Industrial adviser: If two new processes under consideration are not substantially different in cost, then the less environmentally damaging process should be chosen. If, however, a company already employs an environmentally damaging process and retooling for a less damaging process would involve substantial cost, then that company should retool only if retooling is either legally required or likely to bring long-term savings substantially greater than the cost. Which one of the following judgments conforms most closely to the principles described by the industrial adviser? ['In manufacturing pincushions, a company uses a process that, though legal, has come under heavy public criticism for the environmental damage it causes. The company should change its process to preserve its public image, despite some expected long-term losses from doing so.', 'A company is considering two new processes for the manufacture of staples. Process A is more expensive than process B but not substantially so. However, process A is substantially less environmentally damaging than process B. The company should implement process A.', 'Two new processes are being considered for the manufacture of ball bearings. The processes are similar, except that the chemicals used in process A will pollute a nearby river slightly more than will the chemicals for process B. Process A is also slightly cheaper than process B. The company should use process A.', 'A company is considering changing its process for manufacturing shoelaces. The new process is cheaper and less environmentally damaging than the old. Both are legal. Changing processes would be costly, but the cost would be almost entirely recovered in long-term savings. The company should switch processes.']