Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition - Clean Computer Campaign 19dec00
http://www.svtc.org/cleancc/pubs/2000report.htm
The Clean Computer Campaign, a project of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, has completed the most comprehensive analysis ever published which evaluates the environmental information contained on the web sites of 44 of the largest high-tech companies in the world. The report evaluates 8 key indicators in an effort to answer the following question:
Are high-tech companies providing consumers with enough information to make informed decisions about buying "green" electronic products? (For a summary of the many environmental and health impacts of high-tech production - see http://www.svtc.org)
Many of the findings of the analysis are significant and some are surprising: The Findings: Japanese companies received the top scores in 7 out of the 8 categories evaluated. Only 4 companies -- 3 Japanese companies (Canon, NEC and Mitsubishi) and 1 US company (IBM) scored above 50%, but even the top companies scored below 65% overall. U.S. companies (as well as other transnational high-tech companies) practice "double standards" in their global environmental behavior, meeting higher standards in Europe and Japan than in the U.S. due to weaker U.S. regulations. No company provided enough reliable information to evaluate their performance in the third world. Several companies exhibit environmental leadership in a few key areas by phasing out some of the most toxic materials in their products, by designing some "green" products, as well as by taking back and recycling older products. Some companies have made significant improvements in their environmental disclosures since the publication of the first Report Card last year. Brand name consumer products companies tended to score higher than components manufacturers. U.S. and Korean companies were the "cellar dwellers" in most of the key categories.
The right-to-know is a sacred public trust. Consumers both need and want to know pertinent information in order to make informed decisions when spending hard-earned dollars. Historically, retailers and producers have used the buzz words "smaller", "faster" and "cheaper" as the mantra for holiday buying. Now it is time, given the huge environmental impact of high-tech production, for consumers to insist on a new mantra: "greener", "cleaner" and "more recycle-able". This is particularly important since most consumers are unaware of the toxic footprint and legacy of consumer electronics production, ranging from extensive groundwater pollution to serious occupational illness and air pollution. See www.svtc.org for further extensive information.
The broad range of overall scores by company (from 0 - 55 out of a possible score of 87 points) illustrates the disparity among these high-tech companies in the disclosure on their websites of their environmental information, based on the 8 key indicators identified.
See page Appendix C on page 25 for a description of the methodology used in this report.
The U.S. high-tech industry has often been lauded as the global leader in technology developments as well as a leader in disclosing environmental information. This survey uncovers significant double standards in global environmental reporting, as U.S. high-tech companies rank a poor second or third -- and in some cases live in the cellar -- when compared to other global consumer electronics companies.
Double standards
Take-back - establishing programs globally
New legislation in the European Union mandates that producers of
electrical and electronic equipment be physically and financially
liable for their products at the end of their consumer life. Similar
legislation in Japan for certain products has passed and will soon
take effect. In anticipation of this legislation, some US companies
have instituted take-back programs in Europe and Asia. However, the
same companies are not showing the same leadership in the U.S. and
are, in fact, resisting efforts to implement similar programs in the
US. Clearly, the "voluntary" market-based approach is not
working. For instance:
Product Stewardship--exhibiting environmental leadership
A few companies have phased out some toxic products and incorporated
design for the environment into their manufacturing.
It is clear that many toxics CAN be phased out. We challenge all global high-tech companies to be leaders and adopt these and other breakthrough technologies. It is time for companies to use their technological, intellectual and financial resources to assure that their production processes and their products (throughout their lifecycle) will safeguard environmental, community and worker health.
Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard and Canon were the highest scorers of the group, receiving scores of 18, 17 and 16, out of 24, respectively. AMD, Applied Materials, Flextronics, Maxtor, Seagate, Silicon Graphics, Sumitomo Electric, Daewoo, Hyundai, Lucky Goldstar and SK Electronics all scored 0.
Hazardous and Toxic Chemicals - disclosing releases and use
When the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) was enacted in 1986, SVTC was
the first group in the nation to obtain, analyze and publish a report
documenting the toxic emissions in a local region. The report sent
shock waves throughout Silicon Valley and subsequent publicity reached
other high-tech areas throughout the country and the world. While TRI
was an important initial step, critical information regarding chemical
usage was not included in the law. Pollution Release and Transfer
Registry (PRTR) takes TRI a step further, and is being adopted by many
countries throughout the industrialized world. Most Japanese companies
and Samsung (a Korean company) are now providing information about the
amounts of chemicals used, released to air, water and land as well as
the amounts recycled. In anticipation of the PRTR rules being widely
adopted, many companies - especially Japanese companies -- have
started to disclose their chemical usage on their web sites. U.S.
companies, which were the global leaders in terms of toxic chemical
release information, have now fallen behind. Toshiba, Epson and
Fujitsu had the highest scorers with a score of 10, 8 and 8 out of 12,
respectively.
Applied Materials, Dell, Flextronics, Harris, Hewlett-Packard, Lucent, Maxtor, Seagate, Silicon Graphics, Epson, Sanyo, Sumitomo Electric, Daewoo, Hyundai, Lucky Goldstar and SK Electronics all scored a 0.
International operations- ensuring the highest protection in the
era of globalization
High-tech companies operating in the US are required to adhere to
environmental and health and safety regulations to protect community,
worker and environmental health. The globalization of the industry
makes it incumbent on the manufacturers to guarantee that the most
health protective regulations are used in their global manufacturing
operations. Less stringent local environmental regulations or weaker
infrastructure should not be used as a reason for not ensuring the
highest level of environmental and occupational health protection.
Canon was the only company to score a full 6 out of 6, while other
high scores include IBM with a score of 5 and NEC, National,
Hewlett-Packard and AMD all with a score of 4.
Agilent, Applied Materials, Texas Instruments, Sun Microsystems, Sumitomo Electric, Solectron, SK Electronics, Silicon Graphics, Siemens, Seagate, Philips, Maxtor, Lucky Goldstar, Kyocera, Komag, Hyundai, Harris, Flextronics, Epson and Daewoo all scored 0.
Suppliers/subcontractors - maintaining corporate responsibility in
the supply chain
It is increasingly important that high-tech companies establish
criteria to ensure that their suppliers and subcontractors are held to
the same high environmental standards. Major global subcontractors
include Solectron and Flextronics, which increasingly are doing the
manufacturing of components for many well-known electronics companies
(i.e. Hewlett-Packard and Intel). Suppliers include chemical suppliers
and toxic waste handlers. Most of these manufacturing sub-contractors
have little or no environmental or health information on their web
sites, and appear to have less well developed environmental programs
than the better known consumer electronics companies. It is important
that the leadership companies use their resources and influence to
encourage more responsible environmental behavior by these
sub-contractors. All companies should disclose the criteria used in
selecting and monitoring the environmental performance of their
subcontractors.
Sanyo, Hewlett-Packard and IBM had the highest scores in the group, receiving 5,5 and 4 out of 6, respectively, Toshiba, Sumitomo Electric, Soletron, SK Electronics, Silicon Graphics, Siemens, Seagate, Samsung, Quantum, Oki, Mitsubishi, Maxtor, Lucky Goldstar, Kyocera, Komag, Hyundai, Hitachi, Applied Materials, Harris, Flextronics, Epson, Daewoo all scored 0.
Energy -
3 Japanese companies (Canon, Mitsubishi and Sony) earned a perfect 12.
Lowest scorers in the group include: Agilent, Applied Materials, Flextronics, Harris, Komag, Maxtor, National, Quantum, Seagate, Silicon Graphics, Solectron, Daewoo, Hyndai, Lucky Goldstar and SK Electronics, all received a score of 0.
Water Use - adopting water efficiency technologies
Some US firms in Europe and Asia have managed to "close the
loop" in their manufacturing processes and use recycled water. In
spite of concerted activities by SVTC and others, very few high-tech
companies are closing the loop on their enormous wastewater discharges
in the U.S.
Canon, NEC, Philips and ST Microelectronics all received scores of 10 out of 15. Agilent, Applied Materials, Dell, Flextronics, Harris, Hewlett-Packard, Lucent, Maxtor, Seagate, Silicon Graphics, Epson, Sanyo, Sumitomo Electric, Daewoo, Hyundai, Lucky Goldstar and SK Electronics all received a score of 0.
From 1 year to the next
SVTC 's report cards and other campaign initiatives, including work
with socially responsible shareholders (such as the Interfaith Center
on Corporate Responsibility and socially responsible investment firms
such as Calvert and Pax Fund) and letter-writing campaigns are
effective ways of improving corporate accountability in environmental
reporting. SVTC has engaged in shareholder dialogues with AMD, IBM,
Intel, Hewlett-Packard and there has seen some progress.
We hope that next years' report card will show marked improvements among all companies within each of the indicators specified.
Conclusions This research is timely. The global high-tech industry is the largest and fastest growing manufacturing sector in the world. Computer manufacturing, because of its dependence on massive amounts of natural resources and toxic chemicals, has too often had negative impacts on community, worker and environmental health. Therefore, producers of computers and other electronic equipment must be as committed to providing reliable environmental data and to working towards sustainability as they are to increasing their global profits.
Although scoring highly in most areas of the report card, it is clear that many companies also use their websites for "greenwashing" - creating a misleading and unwarranted image of environmental performance. Consumers can easily be swayed into believing information that makes a company appears "greener" than reality dictates. We strongly dissuade any company from utilizing statements without including facts as well. We have highlighted several examples and will continue to expose "greenwashing" when we see it.
Consumers are encouraged to pay attention to the leaders and laggards of this industry and to use the power that we all carry in our wallets to send a message. A good place to start is by rewarding those companies that are doing a better job and by not purchasing from the companies that are the 'cellar dwellers.'
| Company name | Points Received out of 87 | Percentage of the total |
| Canon (J) | 55 | 63.20% |
| IBM USA | 51 | 58.60% |
| NEC (J) | 49 | 56.30% |
| Mitsubishi (J) | 44 | 50.60% |
| Sony (J) | 44 | 50.60% |
| Fujitsu (J) | 43 | 49.40% |
| Toshiba (J) | 43 | 49.40% |
| Matsushita (J) | 40 | 46.00% |
| Sharp (J) | 40 | 46.00% |
| Motorola (USA) | 33 | 37.90% |
| Sanyo (J) | 33 | 37.90% |
| Phillips (E) | 32 | 36.80% |
| Hewlett-Packard (USA) | 32 | 36.80% |
| Hitachi (J) | 32 | 36.80% |
| Apple (USA) | 31 | 35.60% |
| Compaq (USA) | 31 | 35.60% |
| Epson (J) | 27 | 31.00% |
| Oki (J) | 24 | 27.60% |
| Dell (USA) | 19 | 21.80% |
| Samsung (K) | 16 | 18.40% |
| LG Goldstar (K) | 0 | 0% |
Contact us at 408-287-6707 to receive a copy of the full report.
|
If you have come to this page from an outside location click here to get back to mindfully.org |