Questions raised about Dell's carbon neutral claim

In an August announcement, Dell Inc bragged that it had "met its carbon neutral goal," and was no longer contributing to global warming. But an article in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal suggests reasons to be skeptical due to the definition of 'carbon neutral.' "What that means, and what it doesn't, may surprise Dell customers and other consumers who have been bombarded with bold environmental promises from major corporations."

Carbon neutrality is a simple concept, but the details involved in earning the status are complex and controversial. To become carbon neutral, a company, family, or organization must first reduce its carbon footprint -- the amount of pollution it places into the air -- to the barest minimum. It then makes up for what it can't eliminate with carbon credits -- money donated to or invested in green projects.

According to the WSJ article, Dell calculates its carbon footprint from "the emissions produced by its boilers and company-owned cars, its buildings' electricity use, and its employees' business air travel." It doesn't include pollution created by companies that manufacture parts, ship Dell computers around the world, or produce the electricity used to run them. The article also alleges that some of those carbon credits went to "improvements would have occurred whether or not Dell invested in them."

It's impossible for a company of Dell's size to completely control the environmental consequences of its actions. On August 5 (the day before Dell made its carbon neutral announcement), Greenpeace reported on the effects of toxic-laden e-waste -- "from brands including Philips, Sony, Microsoft, Nokia, Dell, Canon and Siemens" -- dumped in third world countries.

The WSJ article acknowledges that "Dell's program is widely praised by environmental groups as one of the most comprehensive attempts by a major corporation to combat climate change."

Image: Dell Inc