Apple CEO Steve Jobs has posted another open letter on the company’s website, this time focusing on Apple and the environment. The letter is titled, “A Greener Apple” and begins:
Apple has been criticized by some environmental organizations for not being a leader in removing toxic chemicals from its new products, and for not aggressively or properly recycling its old products. Upon investigating Apple’s current practices and progress towards these goals, I was surprised to learn that in many cases Apple is ahead of, or will soon be ahead of, most of its competitors in these areas. Whatever other improvements we need to make, it is certainly clear that we have failed to communicate the things that we are doing well.
It is generally not Apple’s policy to trumpet our plans for the future; we tend to talk about the things we have just accomplished. Unfortunately this policy has left our customers, shareholders, employees and the industry in the dark about Apple’s desires and plans to become greener. Our stakeholders deserve and expect more from us, and they’re right to do so. They want us to be a leader in this area, just as we are in the other areas of our business. So today we’re changing our policy.
Now I’d like to tell you what we are doing to remove toxic chemicals from our new products, and to more aggressively recycle our old products.
Included in the full text is the paragraph, “To eliminate mercury in our displays, we need to transition from fluorescent lamps to light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to illuminate the displays. Fortunately, all iPod displays already use LEDs for illumination, and therefore contain no mercury. We plan to introduce our first Macs with LED backlight technology in 2007.” [Bold emphasis added by MacDailyNews.]
Read Jobs’ letter in full here: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/
MacDailyNews Take: May open letters from Steve Jobs become a regular occurrence.
As we’ve repeatedly written regarding this issue: We’re all for a cleaner environment, but Apple ought to charge Greenpeace a PR fee. Mostly, Apple is guilty of being a very a popular brand name which these militant “environmentalists” use to generate free publicity.
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
Impressive letter overall. Apple seems to be doing great in this area. Greenpeace doesn’t know what it’s talking about–oh, what a surprise!
One quibble: Apple states that “we do not allow the use of prison labor at any stage of the recycling process.”
What the heck’s wrong with prison labor? To the degree any inmate can be rehabilitated, work certainly contributes to that. If it’s privately managed, they pay taxes. If it’s community service, it’s paying back society. The only complaints I can imagine are from unions who don’t like the competition–and why should they get to stop anyone else from working? What am I missing here, anyone?
Bravo for not using the phrase Global Warming anywhere. I like seeing no Al Gorhetoric.
Interesting… Download the PDF and inspect – Created with InDesign 3.0…
Nothing like pissing off Greenpeace, and learning about a future upgrade to our products in one letter. Awesome.
Pretty much everything Greenpeace has “rated” Apple on, was summed up in Steve’s letter today.
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/greener-electronics-apple-rank-2.pdf
Greenpeace, what a joke!
The US may produce 25% of the pollution, but it also produces 25% of the world’s GDP (i.e., products and services), so that seems right in line. And the rest the world is racing to catch up with our level of production and standard of living. Besides of the greens didn’t oppose nuclear power, the US economy would release FAR less pollution into the environment, especially “greenhouse gases.” It is by far the cleanest and safest type of energy available, with the added benefit of not subsidizing tyrants in the the middle east and other parts of the world. Well, thanks a lot, Greenpeace & friends.
Kate
Does anyone know if this letter actually satisfys the complaints that Greenpeace have with Apple? I’ve never read their complaints so I don’t know..
If this will shut up those GP hippies I say go for it.
@Kyoto Protocol: USA has 4.5% of the world’s population but is responsible for 25%+ of polution and is world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter.
Yes, but all the things that produce pollution in the USA are foreign made! (Well, not ALL of course…) Maybe if the other 95.5% of the population would give us cheaper alternate energy sources (maybe even free???) we could, in turn, slow the rate at which we are destroying our planet. Peace.
@Allen
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/greener-electronics-apple-rank-2.pdf
If you read that, Steve’s letter covers up most of it.
Apple isn’t perfect but there are other WAY worse companies that Greenpeace could better spend their efforts on. Companies that really don’t give a shit and don’t care to change unless caught.
Apple is just bigger headlines for Greedpiece to grab attention with.
> Apple’s secrecy did indeed bite themselves in this regard.
Ridiculous. Why would Apple keep secret it’s environmental practices? Apple simply did not pay out extortion money to the environmental organizations, just to get a phony good review. Sort of like buying protection from the environmental mafia.
These open letters from Steve Jobs are a great way for Apple to communicate to the public. Apple couldn’t buy such PR if it paid millions of dollars. And this is one way to turn the negative PR spin from the environmental mafia into positive press.
Don’t upgrade to Vista and ship your old PC to Asia, there are enough people getting cancer from pollution already. Upgrade pass the Vista and get a Greener Apple.
Greenpeace is giving the whole environmental movement a bad name. The leaders of this sorry excuse for a company should retire from the environmental business and get jobs selling shoes, if anybody would hire them.
@Allen
You can probably find it here :
http://www.greenpeace.org/apple/
I hate to break it to you, but the reason why the “rest of the world” hates America is not because of its greenhouse emissions or whatever attitude you’ve generalized from a few posters — it’s because of its higher standard of living and rampant jealousy. I think a lot of countries wish they could have the material success and the strength that America does, but they haven’t managed to do it. France, Germany, and Portugal are all former world powers — that’s got to sting. Russia is an eternal wannabe world power. Islamic nuts dream of a caliphate, but they haven’t managed one yet. That’s why you’ll always see other countries throwing pies at America, really. It’s always easier to blame someone else than it is to fix your own stuff.
The problem isn’t with being concerned with the environment, it’s with environmentalist wackos. If they had any sense at all, they wouldn’t lie, distort facts, and be sensationalist. It only kills their credibility and reduces the impact of their arguments in the long run. We need good ideas to solve the real problems and find our way to a sustainable future. We don’t need hype and propaganda. With good ideas and sincere leaders, people will listen and positive change will occur.
Go, Steve, Go. Nice counter punch, well executed. : -)
There is real actions and then the BS that so many other companies use today. Apple, making the world a nicer place to live, one product at a time.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
en
I am a card carrying tree-hugger (really. I work for an environmental publication. And no, I don’t write for them so back off my poor spelling and grammar.)
I pains me to see Green Peace saying this crap about Apple. Whenever people lie, it makes it harder to believe those associated with them. Whether it is by choice or not.
The only thing that could make BustingTSOI’s post ‘better’:
–
This is the kind of environmental friendliness that I think we all can agree with.
First, it’s a voluntary decision undertaken by Apple.
Second, it’s honest. They really are creating a better product, environmentally-speaking.
Third, it comes from a position of strength. They’re not letting Greenpeace cow them and they’re not purchasing phony “carbon offsets” or otherwise playing kissy-face with the environmental shakedown outfits.
Fourth, they’re not requiring the end-user to get on board with any sort of politics. There’s no “join greenpeace now!” stickers with new Macs and other such trendy nonsense.
In short, it is tangible improvement fueled by profits, which come from making a better product.
–
Really, very thoughtful post. No ‘side’ could disapprove.
Unless they are idiots!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
@ BTSOI
Wow … I cant believe I actually agree with some of what you say !!
A little simplistic, but mostly essentially correct !!
@Allen,
Yes, the agents mentioned in the letter are precisely what was cited as a problem from the various “agencies”.
Some better targets: HP, Lenovo, Gateway and Dell.
will Greenpeace take back their ridiculous criticism of Apple & point the finger at real polluters like the gov’t of China (who they applauded by extension when they ranked Lenovo ABOVE Apple in environmental friendly policy)?
write to Greenpeace & complain until they do.
TT: I just got it! (I’m a bit thick today.)
“And there’s no such thing as make-believe, puppy dogs or autumn leaves, no BB guns.
God didn’t make the little green apples, and it don’t snow in Minneapolis when the winter comes.”
– Roger Miller