“There are encouraging signs that electronic goods such as PCs and mobile phones could become ‘greener’, according to the latest review of electronics manufacturers’ policies published by Greenpeace today. The latest version of the Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ (1) which ranks 14 top manufacturers of PC’s and mobile phones, shows that most companies have demonstrated commitments to greener manufacturing processes, such as eliminating the use of the most hazardous chemicals, and recycling policies such as financing take-back, reuse or recycling of end-of-life products. Apple, however, lags far behind the competition, presently occupying the last place in the ranking guide,” Greenpeace International writes.
Greenpeace writes, “Nokia continues to hold the top spot in the ranking, with progressive policies on both, its chemicals policy as well as disposal of electronic waste. However, the company is yet to outline clear timelines for phasing out PVC in all its products. ‘In sharp contrast, Apple is awarded the last position because the company has made absolutely no improvements to its policies or practices since the ranking was first released three months ago, although most of its competitors have improved environmental policies,’ said Iza Kruszewska, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner, in the press release, ‘Despite being the world leader in innovation and design, Apple is losing the race by failing to keep up with the other companies.'”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “obvious” for the heads up.]
These Greenpeaceniks might have a point if Apple was some massive polluter instead of just a very a popular brand name which these militant “environmentalists” are using to generate free publicity. We’re all for a cleaner environment, but Apple ought to charge Greenpeace a PR fee. Apple doesn’t sell dirty CRT monitors, like certain cheapo Windows-centric PC box assemblers. Apple uses rechargeable batteries in iPods, instead of having tens of millions of users constantly tossing AA batteries into landfills. Apple even offers purchasers of Apple Macs and Apple monitors free recycling of their old computer and monitor — regardless of manufacturer. The list goes on.
Information on Apple’s recycling programs and industry-leading environmental policies is available online at http://www.apple.com/environment
Related articles:
Mac Expo evicts Greenpeace campaigners – October 26, 2006
Is Greenpeace lying about Apple’s ‘toxic laptops?’ – September 25, 2006
What kind of green are ‘environmental extortionists’ really after? – September 06, 2006
Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ report called ‘misleading and incompetent’ – September 02, 2006
Greenpeace criticizes Apple over toxic waste – August 29, 2006
Apple offers free computer take-back recycling program – April 21, 2006
Defiant Steve Jobs calls environmentalists’ claims ‘B.S.’ – April 22, 2005
Greenpeace is irrelevant.
Green Peace. Go home. and shut up. all you do is whine. instead of complain, why not develop ways to HELP people.
Greenpeace isn’t interested in the environment so much as they are interested in the publicity they get, which tranlates to donations.
Greenpeace has been corrupted the same way every other institution gets corrupted. After the first generation of volunteers/founders exits management, the second generation thinks of nothing except perpetuating the instituttion, and that takes money.
Today’s environmentalists are whores in pursuit of the dollar they contend is the root of all evil.
Maybe Greenpeace is right…Apple was compared to other electronics manufacturers, not other polluters in general, and still fared poorly in their study.
The bottom line is, in a country where the administration has effectively gutted environmental protections, we need watchdog groups like Greenpeace to call companies on their behavior.
Give me Peace and some Green. Have a great Christ Mass.
As valued as it is, traditional hunting in Greenland is under tremendous stress. Pressure from environmental and conservation groups has led Greenland’s Home Rule Government to set hunting limits for most species. In January 2006, a 150 animal limit was set for the most prized of all Greenlandic animals, the polar bear. Hunters in the region say it is hard to survive on the quotas that have been established.
Excerpt about the Culture of Greenland from Wikipedia
“This is especially true due to the dramatic drop in seal skin prices in the late 1980s. That drop occurred after environmental pressure led to a collapse of the seal skin market in the United States. Today, the price of the skins remains so low that most Thule hunters tan only enough skins for personal use; they no longer process them for sale. Moreover, when asked what the single greatest threat to the traditional culture is, Qaanaaq hunter Lars Jeremiassen quickly replied, “Greenpeace”. That response, (documented in 2006 by the Arctic I.CC.E. Project: Indigenous Climate Change Ethnographies,[1]) reflects the devastating effect that environmentalist-led protests against sealing and seal products have had on the Inuit way of life, not just in Greenland, but throughout the Arctic.”
I believe in enviromental conservation, but I think Greenpeace’s tactics are assinine. Start with education and finding sustainable solutions. If you want enviromentalism to make a huge impact you have to make uncumbersome to the way people live, survive and conduct business. Unfortunately to succeed long term you have make a more gradual shift.
Greenpeace sucks dead bears. All they are interested in is getting enough cash into their pockets to funds their cell phones and junkets around the world. They lost focus years and years ago.
Wow!!! I made a massive typo.
1rst 3 posters (and Buster) are full of shit.
My, aren’t you grand with your lofty pronouncements?
But, I must say.
Greenpeace- I am disappointed in you. Someone’s got their head up their ass.
go to http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM/FFD3F08B-6D43-46BA-BCC2-D075A506A016.html
and read about what’s really going on with greenpeace and apple
“In sharp contrast, Apple is awarded the last position because the company has made absolutely no improvements to its policies or practices since the ranking was first released three months ago, although most of its competitors have improved environmental policies”
In other words, if you were a bad polluter, but you change your practices in 3 months to be a slightly less bad polluter; or you change your policies but take no real action, you are considered to have made “improvements”, and you go to the top op the list.
If you were a good corporate citizen on the environment, and 3 months later you are still a good corporate citizen on the environment, you’ve shown no improvement, and you go to the bottom of the list.
By similar logic, I’d like to commend Kim Jong-il for his outstanding improvement in human rights, by imprisoning, torturing and killing slightly fewer people this year than last year.
Whatever Greenplease is now-a-days, they and all the others have become irrelavant for two primary reasons:
1. Lashing out at popular companies to make a name and gain donations for themselves.
2. Having militants high in their ranks, with the desire that we all live in caves, eat berries and commune/worship nature.
Sorry guys, I love this God-made planet dearly, as we all do, but I’m not going to neglect the inteligence we have so me and my family can be caveman’s again, so you can worship this creation – not a chance.
Green Peace should be charged for dumping this load of toxic waste.
WM = moral
their actions are neither moral nor eithical.
MDN, you don’t have to defend everything apple does or doesn’t do to preserve your peace of mind.
Does Apple’s reduced amount of packaging on iPods count for nothing? Think of the rainforests that will get saved this holiday season as iPods fly off the shelf unlike Microsoft’s iPood (yes, I meant to put two “O’s) which might save a single tree by reducing packaging this season, maybe.
Used to belong until I got hacked off with media-bite campaigns based on lots of poor science.
I agree with amyhre. Apple’s committment to reducing it’s packaging has a direct effect on how much material ends up in landfills and/or recycling plants. I thought I heard Steve Jobs talking about Apple’s committment to the environment in one of his keynotes. No?
Thanks, macaholic.
F*ck Greenpeace. This is just another stupid political stunt to try to attract attention to themselves. Anyone with any sense whatsoever has been ignoring these tree huggers for years anyway.
Greenpeace squirts — just like the Zune.
You know, I am not suprised that someone is waving this flag. A couple years ago, a friend with chemical engineering background took a job there with the group responsible for overseeing the environmental friendliness of their manufacturing. He didn’t stay long.
I love Apple just as much as the next Mac-hugger. But Apple had this coming. Apple has such a cute, fuzzy brand image, who could ever think that they would be a laggard when it comes to keeping the tree-huggers happy?
Not gonna get into the Green Peace has passed into irrelevance debate. The most I can say about that is I quit donating to them many years ago.
I’ve had 3 macs so far ( 2 iMacs ), one was a Mac clone
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />. My clone is in the garage and works fine.
My oldest iMac is now an aquarium, fishs are happy.
And i’m writing to you on my new one.
Apple is actually environment friendly… so there.
This is BS. Unfortunately, I no longer trust most environmental groups, after seeing too many of their scares turn out to be driven by fundraising campaigns. I still value sensible environmental policies–just no longer going to jump every time some group cries “wolf.”
Always Right,
I speak from experience because I am a scientist in the environmental field. As from the diarrhetic prose emanating from you, what right have you to pronounce your hypocritical i.e. ‘lofty’ stance on others? What do you base this on?
Greenpeace has used my name WITHOUT PERMISSION and used it to their own purposes. That is unethical! Moreover, let me tell you a little story before you make more of a fool of yourself.
Vitamin A deficiency causes 300,000 cases of blindness in African children EVERY YEAR. A non-profit organization has made a transgenic rice (which has the precursor for Vitamin A in it). to prevent this. Greenpeace is blocking it. The reason? We feel sorry for the blind children but we are against GMOs. Thats it. Period.
They, and you, can go to hell.
Last? Boo f’ing hoo….
Nice post, Buster. Good to hear someone with facts commenting on Greenpiece. Thanks.