Bailiff: All rise. The Court of Public Concern is now in session. All those with matters before the court, come and be heard. Be seated.

Judge: What concerns oblige the attention of this court?

Representing the People: Your Honor, the people have become increasingly wary of corporate claims of environmental responsibility. Legitimate environmental and public health problems are often dismissed by polluting corporations as nothing more than public relations mishaps. "Greenwashing" is pervasive and has itself become an industry in which advertisers falsify or exaggerate claims, elevating token achievements to earth-saving triumphs. The IBM Corporation has recently made claims as to the environmentally responsible nature of its AS/400 midrange systems and the manufacturing processes that produce them. We seek verification of those claims.

Representing IBM: We are here to provide that verification, Your Honor. We believe our achievements to be both meaningful and measurable. In policy and in conduct, the IBM Corporation seeks to minimize its impact on natural systems and to restore damaged ecosystems to the extent possible. We have made a substantive investment of intellectual and financial capital to underpin our commitment to the environment, and we believe the accomplishments of our Rochester, Minnesota, facility fairly illustrate our progress.

Judge: Opening statements?

Representing the People: Yes, Your Honor. Every year, 10 million computers wind up in the nation's landfills. There, they are reunited with some portion of the 11.4 billion tons of hazardous waste that corporations annually confer upon the planet. IBM has contributed its share of that tonnage, Your Honor. While economists dismiss the effects of pollution with a bloodless euphemism-externalized costs-the costs are very real to the people whose air, soil, and water are being degraded. Accelerated environmental decay is the collateral damage of industrialization and must be honorably addressed by the industries that produce it. As the dominant social

institution, the people look to business for leadership in reversing environmental degradation and directing the transition to a restorative, sustainable economy.

Representing IBM: We agree, Your Honor, and have accepted the leadership challenge within our own industry. In Rochester, the home of the AS/400, and in our 42 other global manufacturing, development, and research sites, we are evolving products that are safe to use, energy-efficient, respectful of the environment, and recyclable or disposable without risk.

We have been able to achieve substantial reductions in pollution and waste by focusing on the entire product life cycle, rather than concentrating on the manufacturing waste stream. Reducing pollutants at the source obviates the need for down-stream cleanup, and the process starts with an environmentally sensible product design. The design determines the type and quantity of construction materials, the size and energy efficiency of the product, and the disposal options. In Rochester, the Environmentally Conscious Product Team, a group of 25 professionals representing disciplines from design to disposal, ensures that the AS/400 reflects an environmental ethic.

Representing the People: How, then, does the Advanced Series AS/400 differ from previous models?

Representing IBM: First, on average it is 25 percent smaller, requiring fewer resources and less energy to produce. It also consumes up to 33 percent less energy. A programmable power- on/shut-down feature further reduces the need for auxiliary power from A/C and UPS systems. The system was designed for easy disassembly. Each component is labeled by material type and identified as reusable or recyclable. A full 98 percent of the AS/400's parts can be reused.

Representing the People: Your Honor, the mere act of labeling does nothing to ensure reuse or proper disposal. A century from now, those parts, labels and all, will dot the landfills unchanged by the passage of time. Surely, the corporation does not expect its customers to disassemble a system, sort it into component parts, and truck it to the recycling center.

Representing IBM: Our purpose is not to transfer the responsibility of disposal to our customers, but to assume full life-cycle accountability for our product. In Rochester, we have established a center for the return of AS/400s when customers no longer need them. Last year, the center processed some 500 systems. All but 2 percent of the parts were reconditioned and used as new, installed by field personnel as replacement parts, or recycled. The obligation of disposal, we feel, encourages efficient product design, with reusable components and minimal packaging.

Representing the People: What disposal methods apply to the 2 percent of the parts that are not reusable?

Representing IBM: There is, to date, no environmentally benign way to dispose of tape cartridges and certain plastics. Operating system cartridges and plastic labels are discarded.

Representing the People: And what of the packaging?

Representing IBM: Rochester uses recyclable unbleached fiberboard.

Representing the People: Let's move on to the manufacturing process. Through the 1980s,

Rochester was one of the three largest chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emitters in the United States. The other two sites, incidentally, were IBM facilities in Endicott, New York, and San Jose, California. As late as 1987, Your Honor, IBM's global operations used 12.4 million pounds of these ozone-shredding chemicals and another 24.7 million pounds of methylene chloride and methyl chloroform....

Judge: How are these chemicals used?

Representing IBM: They are used in the manufacture of semiconductors, circuit boards, and storage devices, Your Honor.

Judge: Continue.

Representing the People: What are the current emission levels in Rochester?

Representing IBM: Rochester has succeeded in completely eliminating CFCs and methyl chloroform from its manufacturing process....

Representing the People: And what of methylene chloride?

Representing IBM: It has been 99.9 percent eliminated.

Judge: How were the reductions accomplished?

Representing IBM: IBM substituted water-based cleaning systems and organic solvents for the chemicals, your honor. We are pleased to note that these reductions exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's 33/50 guidelines, which called for reducing emissions by one-third by 1992 and one-half by 1995. As a company, IBM has reduced its releases of industrial chemicals reported under the U.S. Toxic Release Inventory requirements by 81 percent from 1987 levels.

Representing the People: We are appreciative of the progress, Your Honor, but have concern about its timing. CFCs were discovered to be damaging to the ozone in 1973. By 1976, government authorities were alarmed enough to ban aerosols using CFCs. Yet a decade later, IBM was still among the nation's leading CFC users. If the corporation is so committed to the environment, why did it join the Alliance for a Responsible CFC Policy, a consortium of CFC manufacturers, users, and distributors, in 1981? The alliance aggressively lobbied Congress to slow the phase-out of CFCs. It engaged the lobbying firm Alcake, Rousselot and Fay to gut impending government regulations and fought for the continued use of dangerous CFC substitutes like HCFCs (hydrochlorofluorocarbons). It ultimately succeeded in extending the phase-out period until 1996. Are these actions not inconsistent with the reductions described by counsel?

Representing IBM: Not within the context of the times. CFCs were not always thought to be dangerous. In every respect but one-their effect on stratospheric ozone, which at the time was not certain-CFCs were a superb and benign cleaning agent. They were capable of eliminating microscopic particles on sensitive disk-head assemblies and other electronic components without leaving a residue. And CFCs were nontoxic to employees.

In the late 1970s and 1980s, there was still a great deal of debate and disagreement in the scientific community about the actual effects and severity of CFCs on ozone depletion. Since

IBM widely used these chemicals and their elimination would impact production and require a costly reengineering of manufacturing processes, not unreasonably, the corporation wanted conclusive proof. IBM also needed time to develop an effective CFC substitute. By 1987, when the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement on CFC reduction, was signed by the United States, IBM research had already experimented with a number of new technologies. One approach, later abandoned, was to capture and recycle CFC emissions; another substituted aqueous cleaning systems. These new systems were complex, using a combination of deionized water, detergent, ultrasonics, and hot, dry air and took years to develop and implement. As the evidence against CFC use became conclusive, the transition to nonpolluting systems took place as quickly as possible, consistent with product quality standards.

Representing the People: Why must the people always endure lengthy phase-outs of substances known to be dangerous? Lester Brown of World Watch Institute warns that "every living system on earth is in decline." If so, then perhaps we cannot wait for every test result, every job guarantee, or the success of every product line before we act. Why not simply stop using known toxic substances without precondition?

Representing IBM: Because, unfortunately, the solution is seldom that simple. In the case of the AS/400, IBM has very real obligations to its customers, its employees, and its suppliers. Shutting down production would unfairly impact them and would likely necessitate parting with some of the very people who would invent the nonpolluting technologies in use today. Incidentally, IBM shares many of these technologies with its competitors in the electronics industry, as well as its suppliers. Rochester even certifies its suppliers and provides environmental engineers as consultants to ensure that their manufacturing processes meet IBM's environmental standards.

In the past seven years, IBM has invested $1 billion in upgrading its facilities and implementing ways to safeguard the environment-from moving all storage tanks and pipes above ground, to drilling 2,800 wells that monitor ground water. Our global operations have reduced solid waste by 59 percent between 1987 and 1992. The success we've had requires first and foremost that we stay engaged, and that, of necessity, means staying in business. If society is to continue benefiting from that unique expression of human efficacy that is technology, then "just saying no" is but the first of many steps in a continuing process to minimize and ultimately reverse our impacts on the environment.

Representing the People: You mentioned an obligation to your employees. The reductions in pollutants and hazardous waste should have had a positive impact on the well-being of your work force. Have you been able to document such a trend?

Representing IBM: We have. According to statistics compiled under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), IBM employees report less than half the industry-average work-related illnesses or injuries; less than a quarter of the national average. The Rochester facility has been honored for 13 consecutive years by the Minnesota Safety Council for its ergonomics and safety program. It has also received three state awards and one federal award for solid waste and pollution-source reductions.

Representing the People: We applaud the results. Given the cumulative environmental impacts of past corporate mismanagement, I'm sure Your Honor will agree that although the people yearn to trust, they are wise to verify. No further questions at this time.

Judge: Closing statements?

Representing IBM: Yes, Your Honor. IBM makes no claim of spotlessness. We pollute, yes. But we clean up after ourselves. And every day, we stretch to find the fresh technologies, new materials, and innovative manufacturing processes that pollute less or not at all. The people of IBM are working to provide our customers with products that are as environmentally benign as today's technology permits. If product quality means zero defects, then total quality implies products that result in zero environmental defects. When you speak "for the people," you speak for us, too. We are not separate, nor do we seek to profit at the expense of the well-being of our communities. For, in our mutual dependence on natural systems, we share common values and a common goal: to behave respectfully toward the environment.

Judge: What say the People?

Representing the People: The people are hopeful, Your Honor.

Victor Rozek has been in the data processing industry since 1975. His experience includes seven years with IBM in operations management and systems engineering.

Also Read

IBM i Shops Pivot to Battle COVID-19

Energy, Vibe, and Atmosphere

Murphy’s Security Law