The clock continues to tick on the release of final revised Green Marketing Guides by the FTC.   Predicting the timing of such things is invariably almost entirely guesswork but we can’t help but speculate that the prospect of an upcoming close Presidential election and possible turnover at the top of the FTC depending upon how you all (and many others) vote may spur the current Commission to get something out sometime this year.

Meanwhile green marketing claims continue to proliferate and the creativity of some of these astounds us.  We thought no one could top the solicitation we got from a car company urging us to spend a couple hundred dollars to update our GPS map or risk destroying the planet from all the extra carbon our cars would emit while we’re driving around completely lost (and in at least one of our cases refusing to ask for directions.)

However, we just recently stumbled upon “ergonomically shaped waste reducing soap.”  We can’t really find fault with the advertising.  They follow all the rules in that they label the product as “green” but then go on to specifically explain that the product is green because it reduces waste (for good measure the soap is also cruelty free and the package is made from recycled materials and printed with soy based inks.)   But what made us scratch our heads a bit is the “waste” that’s been reduced.  The soap is hollow in the middle (click here) which according to the manufacturer eliminates the waste from the “unused center of traditional soap bars.”  And come to think of it, we do often waste the center of soap bars but is that because of something inherent in the center of bars of soap or because at some point the soap just gets so small we don’t feel like dealing with it anymore?   If it’s the latter then won’t the same thing happen with the “waste reducing” soap?  And if it does is this something the FTC should work itself into a lather over or is this one of those instances where consumers can take a relatively inexpensive product home, try it out and if they end up still not using part of the soap, conclude that they just spent more money to get less soap and resolve not to do so again.