Apple rejects Greenpeace claims after group stages protest on roof of Apple’s European HQ in Ireland

“Apple has rejected Greenpeace’s claims that it is not focused on renewables after activisits this morning staged an hour-long rooftop protest at the computer giant’s European headquarters in Cork,” The Irish Examiner reports. “The environmental group said it was aiming to to raise awareness about the growing use and scale of cloud data centres which store information for customers and companies at a central base housing thousands of computers.”

“A number of protesters scaled the Apple building in Holyhill at around 7am and voluntarily came down after an hour,” The Irish Examiner reports. “Iris Cheng, campaigner from Greenpeace International, said some major IT companies are not innovative enough about how they power their centers. ‘Coal is one of the dirtiest fuels on the planet, causing untold damage to the environment and global climate,’ she said.”

The Irish Examiner reports, “However Apple said its new data centre in North Carolina will draw about 20 megawatts of power at full capacity and ultimately 60% of its energy from on-site renewables including the largest solar farm and fuel cell generator of thier kind in the US. A separate site due to open next year in Oregon will be run 100% on renewables. Apple also said it buys all its energy for the Cork plant from a renewable supplier.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Instead of riding Apple’s brand for free publicity, how about protesting companies that actually don’t use, and aren’t doing anything to move towards using, renewable energy, you free PR leeches?

When completed this year, Apple’s massive fuel cell energy project in North Carolina will be largest in the U.S.! This is like protesting Coca-Cola because you want them to make cola.

Greenpeace has no credibility and vapid protests of companies that are actually trying to do positive, meaningful things for the environment certainly isn’t helping their stated-but-not-actual* cause. The end does not justify the means.

Get the real story behind Apple’s environment footprint here

*Stated cause: Enrich the environment. Actual cause: Enrich Greenpeace.

[Attribution: AppleInsider. Thanks to MacDailyNews readers too numerous to mention individually for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Apple gets more of its power from coal than any other large tech company – for now – April 17, 2012
New aerial images of Apple’s planned NC fuel cell, solar farms published – April 7, 2012
Apple’s massive fuel cell energy project to be largest in the U.S. – April 4, 2012
Apple plans USA’s largest private fuel cell energy project in North Carolina – April 1, 2012
How Apple took the lead on the environment – February 22, 2012
Apple patent application reveals next-gen fuel cell powered Macs and iOS devices – December 22, 2011
Apple’s Mothership campus solar roof will be among biggest in U.S. – December 7, 2011
Apple working with US company, Leaf Solar Power, on North Carolina solar farm – November 8, 2011
Apple patent app details highly-advanced hydrogen fuel cells to power portable devices – October 20, 2011
Apple building huge solar farm around its billion-dollar North Carolina data center – October 26, 2011

Greenpeace names Apple ‘least green’ tech company – April 21, 2011
Greenpeace drops Apple to 9th as HP, Samsung advance in ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ – October 26, 2010
Greenpeace spotlights links between Apple’s iPad, the Internet, and climate change – March 31, 2010
Greenpeace: Apple fails to meet ‘computer detox’ deadline – January 07, 2009
BusinessWeek: Apple is greener than Greenpeace says – December 08, 2008
Apple’s score plummets as Greenpeace expands ranking criteria in its Guide to Greener Electronics – June 25, 2008
Greenpeace intends to ride Apple’s PR coattails for as long as possible – January 18, 2008
BusinessWeek: Why Greenpeace repeatedly makes flawed attacks on Apple – October 26, 2007
Chemical Industry Group slams Greenpeace over unfair iPhone criticisms – October 22, 2007
Greenpeace admits that Apple’s iPhone is fully compliant with Euro chemicals rules – October 16, 2007
Apple faces lawsuit based on Greenpeace’s ‘toxic’ iPhone Report – October 15, 2007
Greenpeace attacks Apple over ‘hazardous chemicals’ in iPhone – October 15, 2007
Apple greener than Greenpeace wants you to think – May 03, 2007
Greenpeace ranks Apple dead last in ‘environmental friendliness’ – April 03, 2007
EPA does not support Greenpeace’s charges against Apple Computer – January 07, 2007
Apple places last in Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ report – December 07, 2006
Is Greenpeace lying about Apple’s ‘toxic laptops?’ – September 25, 2006
Greenpeace ‘Guide to Greener Electronics’ report called ‘misleading and incompetent’ – September 02, 2006
Greenpeace criticizes Apple over toxic waste – August 29, 2006


    1. No. They are doing exactly what they are really designed to do: enrich Greenpeace.

      Greenpeace = green (money) piece (the large portion that the organization wants).

      Anyone who has been duped into thinking they are an environmentalist organization, I feel bad for you.

    1. Gardaí is the police, one van, one patrol car, several non armed officers. The Landrover Defender in between is the gas guzzler Greenpeace used to commute from the Netherlands.

  1. Were any arrests made?

    I assume lethal force would be bad PR. Perhaps Tasers would help. Keep pressing that button. If they want to climb on our roof, they can ride the bull repeatedly. They just might not come back again.

    1. Arrests = more publicity = ‘oh poor babies’ public response = more fund raising. There’s no point. Just be nice to the loonies on the roof and coax them down. Give them vegan hot chocolate and cookies. Sympathize with their message but point out that they are WRONG in this case and that such infantile, ignorant BS only BACKFIRES on them. Then hand out Apple stickers and and off to bed with them! Cute little tykes. Don’t bother coming back soon! (^_^)/

  2. Greenpeace started an great environmental movement but they went off track.

    Greenpeace was started in Vancouver, BC

    On behalf of all Vancouverites, I’m sorry.

    Go CANUCKS!!!

  3. It would be VERY interesting to see what the source of heating and cooling is for all these Greenpeace freaks’s homes. I’ll bet you won’t find a lot of their homes powered by the sun or wind. Talk about hypocritical!

  4. You’re all missing the point: Greenpeace’s MO is to _become_ the world’s premiere renewable power source by sharing all that hot air and sh*te they’re full of…
    By the way, MDN: linking to Apple’s own website as the source of “the real story behind Apple’s environment footprint”? You’re all either tremendously naïve or sycophantic.

  5. And I was holding out for jumpers. Isn’t that what lemmings are supposed to do?

    Greenpeace is the Mike Daisey of slacktivist organizations, notorious for submitting fabricated FUD to generate sympathy for their causes. Apple’s response made their report even more laughable that it was when it was vomited onto the intertubes. 10% of the NC facility comes from renewable sources? Umm…try 60%, jackasses. As much as it pains me to see their moronic claims meriting any response, I’m glad Apple taking a counter-intelligence stance with these idiots.

    1. Actually, I wonder if Greenpeace’s tactics were the inspiration for Mike Daisey’s attacks on Apple.

      Both of them have no problems telling lies in the service of a “greater truth” (improving labor conditions, improving the environment), while at the same time drawing attention and money to themselves (purely coincidentally, I’m sure).

      And both apparently don’t see how nonsensical it is to target the one company who’s actually making a real effort in these areas, while pretty much letting other companies doing far worse than Apple off the hook.

    1. Actually they drove there (from the Netherlands) with a long Landrover Defender (go carbon footprint) and used an iPhone 4S for pictures (Photostream … iCloud oooops)

  6. Greenpeace says that apple should not build in North Carolina because N.C has large amounts of ‘dirty’ coal energy. It says Apple is ‘rich enough’ to go anywhere to build.

    SO… who is supposed to invest in N.C in areas where jobs are urgently needed? From what I’ve read the area is depressed (double digit unemployment) . Nobody?
    If a progressive company like Apple which is building it’s own renewable energy center to provide a large part of it’s power is not supposed to build there so who can? Maybe Greenpeace thinks only poor companies (you know those that CAN’T AFFORD THEIR OWN RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATORS) should invest in N.C (and ADD to the pollution!).

    Or perhaps nobody should invest, so people don’t need jobs? without jobs where’s the money to build better power plants? Won’t a place with no jobs, i.e a POOR place go for the cheapest energy source… coal?

    as often the case G.P makes no sense to me.

  7. GreenPeace (the two orgs that make it up Greenpeace and Greenpeace Fund) generates about $60 million a year gross which is not a lot.

    Yet the chief executive who runs both gets about $200,000 a year salary (which percentage wise vs company earnings is way higher than the pay of executives of corporations like Exxon. The chief exec of Greenpeace makes % wise 125 times the pay of Exxon CEO.)

    no wonder Greenpeace always likes to hit super high profile Apple as it gets publicity which keeps the donations flowing…

  8. * YES, Greenpeace has better things to do.
    * YES, Greenpeace is fund raising.
    * YES, Greenpeace is fund raising by breaking the law.
    * YES, Greenpeace is suffering an era of senility and ignorance, resulting in lash-back bad publicity about itself, reducing its ability to fund raise, perpetrating its own self-destructive.
    • YES, time for new management at Greenpeace. In a hurry please, before you manage to kill yourselves. 🙄

Reader Feedback

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