Too many big companies have been slow to do their bit to
tackle the world's environmental problems. And IT companies are not
exempt, say environmental campaigners.
Greenpeace International claims that many IT firms have not
taken the environment as seriously as they should and have been
slow in making real changes to their products.
In its
latest research the campaigning group has ranked three of the
world's biggest PC makers - Hewlett-Packard, Dell and Lenovo - at
the bottom of its league table of 18 green electronics
suppliers.
Greenpeace's latest
ranking of technology companies claims these firms have been
slow to remove toxic chemicals from their products - despite other
manufacturers, such as Apple, improving their green
performance.
Greenpeace uses a list of 15 criteria to rank companies, from
how easy it is to recycle their products to how much energy they
use.
However, Dell, HP and Lenovo say that toxic chemicals are the
only materials they can viably use in their computers.
Dell told Computer Weekly that it is unable to use alternatives
and has adjusted its timetable for removing toxic chemicals
accordingly. The company says it is taking big strides towards
becoming more environmentally friendly and it does offer some toxic
chemical-free products. HP, which does not offer any alternative
products, says it is continuing to develop new environmental
programmes and that is has been a "leader in environmental
responsibility for decades".
Two chemicals, present in millions of computers, pose big
problems for the environment. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is the
single most environmentally damaging of all plastics when it is
disposed of, forming cancer-causing carcinogens when burnt.
It contaminates humans and the environment throughout its
lifecycle. Brominated flame retardents (BFRs) are also toxic and
can be released from products during use, building up in animals
and humans.
So while the
dumping of electronic waste in Asia and Africa should be a
priority for the technology industry, it is not just those who deal
with the waste who are affected - it's computer users as well.
Greenpeace says there are alternatives to these substances
available. It points to Apple, which has almost completely removed
the toxic materials from its new products. Tom Dowdall, toxic
technology campaign co-ordinator, says suppliers of PC components
are waiting for manufacturers to say the word.
"We talk to suppliers who say they are actually waiting for the
big orders for alternative materials to come in," he says. "If
these companies placed big orders, it would drive the price of the
alternatives down."
Dowdall says Apple has managed to remove the toxic materials
while simultaneously lowering the price of its products, and any
price increases as a result of the initial investment are likely to
be no more than $10.
The real problem, he says, is that some companies have simply
not prioritised environmental concerns. To help move green issues
up the agenda, Greenpeace is calling for IT managers in both the
public and private sectors to put pressure on their suppliers to
provide greener products.
"Ask them for more progressive environmental policies," he says.
"That is one way that the companies will realise that the
marketplace is demanding change."
Dell, HP and Lenovo are not the only big names to perform poorly
in Greenpeace's ranking. Government supplier Fujitsu was second
from bottom, and Microsoft was not far behind.
An HP spokesperson said, "For decades HP has been a leader in
environmental responsibility and has adopted practices in product
development, operations and supply chain that are transparent and
help to reduce its environmental impact."
Dell says its green credentials are good, and points to its
commitment to reduce its carbon emissions by 40% by 2015.
It says, "We remain committed to proactively eliminating
environmentally sensitive substances from our products, and we are
working closely with our suppliers to eliminate these chemicals
from our products. This commitment is genuine."
Lenovo made no comment.