Interview with a São Paulo reporter about the billboard ban

(taken from the Ad Busters site) On The Media’s Bob Garfield interviewed Vinicius Galvao, a reporter for Folha de São Paulo, Brazil’s largest newspaper, about São Paulo’s ban on visual pollution.

I’ve seen photos of the city, and it’s amazing to see this sprawling metropolis completely devoid of signage, completely devoid of logos and bright lights and so forth. What did São Paulo look like up until the ban took place?

Vinicius Galvao: São Paulo’s a very vertical city. That makes it very frenetic. You couldn’t even realize the architecture of the old buildings, because all the buildings, all the houses were just covered with billboards and logos and propaganda. And there was no criteria.

And now it’s amazing. They uncovered a lot of problems the city had that we never realized. For example, there are some favelas, which are the shantytowns. I wrote a big story in my newspaper today that in a lot of parts of the city we never realized there was a big shantytown. People were shocked because they never saw that before, just because there were a lot of billboards covering the area.

BG: No writer could have [laughing] come up with a more vivid metaphor. What else has been discovered as the scales have fallen off of the city’s eyes?

VG: São Paulo’s just like New York. It’s a very international city. We have the Japanese neighborhood, we have the Korean neighborhood, we have the Italian neighborhood and in the Korean neighborhood, they have a lot of small manufacturers, these Korean businessmen. They hire illegal labor from Bolivian immigrants.

And there was a lot of billboards in front of these manufacturers’ shops.And when they uncovered, we could see through the window a lot of Bolivian people like sleeping and working at the same place. They earn money, just enough for food. So it’s a lot of social problem that was uncovered where the city was shocked at this news.

BG: I want to ask you about the cultural life of the city, because, like them or not, billboards and logos and bright lights create some of the vibrancy that a city has to offer. Isn’t it weird walking through the streets with all of those images just absent?

VG: No. It’s weird, because you get lost, so you don’t have any references any more. That’s what I realized as a citizen. My reference was a big Panasonic billboard. But now my reference is art deco building that was covered through this Panasonic. So you start getting new references in the city. The city’s got now new language, a new identity.

BG: Well, cleaning up the city’s all well and good, but how do businesses announce to the public that they’re open for business?

VG: That was the first response the shop owners found for this law, because the law bans billboards and also even the windows should be clean. Big banks, like Citibank, and big stores, like Dolce & Gabbana, they started painting themselves with very strong colors, like yellow, red, deep blue, and creating like visual patterns to associate the brand to that pattern or to that color.

For example, Citibank’s color is blue. They’re painting the building in very strong blue so people can see that from far away and they can make an association with that deep blue and Citibank.

BG: Now, the city has said, having undertaken this effort, it will eventually create zones where some outdoor advertising will be permitted. Do you expect São Paulo eventually to just revert to its previous clutter?

VG: Not to revert to previous clutter, but I think like very specific zones, I think they’re going to isolate the electronic billboards in those areas, in the financial center. I don’t think they should put those in residential areas as we had before.

BG: Now, the advertising industry is obviously not happy about this. They’re complaining that they’re deprived of free speech and that it’s costing them jobs and revenue. But is there anyone else in São Paulo who’s unhappy about this? Tell me about the public at large. What’s their view?

VG: It’s amazing, because people on the streets are strongly supporting that. The owner of the buildings, even if they have to renovate a building, they’re strongly supporting that. It’s a massive campaign to improve the city. The advertisers, they complain, but they’re agreeing with the ban. What they say is that we should have created criteria for that to organize the chaos.

BG: Vinicius, thank you very much for joining us.

VG: Thank you so much.

BG: Vinicius Galvao is a reporter for Folha de São Paulo.

Excerpted from “NPR’s On the Media” from WNYC Radio.

Billboards banned in São Paulo

One of the major causes of our current environmental problems is consumer culture and overconsumption. If we all only used what we needed, we wouldn’t be producing so much toxic junk all the time (or throwing it into landfills and the ocean).  One way to slow down overconsumption is to slow down advertising.  That may not have been exactly what the people of São Paulo were thinking, but it’s a nice step anyway.

From Art Threat:

São Paulo Billboard Ban Reclaims Visual Space

Call it unprecedented. Call it daring. Call it what you will, but when I see these images of hollow Brazilian billboards, I am tempted to call São Paulo’s advertising ban simply beautiful.

City officials in this metropolis of 11 million passed legislation banning billboards, neon signs and electronic panels as of the new year, and the effects of the law have begun to sink in. Billboards have been stripped of their commercial clothing, the stark nakedness of the abandoned frames reminding passers by of the once stolen public space now reclaimed.

Corporations and ad agencies are enraged, naturally, leaving boardrooms in a tumultuous tiff. Fortunately, it looks as if they won’t be able to bully or bribe their way out of this one. The advertising law is “a rare victory of the public interest over private, of order over disorder, aesthetics over ugliness, of cleanliness over trash,” author Roberto Pompeu de Toledo wrote in Veja, a weekly newsmagazine. “For once in life, all that is accustomed to coming out on top in Brazil has lost.”

The counterarguments put forth by the corporate world lack even a pinch of persuasion. Marcel Solimeo, chief economist of the Commercial Association of São Paulo, complained about the blow dealt to fellow capitalists in an an interview with International Herald Tribune: “We live in a consumer society and the essence of capitalism is the availability of information about products.” Touché.

While the battle rages on–and while São Paulo’s residents enjoy their newly liberated visual space–Tony de Marco’s photos will take you to the city’s streets so you can see these monuments to reclaimed space for yourself.

And from Ad Busters:

São Paulo: A City Without Ads

In 2007, the world’s fourth-largest metropolis and Brazil’s most important city, São Paulo, became the first city outside of the communist world to put into effect a radical, near-complete ban on outdoor advertising.

by David Evan Harris

In 2007, the world’s fourth-largest metropolis and Brazil’s most important city, São Paulo, became the first city outside of the communist world to put into effect a radical, near-complete ban on outdoor advertising. Known on one hand for being the country’s slick commercial capital and on the other for its extreme gang violence and crushing poverty, São Paulo’s “Lei Cidade Limpa” or Clean City Law was an unexpected success, owing largely to the singular determination of the city’s conservative mayor, Gilberto Kassab.

As the driving force behind the measure, mayor Kassab quelled the rebellion from the advertising industry with the help of key allies amongst the city’s elite. On many occasions, Kassab made the point that he has nothing against advertising in and of itself, but rather with its excess. He explained,

“The Clean City Law came from a necessity to combat pollution … pollution of water, sound, air, and the visual. We decided that we should start combating pollution with the most conspicuous sector – visual pollution.”

Since then, billboards, outdoor video screens and ads on buses have been eliminated at breakneck speed. Even pamphleteering in public spaces has been made illegal, and strict new regulations have drastically reduced the allowable size of storefront signage. Nearly $8 million in fines were issued to cleanse São Paulo of the blight on its landscape.

One sore loser in the battle was Clear Channel Communications. Having recently entered the Brazilian market, the corporation was purchasing a Brazilian subsidiary as well as the rights to a large share of the city’s billboard market. Weeks before the ban took effect, Clear Channel launched a counter-campaign in support of outdoor ads, with desperate slogans that failed to resonate with the masses: “There’s a new movie on all the billboards – what billboards? Outdoor media is culture.”

Although legal challenges from businesses have left a handful of billboards standing, the city, now stripped of its 15,000 billboards, resembles a battlefield strewn with blank marquees, partially torn-down frames and hastily painted-over storefront facades. While it’s unclear whether this cleanup can be replicated in other cities around the world, it has so far been a success in São Paulo: surveys indicate that the measure is extremely popular with the city’s residents, with more than 70 percent approval.

Though materialism and consumerism, along with gang violence will continue to pollute the city of São Paulo, these human dramas may at least begin to unfold against a more pleasant visual backdrop.

Chart the relationships between things

You can use the http://www.gapminder.org website to plot the correlations between different things.  Like pollution and education.  Or population and economic prosperity.  Tons of interesting links.

New Mike Judge animated show about eco family

Here is a link to info on The Goode Family, the new Mike Judge animated show on ABC about a guilt-ridden green family.

http://www.tv.com/video/14181/the-goode-family

Calling BS on Dell’s carbon neutrality

Important article from The Wall Street Journal. There’s a pretty sweet interactive part and some diagrams on the WSJ website (follow the link).

DECEMBER 30, 2008
Green Goal of ‘Carbon Neutrality’ Hits Limit

By JEFFREY BALL

ROUND ROCK, Texas — Computer giant Dell Inc. said this summer that it has become “carbon neutral,” the latest step in its quest to be “the greenest technology company on the planet.”

What that means, and what it doesn’t, may surprise Dell customers and other consumers who have been bombarded with bold environmental promises from major corporations.

In the two years since Al Gore’s movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” helped make climate change a marquee issue, companies from Timberland Co., the shoe maker, to News Corp., the owner of The Wall Street Journal, have promised to become “carbon neutral.”

Dell’s Carbon Footprint

The term may suggest a company has reengineered itself so that it’s no longer adding to the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases scientists say are contributing to climate change. The experience of Dell, one of the few multinational corporations to claim it already has achieved carbon neutrality, shows the reality often falls short of that ideal.

The amount of emissions Dell has committed to neutralize is known in the environmental industry as the company’s “carbon footprint.” But there is no universally accepted standard for what a footprint should include, and so every company calculates its differently. Dell counts the emissions produced by its boilers and company-owned cars, its buildings’ electricity use, and its employees’ business air travel.

In fact, that’s only a small fraction of all the emissions associated with Dell. The footprint doesn’t include the oil used by Dell’s suppliers to make its computer parts, the diesel and jet fuel used to ship those computers around the world, or the coal-fired electricity used to run them.

Dell’s announcement that it had achieved carbon neutrality didn’t go into these details. But in an interview, Dell officials estimate that the emissions produced by its suppliers and consumers each amount to about 10 times the footprint Dell has defined for itself. That means the company is only neutralizing about 5% of the greenhouse gases that go into the making and use of its products.

Moreover, while Dell is improving its energy efficiency, it is claiming carbon neutrality mostly by purchasing environmental “credits.” These are financial instruments that bankroll environmental improvements made by others, such as running wind turbines or planting forests. Dell reasons that these credits cancel out the bulk of its carbon footprint.

Yet some of those improvements would have occurred whether or not Dell invested in them, according to some of the companies involved. That suggests Dell isn’t ridding the atmosphere of as much pollution as it claims.

Dell says it’s trying to set an example by reducing its environmental impact as responsibly and aggressively as it can.

“There are skeptics of carbon neutrality who will say, ‘That’s kind of bogus,’” says Dane Parker, Dell’s director of environment, health and safety. “Instead of using that as an excuse for inaction, we’ve said, ‘There’s a lot you can do.’”

Mr. Parker says it wouldn’t be feasible to include more emissions in the company’s carbon footprint. He says many of Dell’s suppliers haven’t yet calculated their own emissions, and customers’ contributions to the overall pie vary depending on how and where they use their computers. For now, Mr. Parker says, the best Dell can do is design computers that are as energy efficient as possible, and persuade its suppliers to reduce their own emissions. Dell has told its major suppliers that it plans to take their emission levels into account when deciding whether to continue doing business with them.

Regarding the environmental credits Dell has bought, Mr. Parker says they “meet the highest standards” that currently exist.

Indeed, Dell’s program is widely praised by environmental groups as one of the most comprehensive attempts by a major corporation to combat climate change. The strategy mirrors the one that scientists and politicians are now prescribing: boosting energy-efficiency, funding renewable energy and buying carbon credits.

Dell’s drive offers an early road map of the thorny questions companies will face as they attempt the massive emission reductions scientists say are needed to curb global warming. In a global economy with so many interconnected players, figuring out who should be responsible for cutting which emissions — and how to ensure those cuts happen — is dizzyingly complicated. Amid that confusion, Dell’s story illustrates the fuzziness of some of today’s corporate environmental claims.

Some observers say companies pledging carbon neutrality at this point could be jumping the gun. There’s not yet uniform agreement on what should be counted in such programs, says Pankaj Bhatia, a policy expert at the World Resources Institute, a Washington-based environmental group that is working with many corporations, including Dell, to develop a standard for carbon neutrality.

Read more »

TriState Biodiesel

http://www.tristatebiodiesel.com/

This company can heat your building on old french fry oil.

How to make a solar power generator

Here’s a website about how to make your own solar power generator (for less than $300).  I haven’t tried it and don’t know how likely you are to blow yourself up trying it, so proceed at your own risk.

New NYC electronics recycling law

OK, last law post for a while, I promise!  I posted about this law months ago, but here is what’s on the NYC government page:

ALSO SEE New York State Laws for statewide take-back requirements.

ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT RECYCLING AND REUSE ACT: LOCAL LAW 13 (2008)

The Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act (Local Law 13 of 2008) was signed by the mayor on April 1, 2008. The legislation will require any electronics manufacturer that sells products in NYC to accept their products for recycling at no cost to the consumer. Visit NYC Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act: Manufacturer Requirements for more info on how manufacturers must comply with the law.

The products covered include, computers (desktop and laptop), computer monitors, printers, keyboards, mice, TVs, and portable digital music players. Beginning July 1, 2009:

• regardless of whether a purchase is made, manufacturers selling electronics in NYC will be required to accept their own brands of products for recycling.

• if an electronics purchase is made, the manufacturer will be required to accept for recycling any brand of product similar to the one sold.

• manufacturers will be required to inform consumers, at the point of sale, how covered products can later be recycled.

Starting July 1, 2010, the disposal of covered electronic devices within New York City will be banned.

ALSO SEE Electronics recycling, NYC Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act: Info for Consumers and NYC Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act: Manufacturer Requirements.

More on NYC green laws

This government website lists all the NYC eco laws in one place. Spiffy.

Below are some of the more interesting ones.

In October 2007, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed a bill (Introductory Number 582-A) that increased the penalties for those who use a vehicle to unlawfully remove or transport recyclables intended for pickup by the Department of Sanitation or a licensed hauler. The legislation increases the penalties from $100 to $2,000 for a first-time offender and $5,000 for repeat offenders. It also authorizes the DSNY to impound vehicles used in violating the law and arrest individuals caught unlawfully removing recyclables, as well as those who receive stolen recyclables.

PESTICIDE NOTIFICATION LAW: LOCAL LAW 36 (2005)

Effective January 2006, Local Law 36 of 2005 requires sellers of pesticides to follow certain notification procedures. These procedures were enacted to opt into the New York State’s Neighbor Notification Law (go to Pesticides page on NYS DEC’s website for more info). All retailers that sell pesticides must post warning signs stating that it is important to follow the labeled directions on pesticides, follow the notification procedures required by law, and notify neighbors prior to application. All commercial applications of pesticides require that all neighbors and abutters within 150 feet be notified in writing 48 hours prior to application of pesticides. This notice must contain the name, address, and registration number of the person applying the pesticides as well as the date of application, the names of the pesticides used, and any warnings that appear on the labels of the pesticides. Residential applications require application markers be placed surrounding the perimeter of the application location the day of application and for 24 hours following. ALSO SEE: pesticides

PROCUREMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE PRODUCTS: LOCAL LAWS 118-121 & 123 (2005)

In December of 2005 the New York City Council passed a series of local laws, effective January 2007, regarding the establishment of a Director of Environmental Purchasing position (Local Law 118), the purchase and use of environmentally preferable products, specifically within the categories of recycled content (Local Law 121), energy and water efficiency (Local Law 119), hazardous materials (Local Law 120), and green cleaning products (Local Law 123). Purchasing standards are published in Chapter 11 of Title 43 of the Rules of the City of New York. Visit the Mayor’s Office of Contract Services environmentally preferable purchasing page for NYC’s minimum standards for both goods and construction.

GREEN BUILDING LAW: LOCAL LAW 86 (2005)

Effective January 2007, Local Law 86 of 2005 requires most City construction and renovation projects to meet certain standards for green building. Projects that cost over $2,000,000 must achieve a LEED Silver or higher rating. Projects of higher value are subject to more stringent regulations.

PESTICIDE USAGE LAW: LOCAL LAW 37 (2005)

Local Law 37 of 2005 limits the application of pesticides on any property leased or owned by the City. Effective June 2006, no pesticides shall be used that are classified as a Category I Toxic by the EPA or classified anywhere between possible carcinogen and known carcinogen by the EPA. Effective January 2007, any pesticide assessed as a developmental toxin by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment shall not be used by a City Agency. ALSO SEE: pesticides

NYC’s Plastic Bag Recycling Law

Starting 2009 you will notice larger stores offering plastic bag recycling. Because of this new state law:

NEW YORK STATE PLASTIC BAG REDUCTION, REUSE, AND RECYCLING ACT (2008)

On December 13, 2008, Governor Patterson signed New York State’s Plastic Bag Reduction, Reuse, and Recycling Act (Assembly Bill A11725/ Senate Bill 8643-A). This law requires larger retail and chain stores to accept clean plastic bags for recycling starting January 2009 and supercedes NYC’s plastic bag recycling law. The New York State Legislature is expected to amend the state law to incorporate some of the elements of the New York City Plastic Carryout Bag Recycling Law.

The New York State Plastic Bag Reduction, Reuse, and Recycling Act requires any retail establishment that sells products and provides plastic carryout bags, and either has over 10,000 square feet of retail space or 5 or more stores located in the State with over 5,000 square feet of retail space to establish an in-store recycling program.

Plastic bags in those stores are required to say “PLEASE RETURN TO A PARTICIPATING STORE FOR RECYCLING.” Retailers must also stock reusable bags for consumers to purchase.

For further information contact the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

It is unfortunate that this state law supersedes NYC’s own law, which applies to retail spaces of 5,000 feet or more (and a couple of other differences). Because of how tightly things are packed together here, it just makes sense. Hopefully those amendments will go through!

(If you’re Curious, here’s info on the city version of the law:

NYC’s Plastic Bag Recycling Law

Effective July 23, 2008, The New York City Plastic Carryout Bag Recycling Law (Local Law 1 of 2008) requires any retail or wholesale establishment that sells products and provides plastic carryout bags, and either has over 5,000 square feet of retail space or 5 or more stores located in the City to establish an in-store recycling program.

Stores are required to have a collection bin in a visible location that collects all types of plastic film, including shopping bags, dry cleaning bags, and newspaper bags. Retailers must also stock reusable bags for consumers to purchase.

Plastic bags in those stores are required to say “PLEASE RETURN THIS BAG TO A PARTICIPATING STORE FOR RECYCLING.” To allow stores to exhaust their inventory of plastic bags without that message, this provision is effective January 23, 2009.

The law requires stores to arrange for the recycling of the plastic bags and maintain records and report how much plastic is recycled. If requested, plastic bag manufacturers must arrange for this collection. Plastic bag manufacturers whose bags are used in NYC stores are required to develop educational materials to encourage the reduction, reuse and recycling of those bags and provide those materials to stores for distribution. Fines for violations range from $500 to $2,000.)