Here's a question for all us greens: why do we call ourselves "green"? Why has the mantra stuck for so long? And is it a symbol we should continue to promote?

I've always avoided using "green." As a clean energy advocate, I strive to avoid association with traditional environmental stereotypes -- and in my experience, "green" evokes environmental culture. Many other sustainability and climate advocates have made similar choices. Adam Werbach even launched what he envisions as the evolution of sustainability, "BLUE."

But clearly this isn't an experience shared by all clean energy and climate advocates. Friedman's new blockbuster book calls it the "green revolution." On September 27th, hundreds to thousands of us will join Green for All, 1 Sky, and The We Campaign in their "Green Jobs Now" day of national action. And whether or not you think "green" is the best approach, these are efforts we can all throw our weight behind.

As a comrade in the clean energy revolution, however, I feel a duty to address basic assumptions when I think they might be limiting our efficacy. So I ask my fellow greens: is "green" a symbol that can rally a national movement powerful enough to transform the entire economy?

I think the answer is no. Democratic Governor Bill Ritter of Colorado summed it up well in a recent interview in the New Yorker:

"I think, while we have great emphasis on green, that it should be about different kinds of symbols than the color green -- wind farms, solar, renewable-energy laboratories, those things that are symbolic of the new energy economy. People think that we overuse the concept of green, and it could become trite in its expression." Later, Ritter returned to the point. "This idea about green in a lot of people's minds still conjures up this notion of a fringe or something that's out-there," he told me. "It doesn't inspire this notion of a new America. It just seems more substantive than a color." He continued, "If you only make it about being green, you lose the sense that you can build a national economy around this."

This isn't to say we should leave green behind. "Green" is a powerful approach with particular constituencies -- namely, the greens - whose weight must be brought to bear. But it's not an approach that can capture the public imagination and garner the level of necessary support. So whether we go with BLUE or "clean energy," it's time to commit to building this movement around symbols that allow us to finally let go of our green baggage.