Greenpeace Rates Apple 4th Worst Eco-Friendly Tech Business, Apple Responds

[happydude]

zero evidence, other than my gut feeling.

But come on, Dell more green than Apple? Something is not right here.

c'mon!, you sound like a 7th grade girl who just had someone say something mean but true about her friend and takes blind allegiance vs. solid evidence. the report is credible, just because we are all mac fans doesn't mean we can't accept evidence disproving apple's infallibility . . . apple is one of those evil corporations, ready to sacrifice as much environmental (this report), humanitarian (the ipod factory slave-like conditions), and economic (the stock options fiasco) sanctitude as they can get away with in order to earn more profits. at least they make a good computer . . .

 

[ZorPrime]

c'mon!, you sound like a 7th grade girl who just had someone say something mean but true about her friend and takes blind allegiance vs. solid evidence. the report is credible, just because we are all mac fans doesn't mean we can't accept evidence disproving apple's infallibility . . . apple is one of those evil corporations, ready to sacrifice as much environmental (this report), humanitarian (the ipod factory slave-like conditions), and economic (the stock options fiasco) sanctitude as they can get away with in order to earn more profits. at least they make a good computer . . .

No need to insult people.

Greenpeace has it's fair share of "mistakes" as well... let's not forget the coral reef in the Philippines they damaged and later said it wasn't their fault because they didn't have accurate maps. Who built that ship? What's its fuel for propulsion? Where do they dump their "organic" waste?

 

[miloblithe]

Sounds like Apple is paying some attention though. In yesterday's keynote, Jobs did point out that the new iPod packaging is smaller, so it takes lest energy to transport them around to consumers (and uses less material in the packaging).

In the end, even if the criticism is inaccurate, if it encourages Apple to behave better, that's good for all of us.

 

[coffey7]

First the IPOD sweatshops and now this.

 

[73CortinaV8]

Organizations are responsible for the impact they have on community resources that impact everyone.

No they aren't. There is no real accountability anymore.

Especially when the factory you outsource production to is in China.

Companies have absolutely no incentive to be responsible.

How many people are running out and buying a dell over a mac because of their environmental record?

 

[menneke]

I'd wear Apple underwear if they made it.

Why, I'll reveal the best kept secret so far: you can! Go to www.apple.gr

 

[ely]

Well, to give Apple some credit, they're sponsoring a large-scale tech recycling event this week for everyone in Hawaii.

http://www.hawaii.edu/ecycle/
http://www.hawaii.edu/ewaste/

It's not terribly obvious from those pages, other than the apple.com email address.

 

[ctango]

A more accurate score would be 4.

Okay, so admittedly I make a living off of Macs, so I am a little biased. But, I am an environmentalist over a Mac enthusiast, so I feel equal in the comment.

The way I figure it Apple scores about a 4 , not the 2.7 Greenpeace gave them. While I do not know the details of every piece, here's why i think the score should be my way :

Precautionary Principle : GP 1, Me 1 - Okay, I don't know enough about this to warrant a change in Greenpeace's judgement.

Chemicals Management : GP 1, Me 1.3 - This is a bit of faith on my part in Apple. Greenpeace gave Apple a 1 because they would not publicly release their information. Apple has never publicly released information about their operations more than they had to. Assuming that Apple is legit in their operations warrants them my 1.3 instead of 1.

Timeline for PVC phaseout : GP 1, Me 1.3 - Again, Greenpeace's main problem is that Apple did not lay out a timeline. Apple could do better here, but they have made a commitment to, just not releasing a timeline (again back to the Apple not leaking information thing). If Samsung can score a 2 for having what Greenpeace says is a "unreasonable" timeline for phaseout, I believe Apple deserves at least a quarter if not a half point tolerance.

Timeline for BFR phaseout : GP 0, Me 1 - Greenpeace kinda annoys me here. They knocked Apple for not telling them essentially. Nokia gets a 2 for not having any timeline for removal of remaining BFR and Dell gets a 3 for committing to a 2009 timeline. Apple was docked solely for not revealing it's information. I am giving them a 1 because they have moved to metal frames for their Mac Pro (thus reducing need for fire retardant) and the previously mentioned secrecy of Apple.

Support for Individual Producer Responsibility : GP 1, Me 2 - Apple has moved forward with accepting all electronics regardless of manufacturer, and does not charge the recycling plant for Apple's waste, and comply with all laws "regarding this issue".

Voluntary take back where no EPR laws exist : GP 1, Me 1 - This is one area where Apple could step it up a little. I would love to see the actual percentage breakdown of Apple units sold where there is no EPR law.

Provides info for individual customers on takeback in all countries where products are sold : GP 1, Me 2 - If there isn't an Apple store in your COUNTRY you might have a problem recycling things to Apple. Really, what does GP want, Apple to pay for shipping of old electronics to another country? Wouldn't that be a waste of resources? Yes, Apple could do a little bit better, but again I would love to see a breakdown of what countries Apple sells their products to and the percentage or unit breakdown.

Reports on amount of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) collected and recycled : GP 2, Me 2.4 - Apple reports based on weight, not percentage. And GP recognizes that Apple does have good WEEE recycling ideology.

 

[Counter]

This, the Nike partnering, the Disney link.....all very crap. Apple can do so much better. I've been a Mac user for....a long time....and could these things affect my purchasing in the future?

Yes.

 

[Grakkle]

Which, like I said, is what one needs to do to control population: educate and create wealth.

Ha! Do you really think the capitalist system has any answers? People think that in capitalist societies people own things. How many people that you know actually own anything? I mean own something in the most basic literal sense. If you have a house with a mortgage on it, you do not actually own the house: the bank does. If you make payments on your car, you don't literally own the car: the bank does. All capitalism consists of is ownership of most resources by a very few and mass wage slavery for the rest.

Do you know that the average middle-class person in the 1300s had more disposable income than the average middle-class modern person? Society of the 1300s was not capitalist, in the modern sense. It was distributist, in that wealth was more equally distributed. (Read Hilaire Belloc.)

As far as computers go, I have a macbook and I like it. I need a computer, thus I have a computer. However, the environment is much more important than having computers. The attitude that having tech stuff is more important than the health of the planet is idiotic. You won't have much fun using your mac when you're sick from pollution, sitting in your room wearing a gas mask.