“Apple has come bottom of the most comprehensive green league table of technology companies because of its heavy reliance on ‘dirty data’ centres,” Felicity Carus reports for The Guardian. “The list, which is compiled by Greenpeace and released in San Francisco on Thursday, shows that the company relies heavily on highly polluting coal power at the sites that house its banks of servers.”

“Greenpeace’s report, How Dirty is Your Data? reveals that the company’s investment in a new North Carolina facility will triple its electricity consumption, equivalent to the electricity demand of 80,000 average US homes,” Carus reports. “The facility’s power will be supplied by Duke Energy, with a mix of 62% coal and 32% nuclear. Gary Cook, Greenpeace’s IT policy analyst and lead author of the report, said: ‘Consumers want to know that when they upload a video or change their Facebook status that they are not contributing to global warming or future Fukushimas.’

Carus reports, “The report estimated dependence on coal for Apple’s data centres at 54.5%, followed by Facebook at 53.2%, IBM at 51.6%, HP at 49.4%, and Twitter at 42.5%. Top marks in Greenpeace’s clean energy index went to Yahoo, followed by Google and Amazon. Greenpeace is also campaigning for Facebook to “unfriend coal” and use cleaner energy to power its servers.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Greenpeace, like Consumer Reports, just can’t help themselves; those huge Apple coattails and the resulting free PR blitzes are obviously just too much to resist.

If Greenpeace wants to affect how electricity is produced, perhaps they should target the power providers? After all, Apple can’t just zap whatever pie-in-the-sky, run-it-on-lima-bean-juice “clean” electricity source Greenpeace pretends is cost-effective all the way from Delusional, Dreamland to Maiden, North Carolina.

Related articles:
Greenpeace drops Apple to 9th as HP, Samsung advance in ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ – October 26, 2010
Greenpeace spotlights links between Apple’s iPad, the Internet, and climate change – March 31, 2010
William Shatner and Greenpeace leave HP reminders, including ‘Hazardous Products’ painted on roof – July 28, 2009
Greenpeace: Apple fails to meet ‘computer detox’ deadline – January 07, 2009
BusinessWeek: Apple is greener than Greenpeace says – December 08, 2008
Apple’s score plummets as Greenpeace expands ranking criteria in its Guide to Greener Electronics – June 25, 2008
Greenpeace intends to ride Apple’s PR coattails for as long as possible – January 18, 2008
Greenpeace gives Apple improving environmental marks; ranks Microsoft near bottom – November 27, 2007
BusinessWeek: Why Greenpeace repeatedly makes flawed attacks on Apple – October 26, 2007
Chemical Industry Group slams Greenpeace over unfair iPhone criticisms – October 22, 2007
Greenpeace admits that Apple’s iPhone is fully compliant with Euro chemicals rules – October 16, 2007
Apple faces lawsuit based on Greenpeace’s ‘toxic’ iPhone Report – October 15, 2007
Greenpeace attacks Apple over ‘hazardous chemicals’ in iPhone – October 15, 2007
Apple greener than Greenpeace wants you to think – May 03, 2007
Greenpeace ranks Apple dead last in ‘environmental friendliness’ – April 03, 2007
EPA does not support Greenpeace’s charges against Apple Computer – January 07, 2007
Apple places last in Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ report – December 07, 2006
Mac Expo evicts Greenpeace campaigners – October 26, 2006
Is Greenpeace lying about Apple’s ‘toxic laptops?’ – September 25, 2006
Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ report called ‘misleading and incompetent’ – September 02, 2006
Greenpeace criticizes Apple over toxic waste – August 29, 2006