Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
All this fake environmental outrage is just like the OWS protesters protesting against big corporations, using their iPhones, MacBooks, etc. Just absolutely ridiculous. One of the famous moronic rappers went down there wearing like $10,000 worth of corporate product pretending to support those lazy idiots.
 
As a very eco-conscious individual, I am somewhat alarmed by this news. However, I would like more facts. Does "EPEAT" mean that the systems must be recyclable by owners or in general? If the electronic device can be recycled by Apple or anyone aside from the general consumer, then fine, just as long as e-waste is not an issue.

One of the reasons I prefer Apple devices is Ive's insistence on recyclable materials such as aluminum (which serves as an excellent cooling agent) and glass, as well as the elimination of mercury and arsenic from their materials.

Apple does take in old devices in their recycling program. However, what do they do with devices that "EPEAT" deems unfit?
 
While I'm not wishing to devalue EPEAT in any sense, I do question their claim on their website to be the "definitive global registry for greener electronics" [my emphasis]. As far as I can see, only one country outside of the US participates (Singapore).

Compare that to the EU, which has law in place already, actually requiring manufacturers of not only electronic devices, but pretty much anything (household appliances, cars) to ensure that virtually the entire thing can and will be reused/recycled, by the original manufacturer. Apple already adheres to this - they have to - and in many cases pay you for the return of the products. I got £80 for the return of my iPhone 3G when I upgraded to the 4. I'm afraid EPEAT is behind the curve here - that's not to say it's a good initiative, but to claim to be the "definitive global registry" paints a rather insular view of the globe in my opinion, given that in fact it's almost exclusively a US list.
 
The sad thing is: Apple is going to sell loads and loads of rMBP! Most consumers will just love it, they just don't care about recyclability or serviceability. The rMBP will probably become the most successful notebook Apple has ever made. See iPhone.

As much as I agree to this, I still hope this is not going to happen, the average consumer finally gets conscious about all the **** going on, and forces Apple to go back to the "good" side by simply not buying.

Apple's become less and less shiny for me starting with Lion and continuing with Steve's death, FCP X, and the rMBP (plus them dropping the 17" model).
I hope Apple will turn around again.
There is no competitor on the market that comes even close to what I currently have set up in my 10.6 Mac environment, so I can't just switch to another brand, but also I can't stay up-to-date with the good crop of the latest "innovations" because of moralic reasons, and that's really hard for a tech enthusiast like me. I could rip myself apart.
 
I wouldn't get all up in arms here yet.

Go do some searching on their website and see who else is missing.

That would be most ultra books and some newer laptops.

http://ww2.epeat.net/searchoptions.aspx

I did. I just looked up the Dell ultrabook, and it has a silver rating.

On the bottom of every dell product spec page is something that looks like this:
Regulatory Model: P15F
Regulatory Type: P15F001
Energy Star 5.0
EPEAT Gold
Product Safety, EMC and Environmental Datasheets
Dell Regulatory Compliance Home Page
Dell and the Environment

The EPEAT Gold is the recyclability rating, which Apple is no longer participating in. Asus, Toshiba, HP, etc, all participate in this.

Someone mentioned the Apple environment page for the RMPB. They go on for a few paragraphs on things like mobile GPU's which are less power hungry, and LED backlit displays which have been industry standard for years. They end with the use of aluminum in their computers, which while nice, doesn't make them inherently better than a Dell with a plastic shell over a steel interior.
 
Once again...

...we see that corporations care more about profit than about the planet. This is a stupid shortsighted move by Apple, very disappointing. I haven't bought any new Apple products in a long time and am unlikely to do so. Apple...this is you being a bad neighbor, a bad part of the global community.
 
I find this to be really sad. I consider myself to be [somewhat] environmentally friendly (I get upset with my family members when they throw garbage in the recycling bags I put out in my apartment lol), so knowing my computer company of choice will no longer take huge strides to make products safe for the Earth... that's just upsetting. Thankfully my 2012 15" uMBP meets the highest of standards. :)
 
It depends on how strong this organization's power is. I have honestly never heard of EPEAT before, so I don't know how great the risk of saying "@#$% you" to them is.

Pretty sure they don't have the influence and money of apple, so not a problem.
 
Someone mentioned the Apple environment page for the RMPB. They go on for a few paragraphs on things like mobile GPU's which are less power hungry, and LED backlit displays which have been industry standard for years. They end with the use of aluminum in their computers, which while nice, doesn't make them inherently better than a Dell with a plastic shell over a steel interior.

It does if they recycle it. Which they do.
 
all of you wanted smaller systems and having user removable parts causes weight gain and just being bigger.

They are still replaceable, and apple does not offer a bad deal to replace it.

I can not see why you guys care so much. look at other super ultra thin laptops, they also have no user serviable batt. SO whats the big deal?

If you drop your IOS device. there is no crap flying around the room.

If I drop my current phone the batt,and sim will both pop out. Thats annoying.. I had to buy a sim card because I could not find mine after it flue out.

To be honest. I like not haveing user replaceable parts. Less can go wrong.
 
apple still cares

Apple still cares about the environment as evidenced by their page: http://www.apple.com/environment/ and they have consistently tried to "reduce their footprint" and bring down the amounts of harmful materials in their computers. Them not being a part of EPEAT and saying they dont care about the environment is as foolish as some of my friends not being friends with me on facebook and me stating that "oh you're not my friend!?" (http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/269228/so-im-not-your-friend-then)

Aside from all that, Apple's computers come apart really really easily (if you know what you are doing and can follow directions in your language) - i've torn apart not a few Macbook Pros (http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown) it's like a chilton's for a computer.

Oh well, whatever. Apple is still awesome and environmentally awesome...they dont need EPEAT to tell them that they are!
 
This isn't stopping them from using environmentally-friendly materials (like aluminium and glass), so it isn't too big a deal. They already weren't being very compliant if easy disassembly was a requirement.
 
To be honest, I'm a little disappointed in apple. I always appreciated the fact that these computers were highly recyclable and better on the environment than most electronics now a days. I figured apple would somehow develop a way to get these batteries off safely so they can be recycled.

If this is the way technology is going to become, getting smaller and lighter but less conscious about the world we live in then I'm not for it.:(

Yes I find this a very poor reflection on the ethos statement of Apple products. Why Apple did it is clearly due to a "we don't care, design trumps environmental concerns" mindset.
 
I don't understand - so just because apple solders on the ram and glues the battery, that suddenly renders the entire laptop unrecyclable? There is no way it can be broken down into its individual parts to be reused or smelted down? :confused:

So yeah, it may take a little extra effort, that there is a great difference between harder to recycle, and can't be recycled at all.
 
I don't understand - so just because apple solders on the ram and glues the battery, that suddenly renders the entire laptop unrecyclable? There is no way it can be broken down into its individual parts to be reused or smelted down? :confused:

So yeah, it may take a little extra effort, that there is a great difference between harder to recycle, and can't be recycled at all.

Plus, what no one is mentioning is removable batteries tend to have higher failure rates. The number one cause of a battery going bad is fastener puncturing. Gluing the batteries helps to prevent that. So at the end of the day what's better for the environment, glued batteries that are harder to repair/replace/disassemble, or removable ones that have higher failure rates and require more batteries to be produced?

Given just how detrimental batteries are on the environment in the first place, you'd think the environmental standards would begin to take notice of this issue.

And the screen is fused to the enclosure but it uses one less ply of glass. I guess it's just better to add more and more material in the designs, that's surely very good for the environment too. I'm getting the growing sense the way people are looking at this is entirely backwards. I don't think screws and disassembly should be the primary factor but what types of materials and in what quantities they are needed to produce these machines.
 
I really don't see this as an issue... I mean all they did was glue a battery and solder some ram in. If you're going to recycle the laptop anyways, you sure as **** don't care about the display cable under the battery or destroying the mobo. It's not like the laptop is indestructible or unaccessible by any means -- you can buy their screw set and open it up, just like any laptop. I fail to see why it's such a big deal.

Worst case scenario you'd have to use acetone or IPA to remove the battery. The travesty.
 
This is disappointing news. Electronics manufacturers should take environmental factors and impact into mind when designing products since most of those products will be in landfills after a couple years. But, one can hope that in the future, Apple will come up with a way to make products that can again be more recyclable...
 
Exactly. So many Apple fans will demonize EPEAT over this in an attempt to brush over what a lame move by Apple this is. The stereotype that Mac users are nothing but liberals who pretend to care about social and environmental issues but deep down really don't care at all is validated by this move on Apple's part. Bypassing EPEAT just to have a new barely thinner laptop to release each year to please the crowds is not really the kind of company I like to do business with.

What kind of company do you like to do business with? Apple, like every company, is interested in profit, just to be clear. They're also interested in pushing design limits, which is difficult to do with certification bodies breathing down your neck. EPEAT is only one way to solve problems and out of this will likely come other ways to disassemble and recycle. And then a new certification body :D

Always follow the money. Certification bodies are just as political and money grubbing as any corporation on the planet so any thought that EPEAT is a benign consortium of tree loving entities would be misguided. Green sells. No company would be part of the very expensive certification process if they didn't think they'd get a lot of cash from it by increased sales. Too, iFixit (and I like what they do) have a money interest selling parts to repair your Macs/iDevices. Can't do that at this time with any part of the rMBP. So they lose out.
 
From now on, Apple is to be blamed for global warming. It's obvious they are deniers. /s
 
Plus, what no one is mentioning is removable batteries tend to have higher failure rates. The number one cause of a battery going bad is fastener puncturing. Gluing the batteries helps to prevent that. So at the end of the day what's better for the environment, glued batteries that are harder to repair/replace/disassemble, or removable ones that have higher failure rates and require more batteries to be produced?

Given just how detrimental batteries are on the environment in the first place, you'd think the environmental standards would begin to take notice of this issue.

Do you have a link somewhere that shows that removable batteries have higher failure rates than glued batteries? That gluing is better than using screws?

iFixit had problems removing the battery from the new iPad without puncturing it. But that I guess is only a problem for whoever has to disassemble it. Too bad that person doesn't have time to appreciate the design...

----

Does anyone know to which third world countries Apple send their hardware to be disassembled?
 
This is disappointing news. Electronics manufacturers should take environmental factors and impact into mind when designing products since most of those products will be in landfills after a couple years. But, one can hope that in the future, Apple will come up with a way to make products that can again be more recyclable...

Apple has a recycling program on their products so this is already the case. Removing themselves from this certification process just highlights the fact that it is difficult for third parties to do so with standard tools on the newer bodies. Not sure this means as much as is being portrayed.
 
This is disappointing news. Electronics manufacturers should take environmental factors and impact into mind when designing products since most of those products will be in landfills after a couple years. But, one can hope that in the future, Apple will come up with a way to make products that can again be more recyclable...

How do you know they didn't take that into account? What if their environmental philosophy disagrees on small issues like using standard tools and ease of disassembly from your favorite environmental group? I'm not saying Apple did take the environment into consideration, all I'm saying is we don't know what standards and metrics they took into account.
 
how does that work for international users specifically those without an official apple store?

I'm not sure to be honest. I guess what we need is some kind of global computer network (an internet, if you like) where Apple and other computer companies could set up some kind of shop with some kind of recycling section. Then they could offer some sort of incentive to persuade folk to send them old Apple kit (and yes, other bits of old kit too) and recycle it properly. Pie in the sky, but who knows. Maybe in my lifetime.

btw is your lifestory of a modern computer device fact and based on something or fiction designed to suit apple?

Actually, it's an opinion formed from working in IT (including sales and procurement) for twenty odd years. Machines are bought fully loaded, and four years later, no one is going to replace the hard drive and motherboard to get faster kit when what you can get for your money has drastically increased during those four years.
 
Even assuming that this is the rationale behind the glue (and I'm not saying it isn't) I still don't see what the environmental issue is: Apple take the product back, disassemble it themselves and reuse/recycle all components as required by law in the EU. Surely that is all any true environmentalist could wish for?


well thats the thing. say the screen breaks in some way in the RMBP. according to people in the electronics recycling industry, they "have no way of recycling aluminum that has glass glued to it like Apple did with both this machine and the recent iPad."

so it sounds like apple literally needs to replace the whole thing rather than be able to repair it.

If the argument is that they're harder for us to repair/upgrade ourselves, then I agree (as someone who has always upgraded both the hard drive and the memory in his laptops to extend their lives) that's a significant minus point in Apple's current direction. But that's not an environmental point: if anything it's the opposite. As I understand it in the EU (which is where currently I reside) if I personally upgrade the memory or hard drive, then it's my responsibility to dispose of the old parts. If I happen to live in a conurbation where they provide recycling for that free of charge, great. Otherwise, landfill... Whereas if it's not easily upgradable, then I take the entire thing back to Apple when I buy a new machine, and they reuse/recycle the lot. I'm not going to get into the whole "energy of recycling" calculation, because I don't have enough information for this, and there are way too many variables, but if you're looking at this purely from an environmental perspective, and in particular at keeping stuff out of landfill, then the direction Apple is taking in design of its latest products is a good one.

I get the sense many people here are shoehorning the environmental argument to fit with their own prejudice against something they can't upgrade. I share your frustration about this element of the current designs, but let's not kid ourselves that this frustration has anything at all to do with saving the environment.



i don't mind the RMBP being non-upgradeable as i'm sure its specs would last me for a long time. but i do mind that apple has turned into a tech company that purposely makes throw-a-away products.

good design isn't only about just making something look nice, especially for a leading company like apple.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.