agree. hence the gimmick comment. My point was that a car manufacturer’s effort to be green is best spent changing their product.

also fuels something I failed to communicate above (and might fail again, sorry):

People don’t want to invest heavily in being eco-friendly. Some are willing to change their behaviour for the benefit of the planet (or their conscience)… but they want it to become a routine; invisible not a daily chore.
I want to recycle as much as I can, but I want it to be a system; something I invest time in to establish but thereafter requires no thinking.

That’s kind of what I meant, asi, challenging the Nike Plus comparison. With Nike Plus, people do want to invest time in it regularly because it adds to their pleasure.

To make this more everyday user friendly, someone has connected a small chip and USB port to this canBUS.

I wanted to fit an X-Guage into my 2000 Smart ForTwo, but the canBUS connections aren’t right (I’m looking into a fix for this). I intended to log my fuel consumption and become a hypermiler too, which what this is promoting.

It’s incredible that it has taken almost ten years to get here…

I see your point, but fact is Nikeplus isn’t aimed solely at keen avid runners. you can find loads of testimonials where people tell how running became fun with nike+

I’m not suggesting that the reward or feel-good factor is the same for running and eco-driving but the psychology is quite the same.

help me do the stuff I care about and make it easy for me to track my progress and lead a greener lifestyle and you won my heart.

Am I too naive to hope that this is NOT a comms idea but slightly deeper one?

nike plus is aimed at runners. eco-drive is aimed at drivers.
runners love running. drivers love… being green?

I will say that it’s very easy for me to attack this kind of thing. It’s a damaged subject matter and companies can’t really win - do too little and we point the finger, do too much and we roll our eyeballs.

Things like this are early experimental steps and I should be more positive. But hey - I work in advertising

I think you are both right and wrong:

“Keeping an eye on your carbon footprint is not fun, interesting or pleasurable”.

I would argue that for quite a lot of people you could say the same thing about running. But the monitoring and tracking and improvement and community competitiveness that NIKE+ gives you make it more fun and pleasurable.

I’m hoping that people who got the right attitude i.e. they want to do more, this can be a nice tool - there is a simple psychology of commitment when you can track changes and this is the most important thing that this app is doing for people.

The biggest problem here is how to make carbon footprint more tangible and the eco-index of this app is heading in the right direction. like counting calories, you can now track your driving style and aim to improve your eco-index.

Surely if all this information could have been presented on your dashboard so you could have a real-time feedback, then there really was no need for a web app, but this is a question I don’t know the answer to

I see why they did this. But really, who would use it, regularly?

In its current form it feels like another green gimmick - and displays an unrealistic understanding of how much time people want to spend on things like this. A few stats on your dashboard - yes. An app?

Nike Plus works (in theory) because people are passionate about improving their PBs and because running against others is fun and challenging. It enriches the experience of running.

Keeping an eye on your carbon footprint is not fun, interesting or pleasurable. I’d argue that it’s something we like to know we’re doing (a bit), not something we want to spend time on.

Do we need an app, or is it this simple:

Manufacturers should build eco-friendly cars.
People should drive them with consideration.

(Sorry - am in a ranty mood today