A lush lawn perfect for a barefoot stroll.
A full, flourishing tree one can seek refuge under for shade.
New leaves shimmering in the sunlight and bouncing with the breeze.
No one can argue that any of these visuals aren’t green.
But how about a naturally derived pesticide product? Or a water-saving irrigation system? Or a landscape company that switched all of its gas-guzzling vehicles to hybrid money-savers? Are any of these green? What about a pesticide that has limited watering-in requirements and a longer residual, hence saving water use on a client’s property and the gas to return multiple times to take care of a recurring problem? Are any one of these greener than another or is it greener to combine all three?
It isn’t news that words like “green,” “environmental” and “sustainability” have gone main stream in a swift and sizeable way. As a result, these buzzwords have taken on whatever meaning a person’s political philosophy sees fit to assign. To some, green means continuing to do what the industry has always done – planting and preserving green spaces. To others, it means sustaining the quality of life on this planet, which might involve rethinking the entire monoculture of the American lawn. Yet more insist “green” is just the current marketing fad, while another percentage feels the term implies a regulatory headache involving hard-to-understand LEED standards that aren’t really written for the landscape industry, costly business changes and meddlesome environmental impact studies.
The point is a lot of ideas and practices can fall under the “green” heading, and that heading directly affects the landscape industry.
But amid the consistent flood of headlines – everyday another venerable brand commits to a sustainable future – the confusion over what’s really green continues to mount.
“What could be greener than being a landscaper?” asks Andrew Aksar, simply, as the president of Outdoor Finishes in Walkersville, Md.
“Yes, our industry is somewhat naturally green,” says Sarah Lampert of Gothic Grounds Management, Valencia, Calif. “We do plant and replace trees, plants and shrubs and that improves the environment. However, the green movement involves much more than simply planting green material in the ground.”
“If you are not working to become more sustainable in the green industry, you will become obsolete,” guarantees Andrew Blanchford, principal and general manager, Blanchford Landscape Contractors, Bozeman, Mont.
From basic deduction to discouragement to demand. Ask any three contractors about green and the conversation circles in this same fashion into spells of sentiments.
There’s no questioning the impact outdoor spaces can have on today’s greener world, but one can’t help wonder with each day’s new corporate commitment to environment-improving practices whether the green movement has really reached a tipping point and if the landscape industry is on the bandwagon or lagging far behind.
CAUSE & EFFECT. Looking at current economic times paints a clearer picture of why there is increased pressure to go green.
First, there is carbon – a global pollutant. Carbon footprint describes the residue of carbon dioxide left by one’s everyday actions – a direct result of the products and services they consume and the fossil fuels necessary to produce them. The U.S. produces nearly a quarter of the world’s greenhouse gases each year (carbon dioxide making up the greatest portion – 72 percent – of these), which contributes to global warming.
The landscape industry, along with its D.I.Y. counterparts, has been accused of contributing to carbon output with its steady use of mowers and other gas-powered equipment, as well as fertilizers, which are produced from urea, a natural gas-based ingredient.
In a July 31st story in the Oregon Statesman Journal, John McEvoy, an Oregon Toxics Alliance volunteer, cited U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data, saying a traditional gas-powered lawn mower produces as much air pollution as 43 new cars each driven 12,000 miles. He also pointed out that more than 17 million gallons of gas are spilled each year refueling lawn and garden equipment – more oil than was spilled by the Exxon Valdez.
Steve Cissel reads a story like this and says, “Houston, we have a problem!” The chief executive officer, 10-20 Media, as well as an owner of an 800-acre turf and sod farm in Maryland, adds, “so, do you think our ‘green industry’ has an image problem, a public relations problem and an infrastructure problem? You bet.”
Information attacking all areas of the landscape industry, like that reported in the Statesman Journal – whether factual or not – is growing, creating not only confusion, but a perception problem as well. Even those who do industry work wonder if these stories have any bearing.
“This industry has to be one of the worst for overuse of power equipment,” says Andrew Garulay, owner, Yarmouthport Design Group, Yarmouthport, Mass. “We have guys buying mulch blowers for use on small residences, and gas-powered spreaders and wheel barrows – it is out of control.”
Greener by Design’s Richard Heller tends to agree. “We, the industry, conflict with the green movement in that we use equipment that is very polluting,” says the owner of the Pelham, N.Y.-based company.
“We do burn a lot of fossil fuels,” Blanchford adds.
Based on these assumptions, if Lampert had to estimate the industry’s carbon footprint, “I would gather it is fairly high,” she says.
Though the true carbon footprint the industry leaves behind is not known, there is some new data available. In an Outdoor Power Equipment Institute-sponsored report titled “Technical Assessment of the Carbon Sequestration Potential of Managed Turfgrass in the United States,” Dr. Ranajit Sahu, an environmental and energy expert and university instructor based in Southern California, estimates typical mower carbon emissions are 0.18 Mg C/ha/yr for riding mowers and 0.23 Mg C/ha/yr for walk-behind mowers. This data is based on weekly mowing for a period of nine months that required typical fuel use (1 gallon per acre for walk-behind mowers and .75 gallon per acre for riding mowers).
While this proves carbon emissions exist from mower use, it “may be offset slightly by the fact that we do plant trees and plants,” Lampert points outs.
And she’s right. Sahu’s study found healthy turfgrass can capture up to four times more carbon from the air than is produced by the engines of today’s lawn mowers.
“When you take care of your lawn and promote a healthy root system, your lawn acts as a carbon sink, pulling and storing away carbon,” Sahu says. “The key is to actively manage lawns to improve their carbon intake, and not let them ‘go to seed’ and into a ‘dormant state.’”
“Even companies with the least green practices in our industry virtually wipe out their carbon footprint with the work they do,” Heller adds. “Just look at the volume of plant material we plant and sustain. It’s a no-brainer.”
Some industry professionals are calling this combatant to the carbon footprint the industry’s “oxygen footprint.” “We grow, sell, install and maintain plants that consume carbon dioxide and release oxygen in a process called photosynthesis,” explains Cissel, who is also the creator of OxygenFootprint.org, a new site dedicated to raising money to drive the oxygen footprint messaging into the minds of consumers. “Our industry’s products and services leave an ‘oxygen footprint’ that consumes the ‘carbon footprint’ of modern society while producing the oxygen that sustains life.”
Though the Oxygen Footprint initiative is still new – it was announced in July of this year – the industry is mixed on whether the term can really be “the carbon footprint antidote.”
“I do believe the oxygen footprint is a good counterpart to the carbon footprint, however both terms for the layman can be tough to understand as to how they’re calculated and what they mean,” Lampert shares. “There needs to be more education and easily understood terms so more people can understand both concepts.”
“I think it’s better to stick with the terms the media is currently using,” agrees Heller. “First, let’s get data on our carbon footprint, and while we are boasting we can talk about all that good oxygen we help facilitate.”
REACTIVE VS. PROACTIVE. Despite turf’s proven benefits in offsetting carbon output, some in the industry don’t think it’s fair for a landscape company to use this fact alone to wave the “green” flag.
“There is a tendency for landscape companies to take the attitude that because they are planting trees and shrubs they are already ‘green,’” says Kelly Duke, vice president, pre-construction services, ValleyCrest Landscape Development, Calabasas, Calif. “The fact of the matter is landscape companies are just as mercenary as any other business. If anything, it is their customers who are ‘green’ for having hired them. The nursery and landscape industries need to face up to the fact that for them to be green they need to individually and collectively embrace sustainable practices at their own places of business.”
Blanchford agrees, pointing to a growing term used to describe companies that are falsely touting their services as green. “I think promoting chemically sustained lawns as green because they absorb carbon could be considered ‘green washing,’” he says. “I think [the industry] is naturally green because were it not for our industry, there would be fewer open and green spaces in and around the built environment, and plants and open spaces are good for everyone. I also think we have some practices that degrade natural and native areas.”
For these reasons, Garulay is one of the nearly 50 percent of industry professionals who think the industry is either on par or way behind other industries in its quest to be more sustainable, according to Lawn & Landscape research. Blanchford points to construction, architecture and hospitality as industries that are ahead of the landscape industry in the green movement.
“It seems we all find reasons to believe we are doing positive things no matter how blatantly opposite they might be,” Garulay says. “Twenty years ago we’d run a hoe through a planting bed to keep it weed free. We’d cut out sod with spades, grub hoes and sometimes sod cutters when we made planting beds. Now almost no one pulls a weed or uses a hoe. They don’t even remove sod. It is spray, plant and cover with mulch. I’m not saying it is right or wrong, but I am saying that proclaiming the green industry as leading the environmental movement is inaccurate. If we as an industry believe we are leaders in the environmental movement, what industry would think it was not?”
In addition to failing to keep up with best practices, Heller believes landscape contractors made the mistake of “fighting environmentalists when we should have embraced them, and as a result the public has a less than savory opinion of us.”
Denver-Colo.-based industry consultant Jim Huston has a lot of reservations about the green concept because he thinks separating the whole issue from politics and personal philosophies is extremely challenging. “What’s happening is it’s a Wild, Wild West situation – a Gold Rush mentality. People are jumping on the green bandwagon,” he says. “When the economy is so lousy, people are looking for anything to get a marketing edge. And there’s so much bad science out there. People with personal agendas are manipulating the data. Contractors are manipulating marketing items to portray themselves as green when the motivation behind why they are going there might not be as pure as we think.”
In fact, when asked whether the industry is advocating the trend toward sustainability, contractors had mixed reviews.
Garulay sees contractors pursuing environmental restoration jobs to sell product and labor but not to create opportunities. “We don’t’ create the demand, we just meet it,” he says. “Niches are developing for ‘no lawn’ yards, native plants, xeriscaping, organic fertilizers, natural pesticides, and such. There are people marketing to those niches. We as an industry are not directing that change, but just responding to it. The environmental activists and lobbyists are steering our industry much more than we are. They are doing it by educating people with a slant toward their agenda, scaring people, guilting people, and getting a lot of regulations passed. When it rains, we sell umbrellas.”
Lampert agrees. “It seems like the industry reacts to issues rather than being proactive,” she says. “Practices pertaining to water usage, for example, aren’t implemented until it is mandated by some governing agency.”
As an industry, “we are behind because we have been slow to look for better ways to do what we do,” Heller says, pointing out that contractors tend to lead with their chins. “We failed to get involved with the U.S. Green Building Council when they created LEED – consequently, LEED products are missing our viewpoint and expertise. We failed to brand our industry as sustainable even while questionable not-for-profits are selling people the opportunity to plant trees they will never see to offset their carbon footprints. We are only just starting to supply the industry with education on ‘green’ basics like managing storm water, reducing water use, etc.”
As far as the green movement is concerned, Tom Fochtman, co-owner of Denver-based CoCal Landscape, believes “we somewhat missed the boat… the boat is in the harbor, heading out to sea.
“The whole green thing as it exists today in our industry is a bit of a fallacy,” he adds. “There are some companies doing some great things, and green industry contractors should carry the gavel as the ‘stewards of our outdoor environment,’ but we have a very long way to go. It is very hard to embrace, implement and really practice all the ‘green’ concepts available today, while operating our businesses in a very difficult economic and immigration unfriendly environment. It’s very tough to walk the talk.”
CHAMPIONS OF CHANGE? Before landscape contractors can learn to “walk the talk,” they have to understand sustainability and how it can apply to their businesses. Ultimately, this is hard to do this if no one knows what being “green” really is to the industry. The challenge is “sustainability is not a black and white issue,” Blanchford says. “There are many new ideas that are not proven. And what is sustainable in one market might be different in another due to locally available materials, recycling facilities, etc.”
For Cissel, being green is not banning all herbicides and insecticides, but “influencing the thinking toward the proper, environmentally conscious use of the resources we have at our fingertips – from plants to pavers to herbicides to insecticides to lighting to fuels, etc.”
To Lampert’s company, “green is being environmentally friendly/conscious in all aspects of our business, conserving our natural resources, protecting our environment and using recycled/organic products that enhance our environment without hurting or taking away from it.”
Blanchford thinks “sustainability” is the true reason to go green. “It means sustaining ourselves and our quality of life on this plant. I think sustainability in our industry is thinking very differently than we have in the past.”
And for others who might not have figured out what is “green” to them, Fochtman has a good point: “We are paying $5 for a gallon of gas, food costs continue to rise and water is becoming more expensive. We are being forced into becoming a much more conservation-minded society, and it’s all good.”
One of the big challenges many businesses list for becoming more sustainable is cost. According to a recent survey of 2,500 business owners, conducted by Office Depot, more than half of the respondents said they wanted to make their businesses greener but feared the move wouldn’t be financially wise. Most cited upfront investment costs as their greatest concern.
While changing business practices always adds costs initially, the end goal of becoming more sustainable is to save resources and, consequently, money. According to Duke, some initial cost reductions to going green come from the potential utility, waste stream and routine maintenance expense savings. He also says many sustainability strategies qualify for utility company or public agency tax incentives or rebate programs.
George Pacheco thinks being green should be done within the parameters of operating a profitable business, particularly in today’s tougher economy. “How the climate is now, we have to do everything to shave money and make money,” says the president, Pacheco Brothers Gardening, Hayward, Calif. “I don’t see the cost coming down, but I do see more people doing it as the right thing to do.”
And greener does cost the customer more, he adds, sharing an example. “In certain California cities, we’re required to use newer blowers that are quieter and have reduced emissions so there is a cost to transfer to that new equipment,” he says. “In other cities, they don’t want blowers used at all, so instead of the 10 minutes it takes to blow grass clippings off of driveways and walkways, we are spending an hour hosing down those areas and using a broom to eliminate debris. Somewhere somebody pays for that.”
As more people adopt green practices and demand rises, costs will naturally drop, many believe. The challenge today is suffering through record-high gas prices and a tough housing market in addition to incorporating green initiatives, Huston says.
Additionally, many landscape professionals say the quest to be greener would be less of an uphill battle if the industry could come together to define and teach it, eliminating confusion and ultimately pushing the industry ahead in the sustainability movement.
“It would level the playing field if we had guidelines and would be fairer to company owners who are legitimately attempting to go green,” Lampert says. “It’s difficult to lead a movement when competitors aren’t embracing these practices. We could end up pricing ourselves out of the market.”
When seeking organizations to champion this initiative, many point to industry associations as good places to start.
“The American Society of Landscape Architects has some traction that is being implemented as we build new landscapes,” Fochtman says. “Water is becoming a more precious commodity and organizations like the Irrigation Association are doing some great things in the area of conservation. But The Professional Landcare Network and the state associations will really need to stay the course to show their membership how to truly operate as a ‘green’ organization.”
Sustainability practices are certainly on PLANET’s radar. Both PLANET and the Professional Grounds Management Society added green tracks to their conferences at The Green Industry & Equipment Expo, being held Oct. 22-25 in Louisville, Ky. Also, PLANET is channeling an upcoming focus group and subsequent report on green initiatives for the green industry.
Could PLANET also develop a green certification program for service providers? “We don’t know yet,” shares PLANET president Jason Cupp, who is also chief executive officer of Highland Outdoor, Olathe, Kan. “We’re monitoring the situation. Our certification just went through a strategic plan a year ago so I don’t know of anything on the horizon in terms of a green certification. But as it becomes more important to homeowners, it’s going to need to be addressed.”
While companies across all industries seem to be adopting green initiatives overnight, Heller knows this takes a business some time to do right. “We have spent 10 years getting where we are [with our green practices],” he says. “As long as companies in the green industry make the commitment to change, and implement it in bite-sized doses with regularity, then they are doing more than 90 percent of the American population.”
Duke concurs. “Trying to do too much too soon and failing early can lead one to abandon one’s efforts under the belief that they are unachievable. It is best to start out slow, establish benchmarks for current energy use and then implement incremental changes over time.”
In determining true sustainability initiatives, one thing is certain, Fochtman says: “It will take a total commitment on the part of business owners to really become ‘green’ contractors.”
“Folks, our best days are right in front of us,” Cissel adds. “It can be average or it can be great. It is literally our choice.” LL