Ruth Carruthers: Eco overload
If I hear the word eco one more time I think I’m going to explode!
I’m learning to drive at the moment and last week my driving instructor asked me if I have ever heard of ‘eco-safe’ driving? Eugh, the term makes my teeth itch.
Eco, which is taken from the word ecology or ecological, is now applied to any product, activity or idea that can in some way be linked to the preservation of the environment. It’s a word so overused recently that its become one of those buzz words or phrases that I put in the same box as ‘multi-tasking’, ‘team player’, and ‘thinking outside the box’. They all make me feel a little queasy when I hear them too often.
I’m sure you don’t need me to point it out to you but 'eco-safe driving' basically means that as you drive, you aim to reduce your carbon footprint. All whilst remembering your safety of course - multi-tasking, if you pardon the expression.
My official DSA Guide to Driving states that during eco-safe driving you need to be constantly scanning all around you, looking out for hazards so you can anticipate problems and take action in good time. It further explains that by doing this you will avoid late braking and harsh acceleration thus reducing your fuel consumption – et voila, you’ve saved the planet! Or not, as the case may be.
But are these instructions not just common sense? I mean, are you not supposed to be looking out for hazards anyway? Plus, reducing your fuel consumption will save you money and that’s common sense too. You might as well call it credit-safe driving.
So what ever happened to common sense then? Isn’t it just common sense not to waste energy? Is it not common sense to find alternatives to finite resources, to pollute less and to live more sustainably? So why do we need to label common sense as eco all the time?
I don’t believe eco-safe driving is a bad idea, and, at the risk of sounding like a Tesco’s advert, I do believe that every little helps. However, such terms lull people into a false sense of security that has them trust such actions are going to dramatically help the world’s state of affairs when they are still driving around in a petrol thirsty car. Further still, by labelling everything as eco, you are only going to engage those who care. But maybe by telling people it makes common sense to lay off the gas cause it makes sense to save fuel and money the concept will reach more people, and the environment will benefit by default.
So what I try to get across to climate cynics when they challenge me with the good old global warming debate is this; maybe human induced climate change is not real or maybe there is nothing we can do about it and I’ve built my entire career around nothing. But what I stress more than anything is that the changes we are making as individuals, as companies and as counties just makes sense at the end of the day, whether you are looking to save energy, money, species, water, resources or just a bit of fuel.
Subscribe to HUCK for six issues
Only £20 (UK) / £43 (EU) / £58 (Rest of the World).
Comments (4)
Please note: Your comment may be held in moderation for approval by an administrator to prevent spamming. This usually doesn't take long, please be patient.
The point she's making is an important one: the more phrases like "eco-this" and "enviro-that" are bandied around in the wrong way, the more people will become overwhelmed with misinformation and greenwash.
These nifty little phrases may help some people sleep better at night, by lulling them into the belief that they're, like, so "eco" and "ethical" and whatnot - but truth be told, greenwash does exactly what it says on the tin: washes away anything green, by watering down the efforts of people who are actually out there sparking real change.
The DSA website calls it "eco safe driving", which is unambiguous and of course completely stupid - there is of course no such thing (yet).