Dell today said it will become the first computer maker to neutralize its greenhouse gas emissions. CEO Michael Dell announced a series of measures to shrink the company’s carbon footprint and offset its greenhouse gas emissions in 2008. Upping the ante, he challenged rivals like Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) to follow Dell’s (DELL) lead. Proclaiming a corporate commitment to carbon neutrality is all the rage these days and Dell joins tech giants like Google (GOOG), which has pledged to offset its greenhouse gas emissions by 2008. Meanwhile, Silicon Valley giants like Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Sun Microsystems (JAVA) have made public their carbon footprints.
Global warming talk, however, is cheap and Dell now needs to make good on its green words. The company reports its emissions to the Carbon Disclosure Project and data on its carbon footprint will be available Monday on the project’s site, a Dell spokesperson told Green Wombat. Dell said it has already been taking action to reduce its electricity use, from automatically shutting down machinery at night to installing energy efficient lighting. Earlier this year it required its suppliers to determine their greenhouse gas emissions as a first step in taking carbon out of its supply chain – a strategy embraced by companies like Wal-Mart (WMT). It also issued a mandate that some suppliers switch to biodiesel to power part of their transportation fleets.
Dell said it will invest in renewable energy like wind power and offset its remaining C02 emissions by putting cash into projects that reduce the risk of global warming. "Dell is working with stakeholders to shape its offset strategy, which will help ensure that offsets are invested in projects that can be monitored and verified," the company said in a statement. "Projects will be evaluated for their long-term viability and assurance that the carbon savings are real."
Green Wombat 
The world needs to wake up to this and Dell is one using it to bolster their corporate image. Good for them. A much bigger societal commitment needs to take place though. The U.S. should be leading this cause of the potential for hugh technological benefits of being on the bleeding edge of efficiency and renewables but unfortunely U.S. is lagging. We’re individualistic, rich and not under the same competitive strains other nations must face. How can be the leader with that sort of baggage?
I won’t trust Dell until I see the changes such as Solar panels in their plants and hybrid vehicles for their employees as well as LEED lighting.
Dell, talk is cheap.
Carbon Neutral ????
Look we expect political hacks and charlatans to use this stupid lingo; of course its meaningless giberish and there is no such thing as “carbon neutral”. If your computers plug in to the wall then they are consuming fossil fuels. Paying someone to plant a twig or paying off a group of greenie idiots doesn’t put the coal back into the ground.
If you truly wish to be “carbon neutral” then unplug your facilities from the grid, make your computers from local materials, you know: dried leaves, twigs, moss, and such. Oh don’t forget to power them with a foot treadle and dont forget to ship them off by donkey.
Or better yet, simply don’t by into the lie that a trace gas in the atmoshpere, admittately needed by all plant life, doesn’t really affect the weather or the climate.
But give up that corporate jet no matter what. You executives need to experience the same joys of commercial air travel thet the rest of us are subjected to.
I would never invest in any company stupid enough to make a business plan of being “carbon nuetral” why dont you try something with more originality: How about oxygen, or better yet silicon nuetral?
I work for Cox Enterprises and saw your comments on Dell and the environment. I thought you might also be interested in visiting http://www.CoxConserves.com. The site details Cox’s commitment to the environment and offers tips on how anyone can become eco-friendly.
Dell’s Challenge to be Green
Back in May, I wrote about Apple’s efforts to be an environmentally friendly computer manufacturer. In an effort to be fair and balanced blogger (and not a hypocrite, this is being typed on a Dell), I am following up on
This continues to amaze me. Given that one major volcano eruption will pump more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than all of the emissions of industrialized mankind, the belief that humans have some level of control over the natural cycle of global warming and cooling trends is incorrect and arrogant.
“Going green” for companies like Dell, Sun, Google, or whoever has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with environmental stewardship. It’s about MONEY.
1) Data center managers could care less about carbon footprint. They care about energy costs. If server X saves 40% in energy costs over server Y, then you’ll see server X in the data center.
2) By 2011, energy costs to run a data center will begin to exceed the costs of acquiring and supporting the servers in the data center, so making lower power servers which more performance is the smart thing to do
Eco-friendly. Laughable. Doing the right thing by reducing energy costs, which helps everyone is what is important. Reducing greenhouse emissions is a positive byproduct.
Hybrids. Typical greenie “feel-good” product. If one takes into account the manufacturing and disposal of the batteries used in ALL hybrids today, the Hummer H3 has a better carbon footprint. But nobody thinks about that because it’s all about “feeling good” and not anything to do with the environment. Now, Hydrogen vehicles are a good idea, especially when you use passive solar or wind to produce the electricity needed to separate hydrogen and oxygen from water.
Gore and the greenies have it all wrong. Do it because it’s more efficient and cost effective in the long run. Not because we have any impact on “saving the earth”. What is scary is that people buy into it, and you’re going to see “carbon taxes” and other legislation meant to push an agenda based on nonsense. Again, it is stupid to believe that humans can have more than a tiny effect on the natural global warming and cooling cycle.
Hi – I work for Dell and in fact worked on yesterday’s announcement – I always enjoy seeing some of the debate environment announcments raise. So two points from reading the comments here:
1. no one is shying away from energy efficiency – you are right – customers don’t just like it – they are demanding it. But if the add on benefit protects the environment – I am not understanding why you think that’s a bad thing?
2. the announcement from Dell about carbon neutrality is very clear – this covers Dell operations and employee business air travel. YES- product use and supplier operations also have environmental effects – in fact for Dell those are far larger impacts than impacts of our own operations — also in the announcmenet – we’re working with suppliers to minimize their emissions and providing more and more energy efficient products.
3. we discussed teh need for more renewable power – today there is not enough supply to run our operations – we need more, period.
And finally as for the “I won’t trust Dell” comment – check out both the announcement which had real examples of efficiency developments and our environment sites (try http://www.dell.com/sustainabilityreports to start) and look for verified annual reporting on this – we put out quite a bit of transparent reporting, verified by third parties, so that we are not making empty claims – I invite you to read some of it.
So will the figures be based on the same “value” they put on their accoutning practices?
Scott, just because something is more cost effective doesn’t make it the right choice. And by the way, are the volcano eruptions responsible for the problems with the environment, or mankind? I’ll give you hint, it’s not the first one…
The earth is on a 100,000 year cycle of cooling and warming. At this point, we are in the upswing of that cycle, with another 10-14 degree rise in global temperatures in our future regardless of human activities. Gases such as carbon dioxide are expelled by volcanoes every year at a much greater rate than mankind produces.
The massive deforestation of the tropical regions has done more to effect global warming than anything else humans have done, including carbon emissions. The amount of greenhouse gases produced by humans are tiny in comparison to non-human sources such as volcanoes, natural decay, and even moose farts – no joke intended. The destruction of the tropical rainforests takes away the earth’s natural atmospheric cleaning mechanism – consume carbon dioxide and produce oxygen – and their destruction by humans is the greatest threat to our existence.