but their document could make it easier to enforce rulings in false-claims cases.

Over the next year, the GPR will work with stakeholders and eco-labeling programs to pilot test the information and continue advocating for transparency and honesty in environmental marketing materials.  The proposed standards are US-centric for now, but there's plenty of room at the roundtable and an explicit desire to globalize the conversation.  A final version of the report will be available by December and by 2012.

Follow Allison Leahy on twitter or reach her by email.

Image Credits:  Stop the Greenwashing, WStryder via Flickr;  Mighty Mac, Dave_s via Greenwashing Index

Related posts:

1. How’s Consumer Confidence in the Green Sector? New Index Provides Monthly Measure
2. Greenwash Hits the Courtroom: Why the ‘Green Wave’ Now Includes Litigation
3. Communicating Green… without the Greenwash

“The public relations of Tepco is very poor,” said Shijuro Ogata in the Financial Times. “It is very clumsy and they don’t seem to be so knowledgeable.”

Editorials in the Japanese media have also called for more accurate information and greater levels of transparency from the power company.

In the absence of solid information coming from Tepco, the media has had to scramble to put the pieces together, some doing a better job than others. NHK, the Japan Broadcasting Corporation, which has also made public calls for more accurate information, produced the following explainer with an excellent animation of the mechanics behind the reactor problems at Fukushima Daiichi:

Photo: (top) Oldmaison via flickr

Related posts:

1. How Fukushima Has Changed Nuclear Power in Japan
2. Nuclear Radiation Experts: 2,000 Tons Nuclear Materials Spewing Radioactivity for Months
3. Will Fukushima Push Japan Toward A Renewable Future?