|
Author:
Lauren Selman
An honors graduate from UC Berkeley with a BS in Conservation Resource Studies and a BA in Theater Performance Studies.
|
Lauren Selman, honors graduate from UC Berkeley with a BS in
Conservation Resource Studies and a BA in Theater Performance Studies.
Lauren has been involved in theater, film and television since she
was a child, but it was living in the Ecuador Amazon rainforest and
riding her bicycle across the United States that sparked and
solidified her interest in the environment. Her senior thesis, titled
"Lights, Camera, Eco-Action!" makes her a knowledgeable asset to a
discussion about greening the films. She recently spoke at the
Association of Film Commissioners International Conference in Santa Fe
and has been invited to speak in South Africa, Vancouver and LA. She
has received numerous awards for both her involvement in the arts and
the environment, including Departmental Citation for her Outstanding
Artistic Achievements and Distinguished Bay Area Youth Activist at the
World Sustainable Symposium. She worked with Circle of Life on several
sustainability projects and greening events. She is currently
consulting with Julia Butterfly Hill's team on the greening of the
film LUNA, a Participant Productions project. She is in the process of
launching a consulting company that specializes in green services for
the entertainment industry. As an actor, producer, filmmaker, activist
and academic, her philosophy is that with creativity and innovation,
we can green the movies together!
|
NOTHING GROWS WHERE A FILM CREW GOES
As a simultaneous degree student in conservation resource studies and theater performance studies, I blended my passion for entertainment and the environment and produced a study of the environmental impact of filmmaking. For over a year, I read articles, academic studies, and interviewed members of the film community about the relationship between the environment and the entertainment industry.
Early in my research, an assumption emerged: the film industry was an industry of waste and abundance and that very little was being done to protect the environment. Was this true and to what extent? I read articles that labeled the 29$ billion dollar film industry as one of the top polluters in the greater Los Angeles area, stories about divas demanding outlandish unconscious perks, and heart wrenching accounts of acres of land being destroyed due to uninformed decisions. Furthermore, I read the highly controversial 2006 UCLA study that claimed the film industry was the fourth largest producer of air pollutants in the Los Angeles area. It provided an exhaustive list of industry created problems that included senseless energy consumption, water-bottle extravagance, stupefying waste generation, air pollution and green house emissions.
As my research progressed, my one sided view opened and I discovered that the film community is full of conscious individuals who have been and are currently working to reduce the environmental impact of the industry, despite it’s highly decentralized system. From the development of the Solid Waste Task Force, the impacts of AB 939 and the conflict over the use of illegally harvested lauan for set construction, the environment has been a constant concern. For example, Film L.A. has worked with the industry on programs to provide recycling of beverage containers on location and in movie theaters, funded by grants from the City of Los Angeles and the California Department of Conservation. The issue of waste is a very good example of such efforts: In 1991 Hollywood studios produced 46,000 tons of trash, but only 15% was recycled Now, according to MPAA “In 2006, the major film studios collectively diverted 58%, or 20,500 tons, of studio sets and other solid waste from landfills to reuse and recycling. As a result, the studios prevented the emission of 62,147 metric tons of greenhouse gasses - the annual equivalent of removing 13,452 cars from the road.” That deserves a round of applause.
However, it has been left up to individuals in studios and production units and to film commissioners to determine how and whether they are “green” and whether they will put the effort in to deviate from the accepted “norm” (implying that excessive production is the norm.) When addressing the “greenness” of productions, we must acknowledge the clear distinction between studio shooting and on site shooting. Each requires a different about of monitoring, codes and staffing. The major studios are getting better about using environmentally conscious strategies on the lot, but filming on location is more challenging. Studios are moving in the direction of providing greener spaces for production and onsite production partner with environmental and federal agencies to gain access to and information on sensitive lands.
Given the increasing environmentally aware story-telling, advertising, and public and celebrity interest in ‘green’, however, we are at an opportune time to instead grow a coordinated strategic effort to green the film industry that has a high profile and has institutional support.
In order to make green successful in the motion picture industry it is going to require solutions that encompass both the depth and breadth of the industry. The solutions may include alternative materials, green guides, rating systems, certification programs, but like most industries, all sectors must be sold on the idea of greening. The film industry is a complex system of subcontractors and networks that are each part of their own industries and further – it impacts the ‘public’ industries of hotels and accommodations, transportation and fuel, road use, provisions and their delivery systems, restaurants and tourism, and the operation of the cinemas –any sector that contributes to making a film. We can’t forget any of them.
Ultimately, we must work together to create a culture in which responsible action is natural. We are at a point in history, where ecological consciousness is a requirement not an option. Where we are now, environmentally, is due to the results of uninformed choices that were made in the past. As active members of the film community, we can promote better choices and share innovative solutions. This may come in the form of reusable materials, company water bottles, recycling programs (available through Hollywood Recycles and studios), donating/reusing sets or hiring environmental supervisors in the office and on sets (available through independent consulting groups like CTP Media Consulting, Reel Green Media and through the studios themselves.) I may also suggest a lot more car pooling from the hotels to the locations, more computer interface and less paper, and bio-fuels for applicable vehicles and equipment. Such programs can benefit the large companies (morally and, we can’t forget, financially) and help educate independent or smaller film groups that traditionally have had to “borrow” locations, use the cheapest, old equipment and subsequently damage the environment.
Lastly, the concept of excess as a fringe benefit has been rampant in Hollywood for a long time. It was publicly tattled that in one recent film, bottled water to the tune of $105,000 went to the above-the-line participants. But more and more above-the-line players are promoting changed behavior in those areas; they know that in order to change the system, such concepts of luxury must be changed.
Above all, education is the key for decreasing our ecological impact as an industry. Conferences of all shapes and sizes are essential for bringing people of all ages together to discuss the state of our environment. Recently, a very robust panel on resources and strategies for greening production was held at the annual conference for Film Commissioners from around the world. It was cheering to learn how many film commissioners want to provide productions with the local solutions and resources to reduce production impact on the environment. New Mexico, Washington and California states have since produced their own green resource guides for visiting production companies. On an international level, New Zealand and British Columbia have impressively provided online resources and information for productions. On the studio level, both Warners Bros. and Fox provide their productions with check-lists and resource guides and space and labor to re-cycle sets. Numerous online and offline green checklists are being published, copied and distributed throughout the film community but true change will occur when each member of the crew, cast and production makes the environment back of mind.
So, can we change the old saying “Nothing grows where a film crew grows?” It’s coming. Many critics of the Hollywood green movement, label green as a luxury for the wealthy, for the stars citing the cost of retro-fitting their individual houses with solar energy or making their estates “carbon-neutral.” Let’s note instead the fact that those types of changes bring attention to the need for those changes. We must acknowledge that more and more people who work in, and have the power in, the industry are committed to making working together to make it happen. These changes must continue go beyond the stars, but reach the producers, directors, and corporate executives behind productions.
I recognize that the greening of the motion picture industry is a huge endeavor, a noble effort. Like most industries, it can’t reverse the environmental degradation that has happened or is currently happening around the globe, but it has the potential to help slow it down and influence millions. By redirecting our high profile industry, we can inevitably create a culture in which responsible environmental action is natural. Directors could soon be calling, “Lights, Camera, Eco-Action!”
Resources and Mentions:
Hollywood Reporter - Hollywood studios trim waste going to landfills
Earth Island Journal - The Greening of Hollywood
California Film Commission - Green Resource Guide
Hollywood Recycles Program
RC Green's participation in greening sets
Reel Green Media
Industrial Wind Action Group - Huge wind farm for Mad Max country
|