USA: Wal-Mart News & Discussion

[Sherman Cahal]

Wal-Mart, green? They seemingly not go together too well.

Wal-Mart is much greener than many other big-box retailers, and many businesses and industries in general. Their philosophy is, if it makes fiscal sense to go 'green', then Wal-Mart will adopt it as policy.

For instance, adding skylights in Wal-Mart stores not only saved electricity costs during the day, but it introduced natural lighting into the warehouse which actually spurred customers to linger longer and purchase more. Some stores, especially in the southwest, feature solar-paneled or green roofs. Wal-Mart was also the first major retailer to stock en-mass CFL bulbs, moving the incandescent to the rear -- which all but brought CFLs into the mainstream and at price points that were much lower than previous. I could go on, and as much as I rag against big-box retailers, they are one of the best ways to promote such a large change.

I hope the labeling process goes well. It'd be nice to see it adopted by other retailers.

At Wal-Mart, Labeling to Reflect Green Intent
By STEPHANIE ROSENBLOOM, New York Times, July 15, 2009

Shoppers expect the tags on Wal-Mart items to have rock-bottom prices. In the future they may also have information about the product’s carbon footprint, the gallons of water used to create it, and the air pollution left in its wake.

For more, click the link

[rockandroller]

How green is it to import the vast majority of your products from China?  I'm not impressed.

[kingfish out of water]

I shop Made in the USA as often as possible, but two facts remain: 1) Somethings simply aren't made in the USA anymore, and 2) China owns so much of our debt that our economies are essentially one.

Wal*Mart seems to be showing an earnest effort to use their size to influence the larger picture. I welcome the new labeling standards if for no other reason it applies positive pressure to manufacturers to improve their efficiencies. I'd like to think it will result in smarter consumers, too.

[Etheostoma Caeruleum]

Wal-Mart is not "green" No matter what they do to appear so, 'green and Wal-Mart' do not belong in the same sentence. There are so many reasons why, as someone just posted one above, which helps increase need for fuel. It is all a lot of green-washing, when they suggest they are green through clever PR. They are not the only one who does this, but in retail, indeed the biggest, so hence they get the most attention.

Scenario: You clear 60 acres of  woods and functioning wetlands...to build a building that supposedly operates 'green' but still adds to the overall demand for electric, especially when they run 24 hours. The fact is, you have offset any gain with the destruction of habitat...the probable stampeding and undermining of existing businesses..both at the middle man level and retail.....and the imminent perpetuation of more sprawl, with Wal-Mart usually the main course, flanked by Lowes, Applebees, and a host of other clone zone auto dependent establishments.

If they really wanted to be 'green' they more often would utilize existing lands already built upon, and stop using the "its cheaper to build on wooded area" excuse. Cheaper for who in the long run? Build on brownfields (such as steelyards) retro-fit existing abandon plaza buildings that can be saved...Do away with the sea of pavement, stop the predatory pricing and deceptiveness.... How about doing away with plastic bags, period... Stop carrying sooooo much junk food that increases demand for sugar, makes everyone FAT..and  hence resulting in draining wetlands for sugarcane production.... Stop building one on every corner of every county whether it is needed or not just to keep shareholders happy.....leaving some to close and communities needing to fill that big ugly empty void, and the myriad of other voids they often leave in their wake.

Oh man.. I could go on and on about listing all the variables as to why they are as far from 'green' as you can get. As an avid conservationist, I dreaded the day when companies like this would make a joke and mockery of the green movement. Just like the move I Heart Huckabees! And, as someone in sales/marketing for years... I tend to smell the crap when its lurking. Totally hate this place and every time I pass one, I feel my IQ dipping, waistline burgeoning...and a sudden urge to buy a trailer. I guess I am the selfish guy who likes to keep the local family owned businesses running, instead of helping whoooosh all the money out of here.

[Etheostoma Caeruleum]

I shop Made in the USA as often as possible, but two facts remain: 1) Somethings simply aren't made in the USA anymore, and 2) China owns so much of our debt that our economies are essentially one.

Wal*Mart seems to be showing an earnest effort to use their size to influence the larger picture. I welcome the new labeling standards if for no other reason it applies positive pressure to manufacturers to improve their efficiencies. I'd like to think it will result in smarter consumers, too.

Hardly anything is made here exclusively anymore.. Best you can do is 'buy local' You always hear 'buy American' but you rarely hear 'buy local'

[kingfish out of water]

Buying from local growers especially is about the single best thing you can do with your money. Even the big grocery chains are starting to source locally. A great example of how simple purchasing decisions can change the bigger picture. Even with all of Wal*Mart's other evils (and there are many), this (along with their support of a public healthcare option) is an example of how they can actually be an agent of positive change.

By the way, you want a real shopper's challenge? Try buying American AND Union made. Not so easy anymore.

[Etheostoma Caeruleum]

Buying from local growers especially is about the single best thing you can do with your money. Even the big grocery chains are starting to source locally. A great example of how simple purchasing decisions can change the bigger picture. Even with all of Wal*Mart's other evils (and there are many), this (along with their support of a public healthcare option) is an example of how they can actually be an agent of positive change.

By the way, you want a real shopper's challenge? Try buying American AND Union made. Not so easy anymore.

I agree... It goes not only for produce but other products as well. But people are so easily lured and lulled by the concept that cheaper/bigger is always better. Often they find in the long run, it is more costly. In at least my business, I found that the guy who always wanted to spend the least..spent the most in the long run, as he (Joe consumer) does not look at factors after point of sale. He will often run 10 miles spending $10. in fuel to save a dime. Buy a product that will be in a landfill in a year. Problem is, these days we often only have enough cash on hand to make the short term purchase.

On teaming up with some of these entities...... Personally, I would rather not have them be too powerful in being the agents of change because when they throw some money  into the hat, they want to call the shots....and this often undermines the true missions of groups with which they wish to engage. Gotta be careful about that. This is the same scenario that has happened to the organic movement...and small farmers who started this idea, saw it coming. 

PR/bottom drives their interest. It is never about altruism, and that is ok in its own right....but this is why when I worked on a river conservation team, I and others actually were very cautious when a large entity was wanting work with us suddenly out of the blue...  We felt we would have lost our true vision, mission, and have to answer to their interests if their name was going to be on the headlines. Instead, we sought out several diverse local businesses. These days, the group did cave into the temptation of money..and not the whole true mission of the group has been severely compromised. I resigned because I do not feel we have to keep having these big guys ride into town like the Lone Ranger and save the day...they fall, we all fall when we build an economy solely around them, making us more co-dependent. Diversity in the economy breeds stability.

[kingfish out of water]

When a company like Wal*Mart (and there aren't many) moves even an inch in the right direction, it's a good thing. I will continue not shopping there, but I'll cheer quietly from the sidelines.

[Sherman Cahal]

Buying from local growers especially is about the single best thing you can do with your money. Even the big grocery chains are starting to source locally. A great example of how simple purchasing decisions can change the bigger picture. Even with all of Wal*Mart's other evils (and there are many), this (along with their support of a public healthcare option) is an example of how they can actually be an agent of positive change.

By the way, you want a real shopper's challenge? Try buying American AND Union made. Not so easy anymore.

It's actually almost impossible. I went one week buying American-made products, and I was constantly having to hunt for labels. While some products claim they may be made in the US, they could be assembled in China but have the labeling applied in the states -- perfectly legal.

Simply put, Wal-Mart and other retailers is a necessity for many. As much as I dislike Wal-Mart, I understand that they offer vastly lower prices than many local retailers -- I can get my favorite non-scented all-natural soap at a local retailer for around $3, whereas Wal-Mart will have it for $2. I was surprised at how cheap it was to shop at Wal-Mart, Target, etc. in comparison to many of the products I buy at local retailers. If I was pinching pennies, I'd go to Wal-Mart in a heartbeat, but I enjoy buying and shopping local and going to locally-owned stores.

For me, there is a social benefit for that, but not everyone sees it that way.

Of course, Wal-Mart and larger retailers have economies of scale -- they can push for lower prices at the supply and manufacturing level, and push for various efficiencies throughout, and have been vastly successful so far. I took quite a few courses regarding supply-chain management, and it's amazing how efficient and orderly Wal-Mart's supply chain is. They knew the instant that a product was tagged with the RFID chip at Colgate, how long it would take to get to a distribution center, how long it would remain at the center (less than a few days, since inventory = money), and how long it would be shipped and sold. It was all electronic and something to be admired.

K-Mart's distribution, on the other hand, is archaic, full of paperwork and grossly slow. There is a reason why K-Mart is no longer a dominant retailer in the states.

[Etheostoma Caeruleum]

Buying from local growers especially is about the single best thing you can do with your money. Even the big grocery chains are starting to source locally. A great example of how simple purchasing decisions can change the bigger picture. Even with all of Wal*Mart's other evils (and there are many), this (along with their support of a public healthcare option) is an example of how they can actually be an agent of positive change.

By the way, you want a real shopper's challenge? Try buying American AND Union made. Not so easy anymore.

It's actually almost impossible. I went one week buying American-made products, and I was constantly having to hunt for labels. While some products claim they may be made in the US, they could be assembled in China but have the labeling applied in the states -- perfectly legal.

Simply put, Wal-Mart and other retailers is a necessity for many. As much as I dislike Wal-Mart, I understand that they offer vastly lower prices than many local retailers -- I can get my favorite non-scented all-natural soap at a local retailer for around $3, whereas Wal-Mart will have it for $2. I was surprised at how cheap it was to shop at Wal-Mart, Target, etc. in comparison to many of the products I buy at local retailers. If I was pinching pennies, I'd go to Wal-Mart in a heartbeat, but I enjoy buying and shopping local and going to locally-owned stores.

For me, there is a social benefit for that, but not everyone sees it that way.

Of course, Wal-Mart and larger retailers have economies of scale -- they can push for lower prices at the supply and manufacturing level, and push for various efficiencies throughout, and have been vastly successful so far. I took quite a few courses regarding supply-chain management, and it's amazing how efficient and orderly Wal-Mart's supply chain is. They knew the instant that a product was tagged with the RFID chip at Colgate, how long it would take to get to a distribution center, how long it would remain at the center (less than a few days, since inventory = money), and how long it would be shipped and sold. It was all electronic and something to be admired.

K-Mart's distribution, on the other hand, is archaic, full of paperwork and grossly slow. There is a reason why K-Mart is no longer a dominant retailer in the states.

Well, we will be paying the high cost of low price. Let's welcome the latest edition...the Emerald Ash Borer. I have not been to a Wal-Mart in 10 years, nor intend to go, for life...... and this is not from a snobbish standpoint, it is purely economic. I am not as rich as Donald Trump either...But, have proven to myself that this is not a necessity.

It is important to challenge the myth and real belief in the mind that these entities are 'needed' , when the need was created, and the more it is bought into, the more it will be impossible to buy "local" anything. I am not condemning anyone for making that choice. But the only time I would question it is when they complain about nothing local being available...and when you illustrate to them how this came to be...and yet they still chose to be a part of the cycle...and then complain more. It is interesting to see what Sprawl-Busters says about this sort of thing...

http://www.sprawl-busters.com/caseagainstsprawl.html

[rockandroller]

Magically, people "afforded" plenty of goods before Wal-Mart came in and undercut everyone.  Everyone thinks they can't "afford" certain things but the truth is, they don't want to give up their big house or boat or whatever credit they are living on in order to actually afford the soap.

In point of fact, if you're REALLY about pinching pennies and can't afford the $3 soap, you could make your own soap.  Wal-mart's business practices in forcing the soap manufacturer to sell the soap there for $2 when they really need to sell it at $3 to stay alive is eventually going to cause them to close down and you'll have to buy the Wal-Mart brand soap for $2 instead.  You're not accomplishing anything but killing more business by giving money to a company that bullies and blackmails companies into selling their goods to them at such a low price that they will eventually go out of business if they agree to the terms, or at the very least have to lay off quite a few people to accommodate their lower profit margin.

[Ram23]

Wal-Mart is better run, and is now taking more effective steps toward functioning sustainably than our federal government.

I know that will hurt some of you, and I'm sorry.

Anyways, the argument about the economics could go on forever, and the anti-capitalist and "hillbilly" stereotypes that are already all over this thread aren't going to be put down, but staying on topic Wal-Mart has been making very good moves recently in terms of functioning sustainability, and I'm glad someone pointed it out here.

[goteenb]

I am very pro capitalist and as a result pro WalMart. They give you the cheapest, most direct line to suppliers products.

If you want to affect how environmentally friendly the products you buy are, you should really consider hitting at the root of the problem and not so much at the tippy top branch, which is your local WalMart store. The reason their products are so cheap, but so damaging to the environment, etc, it because we set up a business framework under which this is legal and profitable for them.

Change THAT, and we will see what business model can wring out the highest profit and survive the best. Perhaps a smaller scale, more distributed retail structure can make sense in the future, but only a future where we as a society tweak the rules a bit.

The best way to do this is probably a combination of taxation and regional land use laws, and these are discussed like every topic I can think of ad nauseum in other posts. My only point is, WalMart is not the problem in any way shape or form. WalMart is a product of OUR society, and we can change the product only by changing the society.

Oh and to be a little more specific:
-Change land use policy so that the cost of clearing a field or wetland has to be offset in a meaningful way, making it more expensive (maybe prohibitively expensive in some marginal cases) to do so
-Redistribute (not increase) taxes to affect social choices in a direction demanded by more and more people. Yes folks, we're talking about higher fuel taxes
-Stop incentives for big boxes to come into little town usa, let them do it on their own if it will drive a profit naturally, lets not pay for our own environmental meltdown
-Do a better job monetizing the cost of ongoing environmental impact, and build this into the corporate tax structure. For example, you may eliminate a certain percentage of energy expenses from tax deductions, or charge ongoing access fees to cover road and utility costs for suburban centers

[C-Dawg Njaim]

You're not accomplishing anything but killing more business by giving money to a company that bullies and blackmails companies into selling their goods to them at such a low price that they will eventually go out of business if they agree to the terms, or at the very least have to lay off quite a few people to accommodate their lower profit margin.

Bingo. Quite a few suppliers in Ohio have experience with this...