Apple Environmental Report: Carbon Footprint Down 3%, 145 U.S. Stores Now Using 100% Renewable Energy

[currocj]

Before all the self high fiving and fist pumps by those who are feeling all warm and fuzzy about being Apple customers, Apple is spending a few hundred million out of their $100B+ wad to sound green.

The greenest thing they could ever do? Sell and promote an iPhone you only upgrade every 5-7 years. That includes new iOS support. They'll never do this. Why? The thing they worship more than lower (or zero) carbon footprinting, is the bottom line.

The raping and polluting of China's natural resources is happening at a breakneck pace for Apple's profits.

 

[CXsjr]

The raping and polluting of China's natural resources is happening at a breakneck pace for Apple's profits.

I fear the Chinese are quite capable of raping and polluting their own natural resources, with or without the (by comparison) small contribution from Apple: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/07/china-coal-idUSL3N0K90H720140107

 

[velocityg4]

Before all the self high fiving and fist pumps by those who are feeling all warm and fuzzy about being Apple customers, Apple is spending a few hundred million out of their $100B+ wad to sound green.

The greenest thing they could ever do? Sell and promote an iPhone you only upgrade every 5-7 years. That includes new iOS support. They'll never do this. Why? The thing they worship more than lower (or zero) carbon footprinting, is the bottom line.

The raping and polluting of China's natural resources is happening at a breakneck pace for Apple's profits.

They supported the 3GS for four years. The same for the iPhone 4 (whose support will end with iOS 8). My 3GS is now five years old and still works fine. It does what I need it to do and runs all the apps I am interested in.

Just because a lot of people upgrade more frequently shows that the consumer isn't willing to wait. But they could if they wanted to.

 

[LordQ]

They supported the 3GS for four years. The same for the iPhone 4 (whose support will end with iOS 8). My 3GS is now five years old and still works fine. It does what I need it to do and runs all the apps I am interested in.

Just because a lot of people upgrade more frequently shows that the consumer isn't willing to wait. But they could if they wanted to.

And don't forget the iPad 2, that thing is a warrior.

 

[acslater017]

I smell cooked books here.

They went back and redid their numbers for 2012 and concluded that 2012-2013 was their first decline ever. But they've only done 2012 and 2013 with this new methodology. For all we know, if they used that same metrology in 2011, then maybe 2011-2012 would have also shown a decline, which could have made that the first decline ever. Or 2010-2011. Or 2009-2010.

Maybe calling it "cooking the books" isn't quite right, but I know that I have a valid point if someone could put a proper name to it... the last time I did any statistics like this was 2 years ago.

From the report:
"Our study revealed that emissions associated with manufacturing our aluminum housings were nearly four times higher than we believed, so we’ve updated our 2013 life cycle analysis data to be more accurate. As a result, the carbon emissions we reported for 2013 are 9 percent higher than the carbon emissions we reported for 2012. However, this increase is due to previously underestimating our emissions, not because our emissions increased. In fact, when we recalculated the 2012 data using the new methodology, our carbon emissions actually dropped by 3 percent year over year.

In other words, carbon emissions from aluminum is more than they thought. But even when they apply this fairly to both 2012 and 2013, total emissions had decreased by 3%. 1) That's only fair, as a stricter interpretation should not be applied merely to the latest year 2) "Oops actually when I look again, we did better" is hardly a brilliant way to deceive people 3) They are applying stricter standards of measurement, producing more goods, and still resulting in a small net decrease.

----------

Before all the self high fiving and fist pumps by those who are feeling all warm and fuzzy about being Apple customers, Apple is spending a few hundred million out of their $100B+ wad to sound green.

The greenest thing they could ever do? Sell and promote an iPhone you only upgrade every 5-7 years. That includes new iOS support. They'll never do this. Why? The thing they worship more than lower (or zero) carbon footprinting, is the bottom line.

Oh please. They are a company that manufacturers products and makes money. I suppose the greenest solution of all would be to shut down Apple Inc. permanently :roll eyes: While we're at it, let's not produce electricity, use vehicles, or have industry.

 

[roadbloc]

This is good. User replaceable parts would be even better.

 

[aloshka]

Hilarious.

Samsung's been green and environmentally conscious many years before Apple even thought of going green.

Citations? Facts? Anything?

----------

Before all the self high fiving and fist pumps by those who are feeling all warm and fuzzy about being Apple customers, Apple is spending a few hundred million out of their $100B+ wad to sound green.

The greenest thing they could ever do? Sell and promote an iPhone you only upgrade every 5-7 years. That includes new iOS support. They'll never do this. Why? The thing they worship more than lower (or zero) carbon footprinting, is the bottom line.

The raping and polluting of China's natural resources is happening at a breakneck pace for Apple's profits.

Or the technology that's 5 years ago cannot keep up with the software. You can't have it both ways. Can't have new features, incredible speed, new camera 5 years ago. You can, however stick to your 3GS. Many people still have them.

----------

The raping and polluting of China's natural resources is happening at a breakneck pace for Apple's profits.

I'd focus on America first with the insane amount of destruction for ranching, and the brand new earthquakes and chemicals introduced by the new insanely rising fracking practices.. I get that everyone wants heart disease and poison everyone in the entire ecosystem, but maybe, maybe apple can set an example and a few companies at least try, even if it's half-assed and for marketing purposes. One solar panel and they are already doing better.

Want to help the earth? Go vegan, the impact you will have if you do it just for three months is the same as driving a hybrid for a year. And you will save a part of the Amazonian rain forest and stop the mutating of antibiotic resistant bacteria. I can go on...

Or focus on Apple and how they are making changes, small or big, and ridicule them for trying. Discredit them for everything. And then post China's resource rape awareness on Facebook, while eating a hamburger that you got driving you 10 miles to a gallon car. But at least you recycle

 

[Jazwire]

How about execs fly commercial airlines and no more private jets.

 

[lincolntran]

I wish Samsung copied this from Apple already.

 

[PocketSand11]

EDIT: I was replying to a comment that was deleted.

Nobody really knows what causes global warming, and there's still research to be done, so I don't see how you could be educated in its causes anyway. Why the strong reaction?

 

[n-evo]

Apple employees cycling to work. How cute. In the grand scheme of things it means jack **** unless the company's manufacturing carbon footprint goes down.

 

[now i see it]

I don't think you have to believe in anthropogenic global warming to agree that pollution sucks and forests are great.

True. And what is the future? More pollution and less forests....and there is nothing that can stop that. Slow it down a bit? Perhaps. Stop it? Impossible.

 

[BvizioN]

Nobody really knows what causes global warming, and there's still research to be done, so I don't see how you could be educated in its causes anyway.

I personally believe CO2 does contribute quite a lot in global warming, but even if you don't believe that, as someone else have said above..... you surely don't believe pollution is good and forests are bad?

 

[vvswarup]

Before all the self high fiving and fist pumps by those who are feeling all warm and fuzzy about being Apple customers, Apple is spending a few hundred million out of their $100B+ wad to sound green.

The greenest thing they could ever do? Sell and promote an iPhone you only upgrade every 5-7 years. That includes new iOS support. They'll never do this. Why? The thing they worship more than lower (or zero) carbon footprinting, is the bottom line.

The raping and polluting of China's natural resources is happening at a breakneck pace for Apple's profits.

Apple doesn't have a choice in the matter. Apple is just doing what its competition is doing. Others release phones at an even faster rate than Apple. Samsung has released three iterations of the Galaxy smart watch in less than a year. They put out Galaxy phones every 6 months or so. Apple has no choice but to release an iPhone at a similar rate or they're not going to be able to keep up.

 

[PocketSand11]

You know what would seriously reduce all computer companies' pollution? If jerks would stop messing with the web standards every few minutes. Yeah, I'm looking at you, Google. Just leave the freaking websites alone. Web standards change, then old computers can't use websites, then they need to be upgraded. I'm also suspicious of Apple for releasing a new OS, Mavericks, that claimed to be faster but actually crippled older Macs.

We're at the point where a decent PC has a 3.X GHz Intel i5 and 8GB of RAM. Why else would anyone but video editors and extreme video game players need to buy new computers in the future?

----------

I personally believe CO2 does contribute quite a lot in global warming, but even if you don't believe that, as someone else have said above..... you surely don't believe pollution is good and forests are bad?

I never said that I don't believe (that is, actively don't believe) that carbon dioxide contributes "a lot" to global warming. I don't know what it does. It seems like it would be negligible compared to natural changes, but that's only a guess. There's nothing but conflicting theories about it. It's even worse that some politicians turned it into a political issue, so now it's hard to trust anyone. It's like asking me whether or not diet soda is extra bad for you. I avoid it anyway, but I don't really know because there's insufficient research.

There's proof that pollution is bad for various reasons, even if one of those is not its effect on the global climate. Of course it should be reduced.

 

[aloshka]

Nobody really knows what causes global warming, and there's still research to be done, so I don't see how you could be educated in its causes anyway. Why the strong reaction?

Global warming isn't the only issue. And everyone DOES know what causes global warming. The ozone layer is destroyed by carbon's, methane, and a whole lot of other things. Basically no O2 = no protection from radiation = really hot / burning = everyone dies pretty quick. So stopping any of the things that destroys the ozone will retard the process of global warming instead of accelerate it.

While not directly "global warming", still an issue that is pressing.

 

[Junipr]

I'm not a sucker for this Man Made Global Warming/Cooling/Flooding/Droughting, but at least Apple puts its money where their beliefs are at.

Me too. When I see this graph showing exponential increases in greenhouse gases correlating directly with the industrial age, like you I don't suck. MERICA!!!

 

[aloshka]

Apple employees cycling to work. How cute. In the grand scheme of things it means jack **** unless the company's manufacturing carbon footprint goes down.

That's what this article is about. Carbon footprint going down. The bikes was just a side-note of what else they are trying to do.

 

[MikeyMike01]

I don't think you have to believe in anthropogenic global warming to agree that pollution sucks and forests are great.

This isn't necessarily directed at you, but I like how global warming has been repositioned as a belief. It's science, it's either a fact or it isn't.

 

[Mums]

I'm not a sucker for this Man Made Global Warming/Cooling/Flooding/Droughting, but at least Apple puts its money where their beliefs are at.

You're right - don't listen to the global warming propagandists on this site. It's always bothered me that Al Gore had/has his tentacles in Apple.

 

[PocketSand11]

Global warming isn't the only issue. And everyone DOES know what causes global warming. The ozone layer is destroyed by carbon's, methane, and a whole lot of other things. Basically no O2 = no protection from radiation = really hot / burning = everyone dies pretty quick. So stopping any of the things that destroys the ozone will retard the process of global warming instead of accelerate it.

Just FYI: CO2 doesn't destroy ozone; halogens and certain other molecules do. Ozone is also O3, not O2. CO2 causes a greenhouse effect, which traps heat on Earth. The question is whether humans create enough CO2 to cause significant effects on the climate. Nobody actually knows the answer to that question, but there are theories and some evidence. The original poster in the replies was talking about global warming specifically, and someone called him an idiot for doubting its causes, probably because it's a political issue now that he has way too strong of a side on.

So I don't know, nor do I claim to know whether humans cause any significant impact on global climate change. I can't discount or support any theories.

 

[Tech198]

Looks like Apple seeing "green"

 

[swy05]

Citations? Facts? Anything?

----------



Or the technology that's 5 years ago cannot keep up with the software. You can't have it both ways. Can't have new features, incredible speed, new camera 5 years ago. You can, however stick to your 3GS. Many people still have them.

----------


I'd focus on America first with the insane amount of destruction for ranching, and the brand new earthquakes and chemicals introduced by the new insanely rising fracking practices.. I get that everyone wants heart disease and poison everyone in the entire ecosystem, but maybe, maybe apple can set an example and a few companies at least try, even if it's half-assed and for marketing purposes. One solar panel and they are already doing better.

Want to help the earth? Go vegan, the impact you will have if you do it just for three months is the same as driving a hybrid for a year. And you will save a part of the Amazonian rain forest and stop the mutating of antibiotic resistant bacteria. I can go on...

Or focus on Apple and how they are making changes, small or big, and ridicule them for trying. Discredit them for everything. And then post China's resource rape awareness on Facebook, while eating a hamburger that you got driving you 10 miles to a gallon car. But at least you recycle

Consider this an appetizer to get you started.

http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/Best-Global-Green-Brands/2014/best-global-green-brands-2014-brand-view.aspx

 

[iBug2]

Too bad all this work only cuts down carbon footprint by 3% when we have to cut it by 500%.

 

[aloshka]

Just FYI: CO2 doesn't destroy ozone; halogens and certain other molecules do. Ozone is also O3, not O2. CO2 causes a greenhouse effect, which traps heat on Earth. The question is whether humans create enough CO2 to cause significant effects on the climate. Nobody actually knows the answer to that question, but there are theories and some evidence. The original poster in the replies was talking about global warming specifically, and someone called him an idiot for doubting its causes, probably because it's a political issue now that he has way too strong of a side on.

Thanks for the clarification. Just answered based on memory, but you are right.

----------

Consider this an appetizer to get you started.

http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-g...best-global-green-brands-2014-brand-view.aspx

A brand value site? You realize it's the internet, and anyone can post anything they want w/o having to explain themselves. Or am I the only one that understands a "branding" site probably does not have good information. All these companies are their clients and I'm assuming these guys get paid by their clients. Or was that the point you were making?