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 Highlights Environmental Responsibility in 2015 Progress Report
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'd be fascinated to know Apple's plans for recycling the Watch Edition and retrieving the gold from the case.
So are you willing to pay $3000 for your next iPhone so it can be manufactured in 'Murica?
[Mod Note]
Several comments regarding the ethics and politics of Apple's payment of taxes were removed. If there is interest in discussing that topic, it should occur in the Politics, Religion, Social Issues section of the forum.
Only users with a history of 100 posts can post in the Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum.
Several comments regarding the ethics and politics of Apple's payment of taxes were removed. If there is interest in discussing that topic, it should occur in the Politics, Religion, Social Issues section of the forum.
Only users with a history of 100 posts can post in the Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum.
....
This^
The vast majority of people don't upgrade their RAM. The thing craps out after a few years and they go buy a new computer. Its amazing the negativity in a thread with such a positive message. Apple is doing and spending a great deal trying to lessen their impact on the environment. This is a good thing.
Last edited:
How is user replaceable batteries better for the environment? You can still get your batteries replaced elsewhere, just can't do it yourself. Actually, if you could replace batteries, you'd probably "toss out" the old one, and not recycle it properly like Apple does it when they replace your battery. Better for the environment.
How is non-soldered RAM better for the environment? As long as you cannot upgrade the RAM, why are you going to take out the old 8 GB stick and put in a new 8 GB one?
Apple populates both banks to get faster working memory. If you want more memory, BTO. If you want a memory-less mac, tough luck. But again, how is this relevant to environmental impact?
Apple most of the time offers the fastest processors available in the market as BTO. So I don't really understand your 5th point.
It's a solar farm. Kind of like this:
http://www.vermontsolargardens.com
I live in Vermont and see this all the time. What Apple is doing is not new nor ahead of the curve.
It's relevant to the misnomer that most people care about user replaceable batteries. And I don't know what that has to do with the environment anyway becausecif I have Apple (or a reputable 3rd party) replace my battery there's better chance the old battery will be properly disposed of.
They're not quite AHEAD of everyone else in being self sufficient. Being self sufficient as a company is ONE thing, however, powering an entire city with renewable energy is a feat.
I live in Vermont and Burlington is the first city to have renewable electricity. I've seen solar farms here and there, especially one next to a famous college five minutes away from me.
http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/10/brlington-runs-on-100-percent-renewable-energy/
I don't think Apple being green is all that accurate and to be honest, it's problematic when they have 'unibody' designs that actually add to the landfill waste of electronics, if people don't recycle them. It FORCES people to ditch them once they crap out instead of prolonging their value.
The older machines Apples used to make allows users to expand memory and performance to get the most mileage out of their systems rather than being 'boxed in'.
Imagine if a car manufacturer were to build a 'unibody' car that locks you out of changing or upgrading your tires? Or locking you out of being able to open up the hood to fix the engine or upgrade it with new battery or engine parts?
I like that Apple is doing this with their own money and not forcing me to buy stuff with money that I am forced to part with at the point of a gun (Solyndra).
Is there any solid data that suggests people are replacing computers more frequently because they can't replace the batteries and RAM themselves? Over the past 3 years or so I've had 3 different iPhones. My replacing them had nothing to do with battery or RAM. Even if people could easily replace all these things there would be new technology that would make them want to upgrade anyway.
This is hugely important. Electronics companies need to be more prudent with e-waste, clean/renewable energy and environmental responsibility. Apple may not be perfect, but at least they're trying and they are far ahead of others. More importantly, they've shown going "green" doesn't mean going "red". 
Nope. Then there'd be that many more spent removable batteries to pollute. Lots more expense servicing old equipment. Lots more pissed off pinch pennies complaining about lack of support. With soldered components, Apple stands a better chance of recycling machines' components properly.
Upgrading RAM and hardisks is so '90s. Plan ahead and buy more than you think you'll need when you get a new device.
Your stuff scratches easily? So take better care of it, instead of blaming Apple.
That makes it absolutely fine. Apple should put that statement out as part of their PR. Thanks for that.
Any company that operates Data Centres is incredibly wasteful, so much so it would make your head spin.
This was a concern of the past, but newer panelling is much, much more eco-friendly to manufacture in addition to amazing efficiency (a sq ft panel has been shrunken considerably, packing more energy from each cell). We can thank Israel for much of this progress. Until a friend of mine moved to Tel Aviv for marketing in technology, I was unaware that Israel was the leading nation in environmental technology and use. A lot of green technology is coming out of Israel, I'm blown away with how much I hear about that has yet to hit the market. Good things have yet to come.
It is to run OS X.
----------
The cost of the Mac Pro whether assembled in China or the US is virtually identical.
Eventually, all products will be regionally assembled to best address regional demands and cut down on distribution costs.
It took me a long time to come to the same conclusion. I was livid when Apple released non-user upgradeable systems years ago. As many, I believed it would lead to more e-waste. However, looking back on years of data and Apple's recycling program(s), many of those systems are recycled responsibly and effectively. Building custom rigs, and upgrading them, I realize now just how much waste is produced. Couple that with the average individual having less access to proper e-waste disposal (most toss parts in their trash and don't bother bringing anything to their local electronics disposal center), it makes more sense given the millions of people who are not as tech savvy as us to recycle their systems after their life spans.
And building solar farms isn't bad for the animals? They use to live where Apple decides to build.
Fun fact
If you do the math, that figure works out to a volume about half the size of Lake Arrowhead in Southern California.
If you do the math, that figure works out to a volume about half the size of Lake Arrowhead in Southern California.
If Apple actually works the way they claim, then many disciplines are involved quite early on, if it doesn't needlessly spoil secrecy. Products typically flow from the Design studio, and they are involved at every step. So perhaps Environmental says "this material is getting phased out, is there an alternative?" and they bounce back and forth a few iterations. The latest iPhone packaging comes to mind as a probable collaboration between Design and Environment.