“When Greenpeace protesters convened outside last year’s Macworld Expo, Apple CEO Steve Jobs dismissed the environmentalists by suggesting they ‘get out of the computer business [and] go save some whales,'” Bryan Gardiner reports for Wired.
“At this year’s Macworld, it was a different story. There were no protesters pounding on the Moscone West doors. Indeed, after introducing the svelte Macbook Air on Tuesday, Jobs took a moment to do something he’s never done while introducing a new product at Macworld: Update the audience on its environmental specs. What’s more, he said he would continue to do the same with every major product introduction in the future,” Gardiner reports.
“‘We continue to make progress on all of these environmental fronts, and we’ll keep you posted,’ Jobs said. ‘They all add up to something in the end, and we’re very conscious of this,'” Gardiner reports.
“Among other highlights Tuesday, Jobs cited the fact that the new Macbook Air is clad in a fully recyclable aluminum case and stated that aluminum is one of the most recyclable materials on the market,” Gardiner reports. “Jobs also told audience members that the Macbook Air will include the company’s first mercury- and arsenic-free display and that all of the Apple-designed circuit boards — which are the vast majority of the circuit boards in the unit — are free of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, two substances commonly found in consumer electronics that critics say pose hazards to the environment and to human health.”
“Yet the sum total of these self-described eco-milestones didn’t impress Greenpeace,” Gardiner reports. “‘Apple is getting greener, but not green enough,’ said Rick Hind, the legislative director of Greenpeace’s toxics campaign. ‘The Macbook Air has less toxic PVC plastic and less toxic BFRs, but it could have zero and that would make Apple an eco-leader,’ he added. While applauding Jobs’ new focus on environmental specs, Greenpeace noted that Jobs did not outline Apple’s plans to honor its 2007 pledge to eliminate these toxics materials in all Apple products by the end of 2008. That pledge was made in an open letter Jobs published last May.”
MacDailyNews Take: Sorry, RIckie, if Jobs decided not to waste his entire keynote presentation talking about your pet issues. Read the letter again; it hasn’t changed. Apple will never be “green enough” for these people because then their free publicity would dry up. Nobody would care if Grenepeace were hounding some dime-a-dozen PC box assembler like Dell. And if nobody cares, nobody joins and, most importantly, nobody donates.
Gardiner reports, “Despite a year of critiquing Apple’s environmental track record, Greenpeace maintains it’s not a case of eco-bullying, as Apple and others have alleged. ‘Apple sometimes gets really defensive,’ Hind admits. ‘They say: Why are you picking on us — especially when we have such a small market share compared to the rest of the industry?’ The reason, according to Hind, is simple. Apple is seen as a tech leader, especially when it comes to innovation. Even though companies like Dell and HP are much larger and ship many more computers, Greenpeace singles out Apple in order to draw attention to the whole tech industry’s eco policies, Hind says.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Too Hot!” for the heads up.]
And there you have it, Greenpeace gives worse polluters like HP and Dell basically a free pass, but Greenpeace continues to use Apple whenever and wherever possible to generate their own free publicity. Then these PR leeches pile back into their hybrids, because they care oh-so-much about the environment, yet they’re too stupid to realize or too lazy to research that they’re polluting Mother Earth even more than most people by wasting almost 50 percent more energy than by driving a Hummer.
But, of course, if they really cared about the environment enough to do their research and dumped their hybrids for more environmentally-responsible Hummers — or God forbid an even more efficient gasoline-powered vehicle — well, then they wouldn’t qualify for their environmental tax credits, now would they? And people wouldn’t read their “Save the Earth” bumper stickers with the same amount of conviction. And, anyway, it’s not about what’s real, it’s how you feel. Besides, NASA needs a place on Earth where they can test moon rovers.
Greenpeace are a bunch of frauds; just a group that long ago lost their way and who are now nothing more than an insincere PR machine.
As we’ve shown above, any issue can be twisted to make whatever point you want to make, just ask a decent lawyer. We know, oxymoron. The bottom line is that Apple is making progress on the environment and is being unfairly singled out for their PR value by Greenpeace. If everyone did a little bit to help improve the environment, turn off some lights, make a list before you go out on errands to cut down on driving, and a million other little things, the environment would be a whole lot better than it is now and certainly improve more than Greenpeace is facilitating by constantly attacking Apple just to get their name in the paper.
More about Apple’s environmental efforts here.
While Steve was saying that he would tell us about the environmental effects of new products, he introduced Time Capsule and didn’t say a word about IT’s environmental specs. Why not?
Thank you MDN. Greedpeace is a joke and they’re only out there to make money and headlines. Environmentalism was hijacked years ago and used for all kinds of political and money-making schemes. Just ask the former co-founder of Greenpeace. They can’t make real legitimate arguments based on fact, so they use bullying and scare tactics, and let kooks and nutcases help them garner headlines and good/bad press all over the world.
MDN, you’re starting to sound like RoughlyDrafted.com when he goes off from time to time about his personal politics rather than sticking to the Apple story. I agree with the gist of your article. But your commentary is over the top.
Where are those French frogmen — pun not intended — when you really need them?
Who is Greenpeace’s technology supplier?
“Greenpeace intends to ride Apple’s PR coattails for as long as possible”
Riding the coattails: I think that means to be helped, or carried along by.
@GizmoDan;
It’s because everyone already knows the people in IT are methane spewing gas bags.
There’s no reason to delve further into their environments.
GizmoDan… I’m with you. MDN can sound like a bunch of right-wing survivalist loons from time to time.
I used to give money to Greenpeace, but now donate to organizations like The Nature Conservancy, NRDC, Transportation Alternatives, ZPG…
Hybrids aren’t always the most efficient choice of vehicle. it depends on the type of driving one does. For highway driving, they’re the pits, but for errands and short hops they’re excellent.
Me? I’ll stick with my bicycles.
There’s nothing DUMMER than a HUMMER.
MDN, tell us how you really feel.
However, I have to say that the Hummer article he refers to is fascinating. You should all read it.
Personally, I am a conservative, and feel that most environmentalists are such due to a lack of other religion, therefore they worship the earth. Gotta believe in something! I drive an xB, but only because I’m cheap.
I received around $6000 in tax credits when I built our home. Then the $6000 was added to my income and taxed. It would have been less expensive, and a LOT less trouble to not have bothered with all the regulations and paperwork entailed. Greenpiss can kiss my donkey.
MDN.
Agree with you on the whole greenpeace thing, but don’t pull stuff out of your ass regarding the Hybrid vs Hummer thing. That was a very flawed study as a quick google search will reveal.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/20/1858204&from=rss
http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/case_studies/hummer_vs_prius.pdf (PDF)
and many more.
ron–
How does that work? I thought a tax credit was a direct subtraction off of the taxes you would owe. How did you end up owing more?
Greenpeace is a joke. Many of it’s founders think so.
GizmoDan, it happened. It was 16 years ago in California.
I also got caught up in Dumbass Carter’s solar energy scam. Cost me a 1/4 million $ in back taxes, interest (16 to 18%) and penalties. My fault.
Greenpeace should know that too much bullshit is bad for the environment.
“Who is Greenpeace’s technology supplier?”
Ohio Art. They provide Greenpeace with
” rel=”nofollow”>the finest and safest laptops.
I think that MDN’s comments here are making a mountain out of a molehill with this Greenpeace thing… Greenpeace is just doing whatever they can to do what they are trying to do… save the world. Is that a bad thing? No, I don’t think so. I personally disagree with many of their tactics, but they’re intentions are well meaning, and really, they have a good point…
Apple could, should (and likely has started to) pressure their suppliers to do the same things with their electronics as they are doing with their own designs. Until then, Greenpeace’s point remains valid… there is something bad in the device that does not need to be there, and thus should be eliminated… The publicity will help push it in that direction, and that is exactly what Greenpeace is trying to do. If it annoys Jobs, oh well…
So what? It’s not like Greenpeace is calling for a boycott of Apple products, and even if they did, outside of a VERY small minority, only Greenpeace activists would actually try to do so, but I doubt it would work, since every Greenpeace activist I have ever met had a Mac. I bet 90% or more of Greenpeace activists are loyal Apple customers.
HP, Dell, etc. whilst bigger, are clearly perceived as just mass producers… The McDonalds to Apple’s Red Robin (Google “Red Robin” if you don’t know what that is – don’t be a moronic putz and ask what you can find out for yourself!). Apple is considered a trend setter, and innovator, a forward thinker, so Greenpeace logically rides their coattails, as MDN fairly accurately characterizes it. If they tried the same with HP or Dell, it’s likely to elicit a “no shit sherlock” kind of response.
Anyhow, let’s remember what Hollywood has known well for decades… there is no such thing as bad publicity. It sure doesn’t seem to be negatively affecting the sales of Macs.
It’s a lot more unsafe to get a hummer while driving a hybrid.
“MDN, you’re starting to sound like RoughlyDrafted.com when he goes off from time to time about his personal politics rather than sticking to the Apple story.”
In this case they are right to do so. Greepeace has all but admitted they are using Apple for PR. Mostly all they are doing is pointing that out.
Kick Al Gore off of Apple’s board!!!
Greenpeace has lost all its credibility which their semi terroristic actions. This is just further proof that they have lost their way and resorts to slumming their cause with idiotic behavior.
Greenpeace is definitely using Apple to piggyback their message to a more conscious audience (Mac users…). While certainly insincere considering Apple’s marketshare and so forth, I’m not sure it’s really a bad thing because it’s clearly influenced Apple and given them a little push to stay ahead of the eco-friendliness curve. Which, I’m positive, will help Apple sell more units in the future. And save the earth
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
So the winner is Apple, simply for taking greenpeace’s unfair criticism seriously. I think Steve is very aware of this, while at the same time he must be wishing GP would get off Apple’s back…
Hey MDN, where’s your custom icon for Webclips on the iPhone? It’d be nice for the direct link to your site. How about it?
F*CK greenpeace and their liberal ilk. Disgusting people.