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.
Apple Announces Renewable Energy and Forestland Initiatives in China
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well they are not great but better than most at least according to this link:
http://www.hightech-rating.ch/fr/
http://www.rts.ch/info/sciences-tech/6129384-les-marques-de-telephones-portables-classees-selon-leur-ethique.html
Sorry it's in French - maybe Google translate for the details, anyway Apple get 3rd place after Nokia and HP. Just to say it's a pretty bad system that needs changing across the board. This doesn't mean fixing up the environment isn't a good thing in and of itself.
Aluminium.
Or Aluminum for those who want to call it that.
But Aluminimum is definitely a mistake
Haha thanks - fixed that! I guess I was getting too caught up in Ive's superior phonetics.
Awesome!!
How about this now, build your stuff here. (Yes, I know, a little bit less profits) but build up the economy that buys your stuff, and start a trend.
"A little less bit profits". Yeah because it's that simple to move manufacturing to the U.S....and profits are the only reason Apple products are manufactured in China.
Yeah, right
OK good, but colour me dubious.
I grew up in Oregon. During my whole childhood they talked about responsibly managing the forests too. Then I'd go flying with my dad and see mile after mile where everything had been cut and not replanted. That is everything except for a strip along the highway so people could convince themselves that Oregon was still covered with trees. Every year we'd choke under the smoke from slash-burning. Every year the logs coming out of the woods would get smaller. Every year Weyerhaeuser and Georgia Pacific would close more small mills, while taking the profits and opening some new lands for "responsible management". Finally they got down to demanding they be allowed to "responsibly manage" the last 1% of the old growth forest.
Why would I expect any company to responsibly manage a forest that takes 40 years to mature when the horizon for most companies planning is at most 12 months? Apple may be better than most but ...
Colour me dubious.
OK good, but colour me dubious.
I grew up in Oregon. During my whole childhood they talked about responsibly managing the forests too. Then I'd go flying with my dad and see mile after mile where everything had been cut and not replanted. That is everything except for a strip along the highway so people could convince themselves that Oregon was still covered with trees. Every year we'd choke under the smoke from slash-burning. Every year the logs coming out of the woods would get smaller. Every year Weyerhaeuser and Georgia Pacific would close more small mills, while taking the profits and opening some new lands for "responsible management". Finally they got down to demanding they be allowed to "responsibly manage" the last 1% of the old growth forest.
Why would I expect any company to responsibly manage a forest that takes 40 years to mature when the horizon for most companies planning is at most 12 months? Apple may be better than most but ...
Colour me dubious.
Nice.
Good idea, good methodology. I think the Chinese will be onboard in a big way with this. I just hope the rural, local populations in China see it as a positive. One can never be sure.
----------
No, but Apple Retail Employees are. Is there a significant difference?
Good idea, good methodology. I think the Chinese will be onboard in a big way with this. I just hope the rural, local populations in China see it as a positive. One can never be sure.
----------
No, but Apple Retail Employees are. Is there a significant difference?
Call me a jerk if you must, but ...
IMO, it's largely a waste of time and energy to put a lot of concern into situations happening in nations other than the one you're a citizen of.
In America, for example, we built the nation on the idea that we were going to do things differently than the rest of the world. Nobody else was interested in a Democratic Republic at the time. Like all countries, we made a lot of mistakes (slavery, slow to give women equal voting rights, etc.) ... but I think it was a grand experiment, overall. Too many people, today, are trying their hardest to tear it apart and convert it into the same type of government that other nations have (Socialism, for example).
If American corporations are able to make legal deals and contracts with companies elsewhere in the world that wind up favorable to America -- so what? It's really not our job to police the rest of the world, OR to ensure their citizens get deals more equivalent to what U.S. citizens get.
Not a 100% Ayn Rand follower, but she had a really valid point with her "Greed is good!" thing. She was trying to get people to come to grips with human nature and realize that greed is a big motivator. So many great things were accomplished because people weren't content to sit back and accept what they already had. I feel like half the people in America today run around saddled with guilt for everything wrong someplace else in the world. It's always "our fault" if we don't give somebody, someplace else in the world, the same benefits or standard of living we get here -- yet it's those other nations' choices to operate sub-optimal forms of government that REALLY cause their issues.
IMO, it's largely a waste of time and energy to put a lot of concern into situations happening in nations other than the one you're a citizen of.
In America, for example, we built the nation on the idea that we were going to do things differently than the rest of the world. Nobody else was interested in a Democratic Republic at the time. Like all countries, we made a lot of mistakes (slavery, slow to give women equal voting rights, etc.) ... but I think it was a grand experiment, overall. Too many people, today, are trying their hardest to tear it apart and convert it into the same type of government that other nations have (Socialism, for example).
If American corporations are able to make legal deals and contracts with companies elsewhere in the world that wind up favorable to America -- so what? It's really not our job to police the rest of the world, OR to ensure their citizens get deals more equivalent to what U.S. citizens get.
Not a 100% Ayn Rand follower, but she had a really valid point with her "Greed is good!" thing. She was trying to get people to come to grips with human nature and realize that greed is a big motivator. So many great things were accomplished because people weren't content to sit back and accept what they already had. I feel like half the people in America today run around saddled with guilt for everything wrong someplace else in the world. It's always "our fault" if we don't give somebody, someplace else in the world, the same benefits or standard of living we get here -- yet it's those other nations' choices to operate sub-optimal forms of government that REALLY cause their issues.
I think essentially they are. When Apple subcontracts large manufacturing operations to Foxconn, it's not like they can just say, "whelp, nothing to do with us!"
However, the poster you responded to is ignorant of working conditions in foxconn/apple factories in China.
That is exactly what those trees do. Trees are renewable and can be farmed in a sustainable way just like a family farm can produce other crops for generations. Trees take a long time to grow and a lot of space, but the theory is the same. You plant them, you take care of them, you harvest them, then you replace them.
With enough of these tree farms, we should be able to not use trees from any old growth forests. Just governments, companies, and consumers have to get behind not using paper products that came from old growth forests. (With the exception that even regular forests do benefit a bit from thinning and picking up older trees to reduce the chance of forest fires. Though even the occasional forest fire is part of the cycle of life and shouldn't be entirely prevented.)
But they don't exclusively make apple products. They have a lot of other big name contracts too, including HP, Google, Dell, Cisco, and a lot of others.
They make Kindles, Xbox, Playstation, Blackberry, Wii, Motorola, Dell, and many other products.
Have you heard about Farms? Their product is produce. A tree farm's product is trees. If the tree farm stops producing trees, then it goes out of business. Farms don't have 12 month time frames, some are operational (for one family or another or one for company or another) for centuries.
If there is a demand for trees (i.e., paper) and if governments, companies, or just reality does not allow those trees to be economically produced from old growth forests, then these farms will see their trees replanted and will be taken care of. For the tree farmer it is simple economic interest. It isn't particularly complicated. Apple might be acting from a higher standard, but most likely they are locking in a good price for the paper by entering into long-term contracts with these tree farms. They are doing the same thing in renewable energy. They are fixing their input price on a necessary item. The "good for the earth" PR is just gravy. Delicious gravy. to be sure. But I bet all these deals pencil out economically as well.
Good job Apple! I'm very happy with the great environmental strides Tim Cook has taken since taking leadership.
It’s good to reduce, reuse, recycle and I hope they and others are doing more going forward.
I still think there’s a degree of political posturing, (same as all companies do). I’ve been in Apple data centres, (amongst others), and I know how much energy they waste day in and day out.
Also, the boxes they use to cover their goods. In comparison to say the box that a Nest Protect comes in. the Apple boxes are overly painted and glossy, that has to be wasteful?
I can understand taking the time to make the finished article all over the top but the box, even those that appreciate the packaging have to concede that it’s not necessary, especially given that in the vast majority of cases the box will never be seen again.
I’m sure there is more to things than I know but at the prices Apple charge they should be doing and giving back more.
I went into a supermarket the other day and saw compostible packaging, great idea!
Well, she's talking about a "plant" and there are several of those exclusively dediated to Apple products, so she is not wrong per-sé.
Greed for money and power is 'good'. Greed for a fulfilling life, a clean environment, and a job that allows you to exist as a human being is bad. THAT is the message from your vaunted America...
John Oliver did a HUGE take down of the 'American capitalist system', over the idea of Mother's Day...
Greed is NOT good is it comes with a blind eye for those that it exploits.
----------
Yet there are facilities dedicated solely to manufacturing Apple products.
----------
Ibid.
Agreed. What Apple is doing will help protect actual forests, but we've interfered with natural fires and processes so long in the US, that any time a spark flies, thousands of acres go up.
Last year, a fire (I think it was called the San Juan or San Lucas fire) started in northeastern Arizona. It had the potential to devastate our forests like so many before, but the Forest Service had been partnering with loggers on a project to thin the north side of the Apache forest. As soon as the fire hit that area, BAM - it fell down to the grass and burned itself out - no need for humans to mess with it. It was a win-win: loggers got business and the forest was saved.
Our forests are freakishly overgrown. Have you seen pictures of western forests in the 1800's, early 1900's, before we messed them up? I'm surprised moose and elk can still walk through our forests today with their huge racks. They need to be thinned and maintained, with periodic logging when too thick, and 'farm' forests on private land to continue producing lumber.
I guess you missed the documentary on the BBC where it showed how Apple source their materials & how badly suppliers working conditions are.
There's very little to be proud about! Obviously the same can be said of any tech company, not just Apple. The products we purchase & enjoy come at a massive cost to those people/places who actually manufacture them.
Of course all these people in the manufacturing & sourcing process are getting paid and that makes it ok in many people's eyes, so who cares right?
As a proud American, I see things very differently. First off, I wish the best for all people, regardless of where they happen to have been born, etc. I don't think abstract notations on some paperwork somewhere (which is what denotes your citizenship) is really all that important when you think about what rights and responsibilities a person *should* have.
Also, I don't feel any guilt for the advantages I have. Either I got them through luck -- not my fault -- or I earned them. Any other notion seems like nonsense to me. Anyone trying to make you feel bad for what you have, it's just a con, and you're best off ignoring them.
But that's not to say "screw 'em" to everyone else. You and Ayn Rand may favor a self-centered philosophy, but that's purely a personal choice. You mention great accomplishments, but I think the accrual of personal wealth and power are rather unambitious goals in the greater scheme of things.
no, they are not, but so are chinese trees. apple is still responsible for the working conditions under which their goods are manufactured (as are we as consumers). they could have chosen another manufacturer who treats its employees better - which would probably result in lower production volume and higher prices, but still... they are responsible for their choices.
it's just cheaper, easier and makes prettier pictures to do some environment-related PR-stunt.
Last edited:
Why do people think the pronunciation that English people learn is "superior"?
It's different than the way educated Americans learn to speak. They often have different pronunciations for words like "mandatory", "nomenclature", and even "clerk" (the 'e' is pronounced like the first 'e' in "sergeant"). But it's not inherently better, nor it is an affectation to make them feel superior. It's just different.
Maybe I prefer it to my own - superior doesn't necessarily have to insinuate a negative connotation. It's just the word I chose to use. Lighten up and don't read so much into it.
Cheers.
Id agree with that but Ill also say that we would also have to get used to paying higher prices. Suddenly it all becomes unpalatable.
Let's just repeat the same thing over again and again. Don't let facts get in the way.
I have visited many, many factories in China, my friends are in the sourcing/exporting business and I travel with them. Do you KNOW how good the Foxconn factories are comparing to most or all the other factories? These workers are not slaves, they can quit anytime and go to work anywhere else if the want. But because they lack education or skill they have to do factory work. Or would you rather they stay on the farm and live in the 19th century with no opportunities?
It's so easy for people like you to use your first world view and judge everything according to your standards. Travel some and see how the real world is like. May I suggest western China, India, Africa, Rural South America to start.
IF you really against all these slave labor practices, don't buy ANYTHING from Asia, computers, clothes, household goods, shoes etc. Only buy from the good old USA. Let's see you put your money where your heart is.