“A chemical industry group has lashed out against Greenpeace, condemning the environmental lobby group for making unfair criticism of Apple’s iPhone’s green credentials,” Jonny Evans reports for Macworld UK.
“Greenpeace last week released an analysis of the iPhone, in which it claims the product contains a range of potentially dangerous chemicals,” Evans reports. “The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum BSEF), the international organisation of the bromine chemical industry, points out that none of the substances Greenpeace is criticising Apple for deploying in the device are banned under existing environmental law.”
“‘All the substances reported by Greenpeace are approved for use, and provide critical performance and safety functions in a wide range of electronic products,’ the organisation countered,” Evans reports.
“The rebuttal continues to explain that – even according to Greenpeace’s own study – the iPhone complies with all existing EU regulatory requirements,” Evans reports. “It adds: ‘The brominated flame retardant most likely used in the iPhone is actually a reactive – it reacts with other substances to form a plastic and, once reacted, it is also no longer available to the environment. The Greenpeace report is incorrect in its assertions about the potential for releases to the environment.'”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “ds” for the heads up.]
It’s funny that a group calling itself “Greenpeace” continually wages “Yellowwar.”
@Endogenous Opioid Peptide
Thanks for making my point for me. Yes, the one statement was a blanket one but in your retort you lose the forest for the tree. The overarching theme of my post is that people are so intent on defending Apple, no matter what, that they are willing to ignore evidence and criticize any source that puts their cause in a bad light.
Jay makes a better point in pointing out the dangers of idealism but this goes for the great benevolent chemical industry lobby as well. And I think I alluded to this problem in my post, use of the word “zealots” was a clue.
Read fenman’s post for a salient point on the chemical issue. Still sticking to the critical thinking statement.
” . . . but in your retort you lose the forest for the tree.”
I guess that just leaves me stumped then.
If I refrain from eating my iPhone, I will be just fine.
In our modern age, we are all exposed to chemicals in the water we drink, food we eat, air we breathe, carpet we walk upon, etc. So periodically detox your body and take good nutritional supplements.
At least that will keep you from taking the toxic chemicals your doctor will prescribe for you.
Speaking of spelling, the MDN Magic Word was “youre”. That’s right, no apostrophe. At least the Mac OS X spellcheck doesn’t like it.
Dunno about bismuth, but silver isn’t dangerous, Jeff.
Then go eat a handful of silver and tell me how you feel.
“A chemical industry group has lashed out against Greenpeace”
This says it all. Whatever..
Greenpeace IS all about money these days, big business. No emotion there guys it´s all about the mighty dollar.You want to know who the genuine enviromentalists are, the real deal, well it is Sea Shepherd. Hard core, maybe, but true to the ideals of the original Greenpeace founders.
I have to say reading some of these remarks I noticed there is a new breed of rednecks emerging!
Greenpeace is leaching on the iPod’s popularity by making it a target of their scrutiny. Are they trying to pressure Apple or make iPod owners feel guilty? Whatever their strategy is the effect is a reinforcement of the idea that environmentalists are dirty hippies with unrealistic expectations from the rest of us.
Why are greenpeace slamming iphone? Because Their carrier cant get it!
Well duh Jeff, even water can kill you if you drink too much of it. Following your logic, we should ban water then.
Silver is highly inactive, just like gold. If you actually ate a handfull of it, you’d just possibly damage your toilet seat when the silver chunk hits it the next day.
And in other news a Car Industry Group reports that America’s vehicle emissions and fuel consumption standards are just fine with them.
And the Toxic Waste Dumping Council reports that Toxic Waste Dumps are completely safe.
If apple is so concern about the enviornment..then howcome they agree with the previous Greenpeace protest..that Mac is not enviornmentally safe..and they come up with their website that they will change their next bunch of macbook..if greenpeace is wrong?..the howcome it happnes?>.so ,all the people who thinks greenpeace is a bullshit..can you pls justify.why apple agreed last time?..haahaa hohoh..because they know they are wrong..
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />..