Thursday March 18, 2010 9:40 PM ET
SmartMoney
Published July 9, 2008  |  A A A
Consumer Action by Kelli B. Grant (Author Archive)

Top 5 Green Products Not to Buy

This story was originally published on AOL on June 23, 2008.

AS MANY ENVIRONMENTALLY-FRIENDLY shoppers soon discover, going green costs some serious green.

A 2008 Honda Civic Hybrid, for example, will set you back close to $7,600 more than its conventional counterpart. Meanwhile, a gallon of Safeway-brand organic skim milk costs $2 more than the regular $3.99-a-gallon skim. In some instances, it's easy to argue that the extra expense is worth it: The hybrid Honda, for example, gets an extra 15 miles to the gallon and the organic milk doesn't contain potentially harmful pesticides, antibiotics and synthetic hormones. But that's not the case with all green products. While some are downright overpriced, others have yet to prove that they will beneficially impact the planet.

Here are five green goods that aren't worth the added cash:


At first glance, organic light-emitting diode (OLED) TV screens seem to be the answer to every eco-friendly couch potato's dreams. The super-thin screens contain organic compounds, and use 40% less energy than LCD models. "OLED doesn't require backlight like LCDs do, which lowers its energy consumption," says Dan Havlik, editor for education site Demystifying Digital. "It's definitely the next wave in TVs."

Problem is that OLED is so cutting edge that it's both pricey and unpredictable, cautions Havlik. The thin screens are fragile, with no guarantee that they'll hold up to regular consumer use. It doesn't help that the lone model on the market, Sony's tiny 11-inch XEL-1, costs an eye-popping $2,500, plus about $8 annually in electricity consumption. In comparison, a 42-inch Philips LCD TV costs about $1,300, plus $29 to run. Prices should come down in a few years, once OLED technology becomes more mainstream. In the meantime, stick with LCD and plasma HDTVs. (Read our story to learn more about buying high-def television sets.)


Organic, free-range or other sustainable foods may promise to do wonders for your health, but only at a significant cost to your wallet. (Read our story for tips on how to buy organic without breaking the bank.)The real stomach-churner? With certain items, you're paying more for the label than any real improvement in quality, warns Kimberly Stewart, author of "Eating Between the Lines."

Save your cash on these "green" grocery items:

"Organic" seafood. Talk about a fish tale, says Stewart. Although you'll see the term "organic" slapped on fish at supermarkets and restaurants, there's actually no such thing. "There is no USDA certification for seafood," she says. "There are too many variables you can't control, like water quality." (Other products that earn the government's organic certification are grown without the use of pesticides, fertilizers, hormones and other chemicals or pollutants, and processed without radiation or additives.) Even farmed fish, like salmon, may require wild food sources — another disqualifier because that feed may have been exposed to pesticides and other pollutants.

Low-pesticide produce. Not all fruits and vegetables are laden with pesticides. Some, like broccoli, asparagus, cauliflower and onions, naturally repel pests. "They just don't need a lot of pesticides," says Stewart. Others, like oranges, avocados, bananas and pineapples, have thick inedible peels that provide a nice barrier and significantly reduce consumer exposure to harmful chemicals.

Hormone-free poultry, pork and eggs. Don't pay extra for chicken just because it has a "hormone-free" sticker on the package. The Food and Drug Administration already requires these foods to be hormone free, citing concerns that the animals may not metabolize synthetic hormones quickly, leading to unsafe levels in the edible tissue, says Stewart. (Pork and poultry products typically use antibiotics to spur animal growth, she says. If you're concerned about chemicals making it into your packaged pork and poultry, look for antibiotic-free food instead.)

(Read our story here for more tips on how to decipher green product labeling).

1
2
Next

Follow SmartMoney on Facebook, Twitter & More: Facebook Twitter
Bookmark and Share RSS
Order ReprintsOrder Reprints
User Comments
Posted by: artjones
Green consumerism helps business more than environment, your health or your pocketbook.
Cutting current energy consumption just 20% helps your health and environment more than ?green? consumerism. Madison Avenue?s ?Green? is emotionalizing your health and the environment. The article correctly points out the costs and hollowness. Your dollars are votes cast in the market place.
Use less gasoline and cut back on meat and fish. Whether conservative or liberal, it makes political and economic sense. If you have to buy a car, buy one tha gets more than 30 miles a gallon. Buying a hybrid is OK if you have money to burn. If you can not reduce your meat consumption, buy the more expensive meats.
Buy green after you know it is helpful and makes economic sense.
Posted by: cre814me
Cemetary - I Live in the Southeast, the fastest growing part of the country. I lived in the midwest, and true, the associations are somewhat less common there, but then so is population growth in many, not all parts. To refer to this area as snobs, it sounds to me as if you hail from the part of the country where the newcomers causing all of this come from! The developments are hundreds of homes at time, and yes, everyone of them has some sort of building covenant! I am glad that you found something with out, but it sounds like you are very out of touch with major housing trends. BTW, I live in a city that still is building new homes, top 20 in population, top ten best places to live, etc. Hardly the 'tiny little corner' that you refer to it as. But then again, stating where you are from, explains a lot.
Posted by: widesmile
I think it's perposterous when someone says they're going green. Where does the energy come from to make solar panels, cooling coils, anti-freeze, pumps, and dig holes. Instead Save money - Dig a hole and throw your money in. It will be more green and decrease inflationary pressures. What you call a win-win.
Posted by: tnapolitano
With the combination of skyrocketing energy costs and financing options, many people are no longer interested in a 10 or 20 year 'pay back' period. The new goal for alternative energy systems such at PV solar, thermal solar, geothermal, etc. it net positive cash flow.

Here's the question. If I buy a $25,000 solar system and get $10,000 in rebates or tax incentives, can I finance that for less than I'm saving in monthly electricity costs? For example, if the monthly cost to finance my solar system is $150 but I save $200 in electricity costs, that's $50 per month in my pocket. Plus you have the added benifit of your home's value increasing.

Another example is the new natural gas furnace I'm putting in my house. It's going to save me an average of $200 per month. After rebates, it will cost me $5800 to install. The payback here is very easy - just over two years. But you could really the cash-flow position if I had to finance it.

Tony Napolitano
Publisher, ...(Read more of this comment)
Posted by: 73Cap
'Other products that earn the government's organic certification are grown without the use of pesticides, fertilizers, hormones and other chemicals or pollutants, and processed without radiation or additives'

Huh? Might want to read this: http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5068682&acct=nopgeninfo .

Especially paragraph 205.606.

I'm too lazy to hunt it down right now, but there's a pretty long list of pesticides farmers are allowed to use on crops and still have them certified as organic, every single one of them both a 'chemical' and a 'pollutant'.

Advertisements
 
Retrieving data...