It can be easy to spot greenwashing when others are doing it, but often it’s harder to know how your own communications will stack up under scrutiny. One reason can be that you’re so close to the material you can’t see the problems. Here are four key symptoms we look for in a Thinkshift Credibility Quotient assessment—if you can spot these (and correct them), you’ll be less susceptible to greenwashing accusations.

Irrelevant or unprovable claims— Statements like “world’s best,” “leader in the field,” and “greenest” are unprovable, and are used so often they are meaningless. It also doesn’t help if you’re making comparisons to very ungreen products or practices.

No proof— No matter how solid your claims are, you need to back them up with hard evidence. (And making people read a white paper doesn’t necessarily count.)

Not walking the talk—Do what you say you’re doing. It’s a sure credibility killer if you’ve only got one small, greenish effort and the rest of your business has a huge carbon footprint.

Jargon or fluffy language—Vague statements without detail or backup, language only a scientist could grasp, or meaningless marketing puffery make you insincere at best and guilty of greenwashing at worst.

To heal these afflictions, make easily understood claims in plain language; back them up with facts, third-party verification, and context; and make sure you’re as green as you say you are. People are more skeptical than ever of green claims, and a key part of the solution is credible communications.

More evidence that “save the planet” is bad messaging: Suzanne Shelton of the Shelton Group reports that her firm’s recent national survey of people identified as green buyers found six myths about green “consumers,” including that their top concern is the environment and that their main motivation when reducing energy use is to “save the planet.” The stat there: “When asked the most important reason to reduce energy consumption, 73 percent chose ‘to reduce my bills/control costs’ and only 26 percent chose ‘to lessen my impact on the environment.’”

This shouldn’t really be surprising. A growing body of research suggests that we’re hardwired to focus on the immediate and undervalue future benefits. Marketing gurus have been hammering home for decades the need to answer the key buyer question, “What’s in it for me?” And really, how would you expect people who are treated and see themselves as “consumers” to behave? (A topic I ranted on recently.)

Yet “save the planet” and its variations continue to appear in marketing and advertising by sophisticated companies and nonprofits. Either they believe there are more treehuggers out there than there are; they’re committed environmentalists themselves who can’t believe that everyone else won’t see the light when it’s pointed out to them (the classic error of mistaking yourself for your market); or they just want to paint themselves as green by communicating that they think saving the planet is a good idea. Regardless, it’s time for a new pitch.

Underwriters Laboratory’s UL Environment, which is certifying green products and verifying green product claims, has just announced the first product to be rated: Serious Materials’ EcoRock drywall. The product appears genuine, based on the excellent information on the company website, and it’s also got Cradle to Cradle certification.

While the UL assessment has UL’s brand clout behind it, they could add assurance and help alleviate consumer confusion over what’s truly friendly for the environment by providing complete disclosure about what their certifications mean on their website. Right now, there’s nothing on the UL Environment website that makes the label credible (except for the aforementioned brand power). By comparison, the Cradle to Cradle site has full disclosure.

Some questions they can answer: How and what are they testing? What is the process? What are the benchmarks and standards? Are they only looking at claims made or are they also comparing the product to similar ones? Do they consider what’s possible, so that if a company is only doing the bare minimum, it counts less?

Eco-labels are proliferating at a pretty fast clip. If they’re going to clear up confusion and help consumers sort out conflicting environmental claims and know what makes one thing greener than another, certifiers (and product marketers) need to help educate.

For more on the UL rollout, see Sustainable Industries’ excellent article. It was also covered at GreenBiz.com.