I agree with all that. But it is interesting to see what the implications can be. I once went to a conference where they made an announcement that they were being green by giving every attendant a canteen to fill up with water instead of using disposable cups. But I'd be willing to bet many of those canteens went into the trash right after the conference, and thus they probably accomplished the exact opposite of what they were after.

This is a familiar frustration. I've entered a number of recreational cycling events, and every time I do they'll give you another cheap drawstring bag, water bottle, and t-shirt that I will almost certainly never wear or use. I already have better versions of all of these things that I've been using for years. But the incentive, even when it's explicitly stated as environmentally conscious - is more likely promotional, and often times driven by outside sponsors anyway.

It takes a big mindset shift that is not easily made in a consumer-focused capitalist economy. It's easy to sell more, cooler things as a solution to a problem, but if consumption is part of the problem it's hard to incentivize doing more with what you already have, which was always the first two of the three R's.

That's also why these kind of corporate green campaigns (and for that matter many other pro-social campaigns) don't really work. It's not even that the people putting them on don't believe in what they're doing. It's just that they are constrained by the capital earning goals of the corporations, which will push back against any work that would undercut both the power/profit of the company individually and the capitalist system undergirding it and its place in the world.

Now, if they had given ceramic cups and a water dispenser...

I don't see people doing that though. Do you?