EPEAT Defends Verification of Ultrathin Notebooks for Environmental Registry

[tbrinkma]

The 15" Retina Macbook Pro is not recyclable at all. The lower casing has batteries that are glued directly to the case and cannot be removed without tearing them open. Also, the screen is fastened to the upper casing and cannot be removed. It's all the Apple quality, but at the cost something Apple has supposedly said was important to them, which is the affect on the environment.

Incorrect. In fact, it would be difficult for you to be any *more* incorrect.

According to the numbers from the lab that did the analysis in question, the battery can be removed from the lower casing easily and safely. It takes somewhere between 2 minutes and 20 seconds, depending on the model. iFixit *claimed* they couldn't because they didn't want to risk damaging the battery. Apparently, when you get the recycling instructions (like any responsible recycling location would), it's not terribly difficult to do.

I'd greatly appreciate it if you could point out in the article where it says the rmbp is one of their most recyclable laptops ever, I see that it's able to be disassembled but that tells me nothing. All I saw was the EPEAT trying to run away from any responsibility of their certifications, absolutely embarrassing.

The first step in recycling is disassembly. Once that's done it's a matter of sorting the parts. The rMBP, like the regular MBP is made largely of aluminum (easily recyclable), glass (also easily recyclable), and non-toxic, recyclable plastics. There's no indication that the circuit boards and chips are any less recyclable than normal.

Now, let's see your documentation for your above claim that , "The 15" Retina Macbook Pro is not recyclable at all.". Please. We're all ears.

----------

Its not that Apple fudged their specs, its that epeat watered down their standards for Apple. If you read the whole editorial, you'd see that thats exactly the case. Epeat had three requirements: upgradability, fixability, EOL disassembly. Apparently, they fudged it so that all you needed was a USB port to qualify for being upgradable. Really... don't all gadgets come with some type of port? And somehow, glue isn't a negative for EOL dissambly? Fishy? You bet it is.

Yep, they 'fudged' that part of the spec for Apple by having that be part of the spec since the first day the spec was written... (Don't make claims contrary to documented evidence, it just makes you look ignorant and irrational.)

According to the test lab, the glued-in battery can be safely removed in less than 2 minutes. That still leaves the rMBP with a faster disassembly time than any non-apple laptop I've ever seen.

----------

I'm shocked at how you can so quickly dismiss someones assumptions (ifixits, who has disassembled hundreds of computers), and insert your own. I've never seen or heard anything that shows different.

Then you didn't read this article, or the last one where it was announced that EPEAT had *verified* and agreed with Apple's assessment. The test lab was able to remove the battery safely, with commonly available tools in under 2 minutes.

Earlier you stated that the rdmb is one of the most recyclable laptops, you have failed to prove that. You have offered nothing to this discussion except what we already know. Yes, the rdmb scored as a gold standard; this topic has to do with the competence of the rating system. Please work on your focus and comprehension before you go around judging other people.

He showed his evidence. You simply refuse to believe it because you want to believe that somebody is being actively malicious here. Read the evaluation standards. They haven't changed since before this whole hullabaloo started.

 

[roadbloc]

you do. you just read the story and took the time to comment. that in itself indicates that you care.

I didn't know you had to verify if you cared or not about an article before you read it. After all how is one meant to know if they care or not if they haven't read it?

Whatever happened to common sense? And why do you even care if that poster doesn't care? Using your logic, you shouldn't have even read his post.

 

[tbrinkma]

The first thing to need replacing in laptops is the battery and as iFixit showed the retina MBP battery is a nightmare to change, which pretty much makes it a disposable computer. The air faired better. My 2006 MBP is on its third battery, 2nd hard drive and had one ram upgrade. I have bought a 2012 air but wouldn't have done without knowing I could change the battery and SSD.

iFixIt has shown that the battery is a nightmare to change *if you don't do it the way the manufacturer intended*.

If, on the other hand, you follow the manufacturer instructions, it's easy. You simply swap in a new bottom case, complete with new battery, and the old bottom case, complete with battery are taken for recycling. Dead simple.

 

[JAT]

So I assume you also oppose the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the ISO 14,000 standards.

No, I oppose marketing bs. Seriously, you couldn't figure that out?

Burn, strawman, burn!!

 

[wootdawg]

The 15" Retina Macbook Pro is not recyclable at all. The lower casing has batteries that are glued directly to the case and cannot be removed without tearing them open. Also, the screen is fastened to the upper casing and cannot be removed. It's all the Apple quality, but at the cost something Apple has supposedly said was important to them, which is the affect on the environment.

The screen can actually be removed on the rMBP, six torx screws attach it to the top case assembly. I won't argue the point that it's not very serviceable though!

 

[JAT]

Because they are too lazy to do the homework to judge for themselves but they don't want to seem anti environment for PR reasons.

basically the tech version of driving a gas guzzling humvee but buying offsets that actually don't do jack

Exactly.

 

[iAco]

This is why these standards exist, because large organizations and govenment can use them as a simple yard stick to decide what to buy to at least limit their purchases impact on the environment. If we all just go on not giving a s*1t we are all going to end up in the s*1t.

I speak for the majority. You can give a ****.

 

[marksman]

Some people seem to think there's some bias when an iFixit guy is criticising the upgradablility and fixability of a product. They think its in the interest of the speaker to over criticise, for personal gain. Not the case here. Its actually in the Epeat standards to require these things, upgradability and fixability. And who better to judge if said products passes these standards than the people who tear down gadgets?

Upgradability and fixabikity have nothing to do with the EPEAT standards.

 

[JAT]

Its not that Apple fudged their specs, its that epeat watered down their standards for Apple. If you read the whole editorial, you'd see that thats exactly the case. Epeat had three requirements: upgradability, fixability, EOL disassembly. Apparently, they fudged it so that all you needed was a USB port to qualify for being upgradable. Really... don't all gadgets come with some type of port? And somehow, glue isn't a negative for EOL dissambly? Fishy? You bet it is.

You should understand that the CEO of iFixit is not the author of the pseudo-governmental EPEAT standard, and he is therefore not an expert.

You may also wish to note that what is really not addressed is the thunderbolt connector on Macs and other recent laptops. This is actually an external PCI bus, complicating the concept of upgradeability. Maybe you should focus on that instead of the USB comments that have always been part of the standard.

----------

Upgradability and fixabikity have nothing to do with the EPEAT standards.

Actually, they do. But it is just one small part, and the Macbooks all follow the required part (4.4.2), which is simply: Upgradeable with common tools.

 

[everything-i]

I speak for the majority. You can give a ****.

I do. But by the look of many of the comments here lots of people don't just as long as they still have their toys

 

[mdelvecchio]

I didn't know you had to verify if you cared or not about an article before you read it. After all how is one meant to know if they care or not if they haven't read it?

Whatever happened to common sense? And why do you even care if that poster doesn't care? Using your logic, you shouldn't have even read his post.

why do you care whether i care that he cared?

----------

I believe the main goals of EPEAT are to get the nasty materials out of computers, so they're less toxins to handle in disassembly. I think the standard has been very successful in promoting this broadly and causing industry wide change.

BUT, upgradeability, repair and end of life are confounded. If something is in need of repair, but it can't be repaired, it becomes "end of life." Is that what you think EPEAT intends? Disposable retina mac book pros?

The criteria EPEAT uses are here:
http://www.epeat.net/resources/criteria-discussion/

Given these dimensions, I beleive an rMBP could be great on nearly all but life extension.

...the only single item from that list you have issue with is "Product longevity/life extension", which youre suggesting is poor. id challenge that...my macs last for years and years -- much longer than my corporate clients use their Dells & HPs. for instance, i just retired my 2006 iMac, but only because it wouldnt be fun to play Diablo III on. its a fine machine and i gave it to someone else -- so its still getting more than 6 years of use!

likewise for my pre-unibody MBP, which remains my mobile workstation.

so how is product longevity an issue, here? you max up on RAM and youre done.

....again, to suggest an rMBP is "disposable" because you have to bring it to the shop for a $200 battery repair every so-many-years is not reasonable. only a fool would dispose of it. they are very repairable to the right people...not consumers. this is 100% the same as TVs, stereos, and cars. normal people dont repair these things, do they?

----------

Its not that Apple fudged their specs, its that epeat watered down their standards for Apple. If you read the whole editorial, you'd see that thats exactly the case. Epeat had three requirements: upgradability, fixability, EOL disassembly. Apparently, they fudged it so that all you needed was a USB port to qualify for being upgradable. Really... don't all gadgets come with some type of port? And somehow, glue isn't a negative for EOL dissambly? Fishy? You bet it is.

no, glue is not a big deal for EOL disassembly. why would it be?

again, youve provided zero evidence that they "watered down" their requirements for apple. the requirements are what they are, exactly, and have not changed a single bit. the guy even says the same, stating that if you dont like the spec then change it...but as it is, it passes.

why is this so hard to come to terms with?

 

[tdiaz]

This whole EPEAT thing reminds me of a bunch of outcast wannabees who have nothing better to do than self justify themselves with a job.

Kinda like .. pretty much every busy body Home Owners Association.

Only this time, they get the envirowhacks onboard to back them.

Really? they want to be "Green"?

They better concentrate on the third world first. That includes most of China. People crap out in the open, in India. There's not enough toilets. There's stuff just dumped everywhere in most of Mexico's cities.

..and they are worried about how easy it is to disassemble something when it's time to chuck it?

Put it in a shredder. Steel/Iron will stick to a magnet, aluminum will float, glass will sink. Plastic will melt.

 

[everything-i]

So a laptop which is well built and will thus have a long lifespan and which is made from simple highly recyclable materials, which that the manufacturer is willing to recycle for you, for free, and this is considered environmentally sound. Can't see the problem myself.

Maybe the complainers think it's better to buy cheap laptops made from a mess of different plastics and metals screwed together, that will ware out in a couple of years and end up in 3rd world dump where no one can be bothered to recycle them properly because sorting out the mess of different materials isn't worth it.

I think EPEAT got it right this time.

 

[pacalis]

This just makes me sick. What kind of idiot would think that customers treat a Retina MBP as disposable?

Obviously they don't. My post was making the point that end of life is dependent on repair and serviceability. The more serviceable, the longer people will choose to use the computer and thus the more environmentally friendly it is as people go through less computers.

Do you think anyone would dispose of a Retina MBP when the battery is dead? What kind of idiots do you think people are? For a start, a retina MBP with a dead battery is a very fine desktop computer and works as a laptop absolutely fine when its plugged in. My 2006 MacBook has had a dead battery for the last three years. First dead battery was replaced, second dead battery wasn't. It's in heavy use every single day with a dead battery.

And yes, certainly people can choose to use rMBPs with failed batteries. And broken screens. And if the mother board fails, you could still use it as a paperweight. I mean, end of life is just crazy talk right?

That said, given the likely exorbitant cost of replacing a critical part in a rMBP most of us off warrenty/Applecare would likely buy a new computer.

 

[pacalis]

...the only single item from that list you have issue with is "Product longevity/life extension", which youre suggesting is poor. id challenge that...my macs last for years and years -- much longer than my corporate clients use their Dells & HPs. for instance, i just retired my 2006 iMac, but only because it wouldnt be fun to play Diablo III on. its a fine machine and i gave it to someone else -- so its still getting more than 6 years of use!

A clarification - the rMBP still lost points somewhere. I think it's in this category and particularly around life extension.

I own one. I think it's a good value and love it. But there is a major issue in serviceability. If an screen fails/is broken out of warranty on your Dell, it's less than $200 to repair yourself. But, if the screen fails out of warranty on your rMBP, you're probably looking at a new model.

 

[iAco]

I do. But by the look of many of the comments here lots of people don't just as long as they still have their toys

I would still buy Apple products even if they did not meet EPEAT standards.

It's like blood diamonds.

 

[roadbloc]

why do you care whether i care that he cared?

I don't care that he cares. That is not what my post is about.

 

[mdelvecchio]

If an screen fails/is broken out of warranty on your Dell, it's less than $200 to repair yourself.

you do realize most consumers dont perform screen repairs on their laptops, right? only the very, very, very few do...like people on this forum. but we do not represent the vast majority of users, people for whom these products are designed. just as auto-makers dont design for at-home-mechanics.

But, if the screen fails out of warranty on your rMBP, you're probably looking at a new model.

no, youre not. youd bring it to apple and get the screen replaced. why would you spend another $2,000 when you could spend 5 or 6 hundred bucks or whatever?

----------

I don't care that he cares. That is not what my post is about.

no, i asked why you care whether i care that he cares. which you do, because in response you asked me:

"And why do you even care if that poster doesn't care?"​

...which shows that you care whether i care if he cares or not, else you wouldnt ask me why i care.

the absurdity of which is makes the point: making an effort to come to a place and spend time on a post, only for it to say, "I don't care!" is facetious. to spend the time posting it is proof of care, else one would have scrolled to the next thing.

 

[pacalis]

you do realize most consumers dont perform screen repairs on their laptops, right? only the very, very, very few do...like people on this forum. but we do not represent the vast majority of users, people for whom these products are designed. just as auto-makers dont design for at-home-mechanics.

no, youre not. youd bring it to apple and get the screen replaced. why would you spend another $2,000 when you could spend 5 or 6 hundred bucks or whatever?

OK, so HD upgrade. Or ram needs change. Plenty of consumers certainly do both of these on other computers.

And second, on most of these these changes, I think you're looking at $200 do it yourself +1hr, vs. $1000 leave it for service for days. But maybe I'm wrong on screen - the all in one screen might be a pricier piece of hardware but easier service. Similarly the ifixit battery complaint also seems innappropriate- Apple charges $200 for this right, which isn't too far off of any new battery. So I wouldn't be surprised if it can be removed with a solvent vs. pure brute force.

So -this isn't a black and white issue, but I still think there's a life extension problem with this product.

Alternatively, I can take your argument and say where do you think the rMBP is weak? It received 21/25 points.

 

[mdelvecchio]

OK, so HD upgrade. Or ram needs change. Plenty of consumers certainly do both of these on other computers.

now youre talking about upgradability, we were talking about repairability...because someone (not me) is making the argument that a damaged rMBP is "disposable". it isnt, and i think ive shown that. apple and authorized repair centers have no problem repairing them. and they can do it -- they certainly dont give you new replacements.

the point iFixIt is wrongly trying to make is that the rMBP is "greenwashing" the EPEAT because one cant perform user-service (upgrades or repairs) on it and that the device is thusly disposable. again, thats false -- first, because the device can be repaired, and second, because the EPEAT rating is mostly for EOL issues, and only some on longevity (upgradability). there is no legitimate issue w/ the rMBP's EOL disassembly or recyclability -- they or others will gladly accept them to do that (myself, ive never decided to personally disassembly any of my laptops for EOL recycling, nor do i know anyone who has).

So -this isn't a black and white issue, but I still think there's a life extension problem with this product.

...which is why it probably scored less in that area; but even so i argued that it's far from a "problem" because apple gear has *way* longer useful lifespans than competitors. again i cite my 6-year-old imac and pre-unibody MBP still in use and suggest that is the norm and part of their virtue.

i fail to see any problems here. nor that it has been "greenwashed". all i see is a useful tool that represents what the market is looking for -- fast, thin, light. just like flat-panel TVs (thin & light).

 

[pacalis]

...which is why it probably scored less in that area; but even so i argued that it's far from a "problem" because apple gear has *way* longer useful lifespans than competitors. again i cite my 6-year-old imac and pre-unibody MBP still in use and suggest that is the norm and part of their virtue.

I agree mostly with your post. I also better understand your point that life extension is less of a problem for a much more durable product. You've closed it out for me! Cheers!

 

[FieldingMellish]

Definitely interested.

Please post criteria:

Sneaky vs. monster

amount of gas released

flavor

including dogs? (My dog's are life threatening)

Poisonous

And who recycles these? Some place in Rumania?

Transportation is castors, like nuclear waste.

Way to many open questions.

Looks like an entire industry could be built for that.

The regulatory government agencies would welcome the taxes
one can levy.

I suggest the chairman to be : Mr. Methane from England, who btw is the recordholder for the longest........

Might as well hire people with international experience in that field.

One of the people who started this long ago was a former boxer, Gaseous Clay.

When people objected to his studies, we asked, "Let's just air our differences..." and he wound up emptying the room.

 

[macs4nw]

iFixit is just pissed that they won't make as much money anymore. With repairability gone downhill, they won't be able to sell you tools and parts. That said, usually when repairability goes down, reliability does go up.

Pretty much true iFixit is also fighting to stay relevant. Kyle Wiens self-serving indignation is pretty entertaining.

Why all the hate on iFixIt? They provide a valuable service, IMO. Once my stuff is out of warranty, it is much much cheaper to fix stuff myself using their tools and guides than pay an Apple authorized repair center. Most normal people can't afford a brand new $2000 laptop when the warranty is expired and something broke or they want to upgrade RAM or HDD.

Why are some people here hating on iFixit? You know its not a bad thing to be able to fix your own gadgets. But I guess when something negative is is said about Apple, then they automatically become the enemy.

I don't believe it's hate as much as an observation that iFixit certainly has their own agenda. See ouimetnick and ValSalva's posts.

All this miniaturization unfortunately comes at an environmental price, and it's not just computers. Ever tried to open up a DSLR to change a chip or an image sensor? Many manufacturers simply exchange product for warranty claims, as it's much cheaper than repairing, in many instances.

 

[Knwtmsyn]

You seem to be getting confused by the terms 'recyclable' and 'serviceable'.

The Retina machine is recyclable by Apple, but is not serviceable by iFixit, which is why iFixit is making such a fuss.

When iFixit tries to break apart the machine, their main aim is to be able to rebuild it again. That is how they make their money.

When Apple gets back a machine for recycling then they will most probably break it up without caring if it can be rebuilt. All they care about is that the parts can be separated out, melted down and used to build something else.

Thank you for giving me the first answer I can actually work with. This seems very much possible that the computer can be recycled using proprietary tools. Yet, with the input of ifixit's concern for the rdmb's manufacturing, you would think someone would address how Apple plans to recycle the rdmb let alone show any indication that it IS recyclable.

 

[Knwtmsyn]

I retract my argument that they are not fully recyclable, it seems that the general consensus is that the rdmb can be recycled as much as all other Apple computers. I would feel much better though if Apple elaborated on it's recycling program given the concerns that have been brought up.