SCIENCE:Retrofit options that provide only limited benefit are still being bought . . . when putting on a woolly jumper could deliver the same comfort benefit for free

IT PAYS TO be green these days. We are told that the global market for "environmental" goods and services will be worth a hefty €500 million ($700 billion) during 2010. And we are also informed that going after this pot of gold could generate 80,000 jobs here in the coming years.

These figures are in the Report of the High Level Action Group on Green Enterprise. Are they optimistic? Almost certainly, but that doesn't mean there is no market. Being green used to be about tofu and sandals and miso soup. Now it is a political force and a new kind of industrial complex, one that is just as industrial as earlier ones.

Any doubts about its political power are countered by the turnout of world leaders at last month's climate summit in Copenhagen. It doesn't matter that the meeting agreed to disagree, it is much more noteworthy to consider that the world's most powerful leaders could not contemplate non-attendance because of a fear of being pilloried in the media and subsequent voter backlash.

Talking green and environmental has long been a marketing device, one now so well established that it can readily attract consumer preference on the back of a perceived environmental or personal benefit. People now spend a fortune on "green" foods, meat, produce and processed goods that claim to be organic.

It doesn't matter that people can't usually tell the difference between organic foods and non-organic foods, that even expert palates can't consistently tell the difference. Once declared as green we just accept that they must somehow taste better or carry fewer pesticides or are more "natural".

Talk to a marketer about that kind of brand recognition and loyalty. In this circumstance, it isn't even a specific brand, just a branding concept. People respond positively to the concept, to the idea that the product is natural, pure and therefore automatically wholesome without question.

Test this for yourself during your next visit to the supermarket. Words like "natural" and "green" are written onto packaging as a sales inducement. But what is natural about processed bread or processed chicken goujons claiming to be "all natural"?

Consumer loyalty to the green ideal has spread far beyond food. We and the marketers are working the concept into the way we live, into products and services of all kinds and it influences how we respond as consumers.

Admit it, many of us fret about the size of our carbon footprints and then subscribe to the dodge that our recent holiday flight to Mauritius can miraculously be offset by planting a tree somewhere (choosing not to fly would be more honest). And what did I see as I flipped up a map of Mauritius to check just how many trees might have to be planted? An ad for National Geographicwith a tucked in panel asking me to "Show your commitment to fighting climate change!" and a little star telling me I could subscribe for only $15.

There is nothing wrong with exploiting people's increasing proclivity to accept at face value what the green message tells us (ie, this chicken is organic, it must be better; I recycle every bit of glass in the house, driving it 5km to the bottle bank every week in my four-litre SUV). Mostly the things it tells us to do are worthy and do not harm the environment, even if they don't actually improve it. And with everyone making a contribution then we really can have an impact on carbon emissions, say by cycling to work, just not this month because it is cold out there, maybe by March or April.

The industrial complex the environmental movement has triggered is a slightly different matter. It talks the green talk, saving energy, cutting carbon, being personally responsible for what happens on the planet, but it is an industrial complex just the same. It is now a permanent feature of some of the industries that environmentally-minded people used to love to hate.

The motor industry for example - save the planet by driving a certain kind of car. People become self satisfied about "spending that little bit extra" to get a green car, conveniently forgetting that you produce zero emissions by walking to the corner store.

Then there is the building industry. Retrofitting insulation is a growing business, accelerated by EU directives and Government regulations on house energy ratings. You can hire expensive consultants to look over your home and make recommendations on how to save energy. Retrofit options that provide only limited benefit are still being bought because you might be able to save something on energy and feel green while doing it, when putting on a woolly jumper could deliver the same comfort benefit for free.

I do not knock people's efforts to do the right thing when it comes to the environment, but let's call a spade a spade. Those 80,000 jobs are looking pretty good as the green industrial complex cranks up, and we will be able to feel smug to boot. Win win.