Please define `eco'

It's overdone. The precarious one-third of a word - `eco', that has come to define character these days.

In reality it has to do with anything that brings about balance and harmony in nature. In market reality it has become a victim of greed by companies out there to outsell their products and brands.

Let's consider three examples.

Eco-housing for instance. What exactly does an eco-house mean? How exactly do you define a Green home? Should we as suckers for image politics get stuck up with that self placating tag and become convinced that the label will somehow thwart off disastrous global climate change?

What is an eco-friendly house? One that minimises energy alone? Global market forces are trying hard to bury under the carpet, effects of mortar and chemical material in construction by merely focussing on energy efficiency.

Ideally, an eco-friendly house should use only local material for its construction, be it bricks, sand, tiles, flooring, or even plastering. If the soil dug up to lay foundation is re-usable as bricks, there should be every effort made to do so, by making cement-and-soil bricks. Solar lighting (the unfortunate poorer word) or home windmills should be made compulsory just as solar water heating is mandatory. Rain-water harvesting should be the norm, not an option. I am not talking of individual homes alone here. The need is urgent, to incorporate mass housing that is eco-friendly.

The unfortunate thing: Builders try to pass off any and every project as `Green' by introducing a token environmental-friendly feature, but sticking to those lawn-scaping structures that do not have even rainwater harvesting to speak of. Not able to believe? Just look out for those glossy Sunday realty ads in the newspaper.

As for products, we have `energy saver' refrigerators, energy `efficient' lighting, washing machines that `conserve' water and what not. Why are we forgetting the the plastic that still goes into making these products? A refrigerator is made of plastic, and so is a washing machine. Hardly any talk is focussed on completely alternative ideas.

We still advertise bath-tubs and showers in the name of luxury and status. Isn't it about time we spoofed at them and reverted to changing the language there. Using a bucket and mug to bathe, or even having a sponge bath instead of a shower should be clamped down as a value, not a choice with that `I am doing you a favour' attitude.

Finally, let's talk of recycling. What exactly is recycling? Does picking up a plastic cover from the supermarket every month and looking at ways and means to reuse it really mean recycling? Why do large scale super bazaars insist on thrusting their branded plastic covers on customers? It may cost them a little more, but they can always give the option between cloth bags and plastic bags! In cities like Mumbai, it is a breather that reselling furniture is a rage even if out of necessity. But to what extent can you reuse a material, specially if its quality is pathetic? And in a largely conservative society, is there any effort at all to introduce recycling as a religious value?

Computer vendors tell me that the flatscreen monitors selling these days have a life of hardly three years as against box monitors of 10 years ago that would last about five years. Where does a refrigerator go after it has outlived its use?

Our problem is chronic. We as humans settle for anything below a certain quality, forgetting that it also means more burden on resources. We believe in the standard business attitude of profiting from a sale with reduction in product quality, rather than selling a product that lasts longer.

You only have to look around at all the cheap material products around to understand.

The starkest bit of such image exploitation is of course those realty ads with magic words like `eco', green and ultra poetic words such as heaven in the hills.