Who’s the greenest of them all?

Back in the ’80s, it was hip to be square (if you believe the dogma of the prophet Huey Lewis). These days, being green is where it’s at, and while many companies are scrambling to tout their eco-friendly, energy-efficient ways, the media and other organizations are also celebrating companies they deem the greenest in the land — and decrying those that fall short.

As with any ranking, though, it’s always important to assess the criteria the ranker is using. Green is not an easily measured trait. More on that in a moment.

First, let’s take a look at some companies in the IT world that are drawing attention for their green accomplishment. An recent article from Fortune declares Sun Microsystems “the greenest company under the Sun.” After speaking with Sun’s vice president of eco-responsibility Dave Douglas, Fortune writer David Kirkpatrick declares that “Sun is ahead of its peers in the scope and seriousness of its multi-tentacled environmental efforts.”

Indeed, Sun has an impressive sustainability track-record. Beyond what’s it been doing in-house, such as developing energy-efficient UltraSPARC server processors, Sun was the only IT company to join in a call to the Feds for carbon reductions to address climate change. That’s just the tip of the iceberg; Sun seems to have a strong green track record. But is it the greenest IT company out there?

Consider Hewlett-Packard. The company also has a remarkable green track record, for which it has garnered recognition (such as by Fortune, again). HP was the first to market with an Energy Star 4.0-compliant PC, and it recently announced its plan to cut its 2005 level of energy usage by 20% come 2010. Given its extensive sustainability record, is HP the greenest IT company?

Well, not if you look at Greenpeace’s recent ranking of tech companies based on the greenness of their electronics. Topping the list was China-based Lenova. At the bottom was Apple. HP, despite its green reputation, was in the middle of the pack. (Since it doesn’t do consumer electronics, Sun wasn’t ranked.) So given Greenpeace’s rating, is Lenova the tech greenest company out there?

The problem is, it’s difficult to gauge which company is the greenest, because the potential the criteria are so broad. In the case of the first two articles from Fortune, in fact, the criteria are quite vague. Meanwhile, Greenpeace attempted to create a formula based on specific criteria, but really, I’m not convinced the rankings have too much value. The nonprofit essentially rated companies based on the amount of specific hazardous substances in their wares, as well as their take-back and recycling programs. What about the energy efficiency of products? How about the packaging employed?

And what about other steps companies take (or don’t take) in-house to reduce their environmental impact and boost energy efficiency, like virtualization and storage consolidation? Using hybrid vehicles instead of traditional ones? Tapping into alternative energy?

And consider this: If Company A has managed to cut back from 1,000 servers to 100 through virtualization, while Company B is using just 75 servers but no virtualization, which is greener? A is making better use of resources, but B is using fewer.

Or suppose Company X employs virtualization, has neatly consolidated its storage, has solar panels on the roof, runs it servers on organic soybean oil, etc., but it produces PCs that have inefficient power supplies and components that require an above-average amount of electricity to run. Meanwhile, Company Y hasn’t done much in the way of improving its energy efficiency in-house, plus its CEO drives an SUV that gets 12 miles to the gallon– but its PCs are all Energy Star 4.0 compliant, low on toxic substances, and 99.7% recyclable. Which company is greener?

How would you determine which company is greenest?