Apple places last in Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ report

“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

48 Comments

  1. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.”

  6. 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.

  7. Last on Greenpeace’s list is first on mine! Unfortunately there are more than enough college age skulls-full-of-mush to man the protest lines for them. These press releases are meant to garner free press to help line their pockets.

  8. Wow, did somebody say something vaguely bad about Apple and hurt everyone’s feelings? Boohoo.

    Why can nobody think of the possibility that Greenpeace might be right? Compared to Nokia, which doesn’t sell CRT monitors or use non-rechargeable batteries, Apple is lacking too. Perhaps their environmental policies AREN’T friendly. Just because they say “We recycle computers” doesn’t mean they recycle them well.

    Stop calling it “Industry-leading” environmental policies if they clearly aren’t.

  9. When you read the fine print, clearly they’re gunning for Apple. Makes good press and I’m sure Apple’s user base cares more than Dell’s corporate types. But honestly “other companies have promised”… c’mon guys, that’s Apple’s silence to the others’ vaporware.

    SJ & Co are in the business of NOT making promises and then delighting us.

    And GP has some loony ideas about “upgrading” ipods… so you replace the battery and the hard drive somehow, but you don’t throw away the ipod? Except the hard drive and the battery are 90% of the ipod… so what’s the point. You’ve eliminated waste of what… the equivalent of a few sandwich bags of plastic?

    (Or let’s not throw away a single hard drive. Let’s keep using the old ones… having four old drives sucking down power instead of one new one. Ooops. Doesn’t work either. Guess we should just halt technological progress altogether!)

    And Apple gets no credit for being first to eliminate old dirty technologies like CRTs. And no credit for hardware with a longer life span on average than competitors (3:1 in my experience… my PCs die, my Apple’s all become hand-me-down.)

    If you really think Greenpeace has a point, read carefully and THINK about what they’re saying.

    What upsets me is the number of people who think Greenpeace is really onto something nefarious about Apple. If you don’t think this is about Apple being a consumer brand and therefore a better target for fundraising and more vulnerable to this sort of campaign, you are as naive as those who trust the government.

    How many tons of lead did Dell sell in CRTs last year?

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.