Well one place I’m getting my information from is my own experience and that of a couple of friends. Secondly from common sense. Thirdly from documentation that I can’t point you to as I don’t have access to it any more (so feel free to disregard that if you wish, it doesn't negate the rest of this reply). So ok, if you got a new AirPod instead of a refurbished one then you got lucky. Doesn’t change my point.
Meanwhile, I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. You said initially:
My response amounted to: if you're throwing them out then that's on you. Apple offers both the battery replacement program and their comprehensive recycling programs. We know for certain in the latter case they recycle the devices handed in. It makes more sense on every level that they also recycle those in the former case, than the claims you're making.
As mentioned above, I have anecdotal evidence, and common sense, among other things. I also have sources I can't cite. But I don't need to. You're making claims that Apple possibly doesn't recycle their devices, when Apple claims they do. I believe that puts the onus on you to cite your sources for your claim. The existence of startups taking advantage of the misinformation spread by Apple haters doesn't count as evidence that Apple doesn't replace the batteries internally.
Even if Apple does not replace the batteries and instead simply grinds up the AirPods for raw materials or something, it's still recycling them and therefore not negatively impacting the environment. Apple engineers and repairs their devices, even if they don't build them from scratch. There is simply no reason to believe they don't have the ability or desire to open them up and replace the batteries as part of their recycling program.
I'm well aware the suppliers aren't using 100% clean energy. That's public knowledge as evidenced by their determination to change that by 2030.
As for their own operations, from your last statement there, I don't think you understand at all what Apple's clean energy program is about either.
Apple claims their operations ARE carbon neutral. See
Apple newsroom. Search the page for "While Apple is already carbon neutral across its global operations". It doesn't matter if that's done by actually running their operations from renewable sources or if it's offsetting with renewable energy credits. If it's carbon neutral it's carbon neutral.
If they're lying, well they're lying, but I understand there are regulations in place to stop companies making those kinds of claims falsely. So I trust the system enough to catch them if they're lying, and since no one (govt or otherwise) has done so yet, I have no reason to believe they are. If you have actual evidence to the contrary, please do share. Otherwise I have to side with them -- I trust Apple official statements more than I trust self-contradicting comments on an internet forum.
You had to go and call out what was obviously an exaggeration ("twice") while missing the point.
Are you able to show evidence of any other device by any other reputable company with equal or better quality, functionality, battery life, and size to the AirPods Pro, that have removable batteries? Does such a thing exist? Could Apple really have done it better than they have?
If you don't understand how the laws of physics require a removable battery to require more materials in the device (therefore taking up more space -- significant in a device that small) one way or another, all else being equal, then I'm not the one to try to educate you. We'll have to just agree to disagree.
I don't know about others but I'm not aggressively defending Apple, I'm calling out misinformation within a topic I happen to be interested in. Apple has a lot of flaws. Making the batteries in their devices non-user-replaceable is not one of them.
Note: NON-USER-replacable. You keep making this claim that Apple expects consumers to buy new AirPods every 3 years. That is just incorrect.
It is misinformation that needs to be called out. You are either deliberately trying to mislead, or you're that ignorant and not listening enough to correct that. Multiple people here have pointed out the battery replacement program. For $49 each -- not another $250+ for new AirPods -- you can have the practical equivalent of the batteries replaced in your AirPods, and assurance that Apple will recycle, one way or another, whatever they don't give back to you.
But it IS known. It is 100%, according to Apple. Again, if they're lying, they're lying, but I have no reason to believe, and so far you've shown no evidence, that they are. But that said, let's say for a moment that it really is not known: therefore
you don't know, and therefore your complaints about environmental wastage are not founded in any evidence. You're just speculating.
Meanwhile...
More misinformation. As I and others have said already, Apple recycles all their devices 100%. Unless you're a deep conspiracy theorist in which case this conversation is completely pointless, it makes a lot more sense that they would do that by replacing the batteries and selling as refurbished at least some of those. In either case, what's the alternative?
If users were able to replace the batteries, then where would the vast majority of those dead batteries go? Yes, I'm sure you'd be responsible and go out of your way to hand them in to a recycling center that can handle batteries, or whatever else, but we both know that the vast majority of consumers will not. The average neighborhood recycling program doesn't recycle batteries.
It makes more sense to me that, Apple recycling 100% of every AirPod they're given the opportunity to, including all those dead batteries, is better for the environment than user-replaced dead AirPod batteries going to landfill.
----
Edited for a few spelling mistakes and correcting "Apple ... builds these devices" -- no, they don't. Apple has contracted manufacturers doing that.
