Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
A Greener Apple
- Thread starter TheSailerMan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I mean, really: what is Greenpeace saying about this? Here is a quote:
Warning! Deceptive liars detected! They are merely changing their PR-policies, not their environmental-policies you damn nitwits! Or are you saying that good PR is more beneficial to the environment than actually reducing pollution, and your campaign was about making Apple prop up their PR? Is THAT what you are saying?
Recycling of electronics is mandated by law in the EU, so Apple does not even have to "make promises" here, since recycling is mandated by law.
No, "we" just convinced them to release a press-release you damn idiots! Their environmental-policies are unchanged! Can you say "deceptive liars"? Why yes, I think you can!
Hey Greenpeace: Instead making yourself look like an idiot, why don't you just shut up and go hug a tree or something?
Warning! Deceptive liars detected! They are merely changing their PR-policies, not their environmental-policies you damn nitwits! Or are you saying that good PR is more beneficial to the environment than actually reducing pollution, and your campaign was about making Apple prop up their PR? Is THAT what you are saying?
Recycling of electronics is mandated by law in the EU, so Apple does not even have to "make promises" here, since recycling is mandated by law.
No, "we" just convinced them to release a press-release you damn idiots! Their environmental-policies are unchanged! Can you say "deceptive liars"? Why yes, I think you can!
Hey Greenpeace: Instead making yourself look like an idiot, why don't you just shut up and go hug a tree or something?
Global warming is real.
His writings and Greenpeace's actions have little to do with CO2.
Anyway, I am more concerned that Jobs doesn't seem to know how to justify his writing... it looks so messy being all over the place on the right hand margin...
His writings and Greenpeace's actions have little to do with CO2.
Anyway, I am more concerned that Jobs doesn't seem to know how to justify his writing... it looks so messy being all over the place on the right hand margin...
Hot air
Thanks for that. Funny, I had forgotten my Degree level Chemistry classes.
The output from a single person of CO2 is tiny compared to the impact from industry and farming. The output of other gases during the manufacturing process have an greenhouse effect somewhere between 10 and 100 times that of C02.
If you want to discuss personal production of greenhouse effect gases then look no further than your drive/garage and the plane you take for holiday. The sooner we all stopped driving "big d**K nissan W**K mobiles" the better.
Can you look at yourself in the mirror and say "I am happy with what I did for the environment today". If not, then change.
Thanks for that. Funny, I had forgotten my Degree level Chemistry classes.
The output from a single person of CO2 is tiny compared to the impact from industry and farming. The output of other gases during the manufacturing process have an greenhouse effect somewhere between 10 and 100 times that of C02.
If you want to discuss personal production of greenhouse effect gases then look no further than your drive/garage and the plane you take for holiday. The sooner we all stopped driving "big d**K nissan W**K mobiles" the better.
Can you look at yourself in the mirror and say "I am happy with what I did for the environment today". If not, then change.
Back to the future
Love the post. Here are some more stats that you might like.
700 compounds used in the manufacture of a typical computer
50% are toxic
A desktop used 4 hours a day will produce 83KG CO2 per year.
Only two industrial countries have not signed up to Kyoto. The US and Australia.
Lets face facts people. The manufacture of computers is a nasty thing. If you want Hexavalent Chromium in your water then add it yourself.
Apple has taken the first small step in the right direction. Required - Yes. Inspirational - Yes. Enough - No way.
And to the people bashing Al Gore. When was the last time you did something for the planet ?
Love the post. Here are some more stats that you might like.
700 compounds used in the manufacture of a typical computer
50% are toxic
A desktop used 4 hours a day will produce 83KG CO2 per year.
Only two industrial countries have not signed up to Kyoto. The US and Australia.
Lets face facts people. The manufacture of computers is a nasty thing. If you want Hexavalent Chromium in your water then add it yourself.
Apple has taken the first small step in the right direction. Required - Yes. Inspirational - Yes. Enough - No way.
And to the people bashing Al Gore. When was the last time you did something for the planet ?
Horse whisperer
Sorry but you are talking rubbish here.
Yes natural fluctuations occur. What has happened over the past 100 years is no long a natural fluctuation. Levels of C02 are now over 40 times higher than any point since the year 1000. Global temperature has risen more than ever before.
Many people (mainly in North America) cling to outdated "evidence" that temperature are not rising. You need to do an investigation on the re-alignment of temperature data from Weather balloons. The "experts" who claimed global temperatures were not higher were basing their research on daytime weather balloons - which after improvements were no long impacted by direct sun.
Sorry but you are talking rubbish here.
Yes natural fluctuations occur. What has happened over the past 100 years is no long a natural fluctuation. Levels of C02 are now over 40 times higher than any point since the year 1000. Global temperature has risen more than ever before.
Many people (mainly in North America) cling to outdated "evidence" that temperature are not rising. You need to do an investigation on the re-alignment of temperature data from Weather balloons. The "experts" who claimed global temperatures were not higher were basing their research on daytime weather balloons - which after improvements were no long impacted by direct sun.
Apple is clearly responding to GreenPeace, to say otherwise is to be blatently dishonest.
GreenPeace used poor science to achieve the results they desired so they could promote a social/political position. They are unabashed, in your face, activists that will resort to any stunt to get their way.
In short, they are alarmists. They distort facts to support their positions and then engender a crisis around those facts. That is plainly terrorism. They simply terrorize companies and individuals, thus my labeling them "Eco-Terrorists".
I am so sorry for you that you have fallen so far down the slippery Politically Correct slope that you are "extremely offended" by the term "Eco-Terrorist" or "Eco-Terrorism".
And yes, I am a card carrying member of the NRA, so is my wife, my three pre-teen sons and my teen daughter, and we are all proud of it.
I take the stance that anything whatsoever that raised environmental awareness and forces positive change is a good thing. If Greenpeace can use the Apple halo effect to their advantage then I think that's excellent.
In this case Apple had not divulged their plans to cease the usage of certain toxins in the same way other companies have, the only assumption that can be made without the facts is the worst-case scenario and that's what GP did. Now Jobs has announced the plans they can stop campaigning on these points and concentrate instead on the more pressing issue of third-world dumping. Here Apple would need to improve their policy outside Europe.
Given that Apple puts a lot of stock in 'cool' and being environmentally active will certainly become incredibly cool in the coming years I think there's an opportunity for Apple to increase market share further on the back of this.
Unless you are concealing some brilliant witticism that has nothing to do with either my post or the thread in general.'Good intentions' are the best place to start. The 'methods' will follow, evolving over time to become better and better.
It's a start and that is what is important.
But there are few problems here:
a) GP didn't really achieve that much. Apple released a press-release telling what they have done in the past, and what they will do in the future. Well whooppee. Is a press-release a "positive change"?
b) GP is trying to claim that Apple has actually changed their environmental policies (they didn't) by taking some comments from the press-release out of context, and that it's all thanks to GP.
In short: GP is distorting the truth and magnifying their accomplishments.
Bbc
As anticipated, BBC has put a positive spin on the story:
"Call for Apple to go even greener"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6618533.stm
As anticipated, BBC has put a positive spin on the story:
"Call for Apple to go even greener"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6618533.stm
Product becomes obsolete--> product becomes disused--> product is discarded--> product is recycled
Therefore the steps to increased recycling are:
1. design product for earlier obsolescence
Therefore the steps to increased recycling are:
1. design product for earlier obsolescence
A Proper class?
You mean a fake class where they pretend to tell you useful information? As I said before, the "harm" caused to the environment by the non-mercury materials in Apple's computers is minimal at best.
The CO2 part was simply a way to point out that there's no such thing as living truly green - by your very existence you are hurting the environment. If you've got a problem with that and care more about mother nature than your own existence feel free to do whatever you'd like to fix that situation...
You mean a fake class where they pretend to tell you useful information? As I said before, the "harm" caused to the environment by the non-mercury materials in Apple's computers is minimal at best.
The CO2 part was simply a way to point out that there's no such thing as living truly green - by your very existence you are hurting the environment. If you've got a problem with that and care more about mother nature than your own existence feel free to do whatever you'd like to fix that situation...
Well, done Greenpeace! Apple has always had a big following among green activists who will broadly welcome this move.
Still, simply removing a few chemicals and talking about recycling isn't the answer. The major problem with today's tech is that it's non-upgradable and undurable. I still use a Technics CD walkman from 1994 regularly, while I have friends on their fith iPod, who've upgrade because iPods break easy or for reasons of fashion. A photographer I know uses a Hasselblad that's decades old (now with a digital back), while today's DSLRs are just tat as soon as the next model comes out.
We can't keep on throwing away vast amounts of electrical products as if they're yogurt pots just because we have a debt-based money supply where nonstop growth is demanded to pay back 'money' made from thin air by private banks. I generate very little waste and what waste I do create can mostly be chucked into my wormery. I wish I could buy durable, last forever, upgradable modular electronic products that contain much less instant landfill.
Still, simply removing a few chemicals and talking about recycling isn't the answer. The major problem with today's tech is that it's non-upgradable and undurable. I still use a Technics CD walkman from 1994 regularly, while I have friends on their fith iPod, who've upgrade because iPods break easy or for reasons of fashion. A photographer I know uses a Hasselblad that's decades old (now with a digital back), while today's DSLRs are just tat as soon as the next model comes out.
We can't keep on throwing away vast amounts of electrical products as if they're yogurt pots just because we have a debt-based money supply where nonstop growth is demanded to pay back 'money' made from thin air by private banks. I generate very little waste and what waste I do create can mostly be chucked into my wormery. I wish I could buy durable, last forever, upgradable modular electronic products that contain much less instant landfill.
I broadly agree with you, nothing in fact changed but as Apple wouldn't previously reveal their plans we could only assume they were not intending to cease the use of certain toxins.
I'm happy for Greenpeace to overstate anything, they're doing as much as they can while a vast majority of our race sit on their fat collective arses in their hugely overpowered automobiles in traffic jams...
For those that poo-poo global warming, maybe you don't care for yourself, fine, that's for you but what about your kids? For those that don't care and don't have kids, keep it that way.
We will just have to disagree on the Apple response. You argue that Greenpeace is responsible for Apple changing their approach. I'll argue that Greenpeace's influence was quite minor and the real reason is legal (i.e. within the EU they must change or face legal action) and public opinion has changed (to support this I'll site the majority of these postings in this thread as being positive towards Apple for changing).
But lets examine the 'terrorist' allegations more closely.
Apple's dictionary and Thesaurus said:
Greenpeace does pull various stunts to support their claims. However, as far as I know, they always pull their stunts directly against the people who they're arguing against. For example, their boats getting in the way of ships attempting to dump things at sea; pulling up GM crops dressed in white suits; climbing cranes over building sites, etc.
Greenpeace entry in Wikipedia said:
These activities Greenpeace refer to as direct action which is a very long way from extreme acts of violence against an innocent population which terrorist groups such as the IRA, the Nicaragrian Contras, Afghan mujahideen, Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi insurgents who all 'terrorise' non-related civilian populations using indiscriminate acts of violence in order to further their 'political' aims of overthrowing their governments or ridding their countries of an invading army. We don't need to discuss funding of these organisations here.
There is a rather wide gap between 'direct action' and 'terrorism'. So wide in fact that it is very difficult to see any similarities. Of course, there's the old adage that "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist", but again this doesn't really relate to 'direct action'.
In this media-focussed world we inhabit, we base our ideas and opinions upon what we see; primarily through the medium of Television. If Greenpeace simply argued through scientific papers that, for example, the world is getting warmer due to increases in carbon emissions, then nobody would hear it (most people don't read, they just look at the pictures). There's nothing like "showing the puppies" to get people's attention - without the 'puppies' do you think that Fox news would carry anything with intellectual content?
This is why Greenpeace pulls it's stunts, it's simply responding to the rather jaded media environment we live in -- especially in the US with the UK very close behind -- and showing us the puppies.
Point aside...
For what it's worth, I drive a car and have a daily commute of less than 1 gallon of gas round trip. That's obviously not perfect by any means but if the whole country (US) did that it'd have a pretty fair impact and maybe OPEC wouldn't keep screwing the economy...
Regardless, this is really about Apple just saying "look, groups have been lying about us and we want to set the record straight." Of course I wouldn't expect any type of apology from Greenpeace for their lies but an admission of fraudulence would at least be adult like of them. But then again if they did that they wouldn't be greenpeace.
Oh - and this is for all the Al Gore lovers out there. Check out President Bush's house in Crawford - it really looks like that "evil, environment hating" president is more environmentally friendly than Mr. Gore...
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp
What is a "big d**k nissan W**K mobile"???? I've only seen 1 model of Full Size pickup from nissan and the gas mileage is better than it's American Counterparts. I'd say you're looking for something along the lines of the Chevy Suburban or a F-350 to better illustrate your point. I have the misfortune of living in Texas so I know what you mean - there are WAY WAY WAY too many SUV's/Trucks out there being used simply for a daily commute...
For what it's worth, I drive a car and have a daily commute of less than 1 gallon of gas round trip. That's obviously not perfect by any means but if the whole country (US) did that it'd have a pretty fair impact and maybe OPEC wouldn't keep screwing the economy...
Regardless, this is really about Apple just saying "look, groups have been lying about us and we want to set the record straight." Of course I wouldn't expect any type of apology from Greenpeace for their lies but an admission of fraudulence would at least be adult like of them. But then again if they did that they wouldn't be greenpeace.
Oh - and this is for all the Al Gore lovers out there. Check out President Bush's house in Crawford - it really looks like that "evil, environment hating" president is more environmentally friendly than Mr. Gore...
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp
That is rather idiotic.
As an example, while HP has plans to stop using PVC in all packaging in the next two years, Apple hasn't revealed any such plans. So you could only assume that Apple doesn't intend to use PVC in packaging, right? Wrong. All you can assume is that Apple hasn't revealed any plans, and the actual fact is that Apple stopped this practice twelve years ago.
The only honest thing that Greenpeace could have done is writing what information they got from other companies and telling people that Apple refused to give them any information. What they did was lying.
Sorry but you are talking rubbish here.
Yes natural fluctuations occur. What has happened over the past 100 years is no long a natural fluctuation. Levels of C02 are now over 40 times higher than any point since the year 1000. Global temperature has risen more than ever before.
Many people (mainly in North America) cling to outdated "evidence" that temperature are not rising. You need to do an investigation on the re-alignment of temperature data from Weather balloons. The "experts" who claimed global temperatures were not higher were basing their research on daytime weather balloons - which after improvements were no long impacted by direct sun.
Exactly. Any "informed" scientist will tell you that natural fluctuations occur over LONGER periods of time, not in a century or less. Humanity's burning of fossil fuels at increasingly alarming rates IS the primary cause of expediting global climate change...
Then again, people like Clive at Five get their info from Fox News, so it HAS to be right and hundreds of thousands of independent scientists and researchers are all wrong and Fox is right about it all, including misinformation on that evil, tree hugging know it all Democrat Al Gore.
If Gore isn't eco-friendly. Al Gore's use of Electricity (wikipedia)
But you know, I don't really care about Gore. If he causes a large amount of pollution, that's bad. Whether or not he is a hypocrite doesn't matter. Why should it? Just because he's the one out there trying to get people to change to better the environment doesn't mean that if he's a hypocrite his entire message is wrong.
Honestly, if a person said in public "Everyone should always be polite to each other", but was a mean person in real life, does that mean that we should all be mean, just to spite him?
As for Apple v. Greenpeace, I see deception and misleading comments on both sides. Apple is trying to glorify what they have done to what may be an extent which is more than fair, and Greenpeace attacked Apple in a less than honest way (and has continued to do so).
I love Apple products, but I do wish they were more green. But, I do have to say, my iMac G5 (Ambient Light Sensor) only uses the amount of energy which 3 incandescent light bulbs use! (180 watts) - that's the MAXIMUM. Most power supplies in desktops seem to be > 300 watts (to over 500). I could have my numbers mixed up, though.
Yep
Key word is "expediting"...
But then again when we were polluting the crap out of air back in the 40's and 50's the temp actually went down. Proof that Mother Nature is gonna do whatever she d@mn well feels like. We're gonna end up in another ice age - that's not a question of "if" but "when". Personally I don't care if we have another ice age, we've got the technology to survive and it most severely effects the northern hemisphere. That's a good thing since most all of the "3rd World" countries are in the southern (i.e. they probably won't freeze to death like they would if they were in the northern hemisphere).
But then again the prospect of what happens in "The Day After Tomorrow" wasn't at all scary to me so I can only assume that I'm numb to the thought of frigid temps...
Key word is "expediting"...
But then again when we were polluting the crap out of air back in the 40's and 50's the temp actually went down. Proof that Mother Nature is gonna do whatever she d@mn well feels like. We're gonna end up in another ice age - that's not a question of "if" but "when". Personally I don't care if we have another ice age, we've got the technology to survive and it most severely effects the northern hemisphere. That's a good thing since most all of the "3rd World" countries are in the southern (i.e. they probably won't freeze to death like they would if they were in the northern hemisphere).
But then again the prospect of what happens in "The Day After Tomorrow" wasn't at all scary to me so I can only assume that I'm numb to the thought of frigid temps...
You're right but that's in a perfect world. If you're going to champion a cause you need live by example. You need to show the masses how it's done. I don't really care if Gore uses green energy or not - that fact of the matter is he uses WAY too much as it is. People don't realize that regardless of how much green energy he's using he's using too much - he's preventing others who would like to use green energy from doing so since the capacity isn't there. Any intelligent person will tell you the first step to greening the electricity industry is by decreasing consumption...
Case and point - Austin, TX:
The electricity company in Austin has a limited # of subscribers to it's green energy production. My g/f tried to sign up but couldn't because they were already at max capacity. Now if all those people currently on the list would use less more people could use green energy and thus fewer people would be using energy from coal burning plants.
Then again we could really help ourselves if we just built a bunch of nuclear power plants. I hate to admit it but France is actually smarter than the rest of the world on this one.
Sorry but you are talking rubbish here.
Yes natural fluctuations occur. What has happened over the past 100 years is no long a natural fluctuation. Levels of C02 are now over 40 times higher than any point since the year 1000. Global temperature has risen more than ever before.
Many people (mainly in North America) cling to outdated "evidence" that temperature are not rising. You need to do an investigation on the re-alignment of temperature data from Weather balloons. The "experts" who claimed global temperatures were not higher were basing their research on daytime weather balloons - which after improvements were no long impacted by direct sun.
"Including uncertainties in the models and in future greenhouse gas concentrations, the IPCC anticipates a warming of 1.1 °C to 6.4 °C (2.0 °F to 11.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100."
i'm bloody shaking in my boots
also, temperatures are rising on other planets in our solar system and i'm pretty certain nobody is driving SUVs on Venus.CO2 emissions are not what you should be worried about, worry about something that is actually toxic if you must.