Apple commits to be 100 percent carbon neutral for entire business by 2030

Apple today unveiled its plan to become carbon neutral across its entire business, manufacturing supply chain, and product life cycle by 2030. The company is already carbon neutral today for its global corporate operations, and this new commitment means that by 2030, every Apple device sold will have net zero climate impact.

Located in Dao County in Hunan, China, the Concord Jing Tang wind farm was developed by Concord New Energy Group and produces 48 megawatts of clean energy.
Through a first-of-its-kind investment fund, Apple and 10 of its suppliers in China are investing nearly $300 million to develop projects totaling 1 gigawatt of renewable energy.

“Businesses have a profound opportunity to help build a more sustainable future, one born of our common concern for the planet we share,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, in a press release. “The innovations powering our environmental journey are not only good for the planet — they’ve helped us make our products more energy efficient and bring new sources of clean energy online around the world. Climate action can be the foundation for a new era of innovative potential, job creation, and durable economic growth. With our commitment to carbon neutrality, we hope to be a ripple in the pond that creates a much larger change.”

Apple is providing detail on its approach to become 100% carbon neutral with a roadmap for other companies, as industries look to reduce their impact on climate change. In its 2020 Environmental Progress Report — released today — Apple details its plans to reduce emissions by 75 percent by 2030 while developing innovative carbon removal solutions for the remaining 25 percent of its comprehensive footprint.

To support these efforts and beyond, Apple is establishing an Impact Accelerator that will focus on investing in minority-owned businesses that drive positive outcomes in its supply chain and in communities that are disproportionately affected by environmental hazards. This accelerator is part of Apple’s recently announced $100 million Racial Equity and Justice Initiative, focused on efforts that address education, economic equality, and criminal justice reform.

“We’re proud of our environmental journey and the ambitious roadmap we have set for the future,” said Lisa Jackson, Apple’s vice president of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives, in a press release. “Systemic racism and climate change are not separate issues, and they will not abide separate solutions. We have a generational opportunity to help build a greener and more just economy, one where we develop whole new industries in the pursuit of giving the next generation a planet worth calling home.”

Apple’s Climate Roadmap

Apple’s 10-year roadmap will lower emissions with a series of innovative actions, including:

Low carbon product design: Apple will continue to increase the use of low carbon and recycled materials in its products, innovate in product recycling, and design products to be as energy efficient as possible.

• Apple’s latest recycling innovation — a robot the company is calling “Dave” — disassembles the Taptic Engine from iPhone to better recover key materials such as rare earth magnets and tungsten while also enabling recovery of steel, the next step following its line of “Daisy” iPhone disassembly robots.

• The company’s Material Recovery Lab in Austin, Texas, which is focused on innovative electronics recycling technology, is now partnering with Carnegie Mellon University to further develop engineering solutions.

• All iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch devices released in the past year are made with recycled content, including 100 percent recycled rare earth elements in the iPhone Taptic Engine — a first for Apple and for any smartphone.

• Apple decreased its carbon footprint by 4.3 million metric tons in 2019 through design and recycled content innovations in its products. Over the past 11 years, Apple has reduced the average energy needed for product use by 73 percent.

Apple’s latest recycling invention — its Dave robot — recovers material from an iPhone component for better use in future products.

Expanding energy efficiency: Apple will identify new ways to lower energy use at its corporate facilities and help its supply chain make the same transition.

• Through a new partnership with Apple, the US-China Green Fund will invest $100 million in accelerated energy efficiency projects for Apple’s suppliers.

• The number of facilities participating in Apple’s Supplier Energy Efficiency Program grew to 92 in 2019; these facilities avoided over 779,000 annualized metric tons of supply chain carbon emissions.

• Last year, Apple invested in energy efficiency upgrades to over 6.4 million square feet of new and existing buildings, lowering electricity needs by nearly one-fifth and saving the company $27 million.

Renewable energy: Apple will remain at 100 percent renewable energy for its operations — focusing on creating new projects and moving its entire supply chain to clean power.

• Apple now has commitments from over 70 suppliers to use 100 percent renewable energy for Apple production — equivalent to nearly 8 gigawatts in commitments to power the manufacturing of its products. Once completed, these commitments will avoid over 14.3 million metric tons of CO2e annually — the equivalent of taking more than 3 million cars off the road each year.

• New and completed projects in Arizona, Oregon, and Illinois bring Apple’s renewable capacity for its corporate operations to over 1 GW — equivalent to powering over 150,000 homes a year. Over 80 percent of the renewable energy that Apple sources for its facilities are now from Apple-created projects, benefitting communities and other businesses.

• Globally, Apple is launching one of the largest new solar arrays in Scandinavia, as well as two new projects providing power to underserved communities in the Philippines and Thailand.

Process and material innovations: Apple will tackle emissions through technological improvements to processes and materials needed for its products.

• Apple is supporting the development of the first-ever direct carbon-free aluminum smelting process through investments and collaboration with two of its aluminum suppliers.

The 16-inch MacBook Pro is the world’s best pro notebook.
Apple’s 16-inch MacBook Pro is the first to use low carbon aluminum

• Today the company is announcing that the first batch of this low carbon aluminum is currently being used in production intended for use with the 16-inch MacBook Pro.

• Through partnerships with its suppliers, Apple reduced emissions from fluorinated gases by more than 242,000 metric tons in 2019. Fluorinated gases are used in the manufacturing of some consumer electronics components and can contribute to global warming.

Carbon removal: Apple is investing in forests and other nature-based solutions around the world to remove carbon from the atmosphere.

• Apple is announcing today a first-of-its-kind carbon solutions fund to invest in the restoration and protection of forests and natural ecosystems globally.

• In partnership with Conservation International, the company will invest in new projects, building on learnings from existing work like restoring degraded savannas in Kenya and a vital mangrove ecosystem in Colombia. Mangroves not only protect the coasts and help support the livelihood of those communities where they grow, but they also can store up to 10 times more carbon than forests on land.

• Through its work with The Conservation Fund, the World Wildlife Fund, and Conservation International, the company has protected and improved the management of over 1 million acres of forests and natural climate solutions in China, the US, Colombia, and Kenya.

Apple engages with governments, businesses, NGOs, and consumers around the world to support policies that strengthen environmental protections and the transition to clean energy, which the company sees as a vital component of global climate action.

MacDailyNews Note: The company’s complete plan to become 100 percent carbon neutral for entire business by 2030 and how it measures its carbon footprint can be found in its 2020 Environmental Progress Report at apple.com/environment. Progress on its supplier commitments can be found at “>apple.com/environment/pdf/Apple_Supplier_Clean_Energy_Program_Update_2020.pdf.

29 Comments

        1. According to Al Gore and Loon Lunatic Liberal AOC we should have been dead years ago.

          Oh wait, yes almost forgot they are lying liberals with skin in the game and not credible non-partisan scientists…🤔

  1. Apple cares more about bs climate “science” than human rights in China where it continues to use what amounts to slave labor. Modern “liberalism” in a nutshell. They can pat themselves on the back all they want – it get accolades from total losers.

    1. The woker they get, the more they pat, the faker it becomes. If Apple wants to donate to a community devastated by a tornado or flood, go for it. But all this other stuff, while not inherently bad, reeks of sickening fakeness. Tone it down, Apple; you aren’t my religion, my teacher, my government or my mother.

    2. It must be lovely to live in a world with no climate change, racism, or coronaviruses. Those of us who live in the real world can only envy you. When do they have visiting hours?

      1. The Conflator strikes again….

        Is it only here, or could it be observed elsewhere in your daily life, your need to respond to things as-if they were spoken, or written, but neither were the case?

        Do you function daily with the notion that a falsity presented is permissible, if it supports your position on an issue, or your general paradigm?

        On numerous occasions, it’s been noted via your own words that you are serving as a sort of truth-detector for the dumb-axes here, though you seem to have a curious notion of the definition “truth.” Exaggeration, conflation, deflection and, fairly recently confirmed lying, have formed your repartee. Some much for heralding truth.

        Truth-defector is more fitting.

        1. Are you suggesting that it would not be great to live in a world where climate change, racism, and coronaviruses are not serious problems? Who would not be envious of those who live in such a paradise? Sadly, that is not the world that most of us live in. It is a world we dream and work for, but we know we are not there yet. It must be wonderful not to worry about such things, but somebody needs to. Good for Apple and their efforts!

          1. You just can’t help yourself. In what corner, crack, or pocket was this eluded to in even the smallest degree?

            Absolutely nothing was said about racism. Absolutely nothing was said about the Virus. It’s also nothing but conflation to make the conclusion about climate change…it arose completely from your own assumptions/suppositions.

            Now I more fully understand your propensity…disagreeing with you, or challenging a statement most often means one MUST be opposed to the principle/idea being proposed, or must mean “the other” is advocating the opposite position. You’ve got it wrong. A thinking mind will often be critical of an idea, EVEN when they hold the view personally. I can be an conservationist simultaneously thinking Apple is an active social justice warrior in this realm. It’s not that hard and it’s not uncommon.

            Focus on the words written and try to respond in-kind. Please take seriously you’re innate propensity to conflate. It’s apparent your bias is confounding simple realities.

          2. Ronner has posted a most superlative post calling you out exactly on many levels.

            And what do you do, totally ignore it and move to deflection confaltions Grande!

            You are a LYING JOKE and the most DISHONEST person around here…

      2. Are you sure you live in the real world… really sure? I. Mean they’re changing the definition of racism because they can’t find enough “real world” examples. COVID-19… had they not told you about it, would you be hiding at home with your mask on right now? Climate Change… well what is that new drop dead date I heard on the radio last week?

    3. And…China the largest user of coal in the World and actively proceed with creating more coal factories.

      The UN, IPCC and Apple don’t seem to care about this fact, in-spite of all rigorously seeking World-wide decrease in carbon levels.

      Help me reconcile. I love variable absolutes.

  2. Gasoline is great. Natural gas is a gift from God to mankind. These two excellent energy sources work 24/7/365. Wind and solar work about 8/5/220, more or less. And for those days when the “renewables” are sitting on their asses, energy providers are required by law to have “backup” from oil or gas or nuclear or hydroelectric, all of which the preening, virtue signaling jackass Democrats hate.

  3. We have roughly 9 years to act aggressively to prevent catastrophe from climate change. It is good to see Apple contributing like this, perhaps it will inspire others. However, only when this and other governments make the necessary changes and we end the use of fossil fuels will we be acting in a way to ensure a habitable world for our children. The scientists are right on this one too.

    1. “We have roughly 9 years . . . “. That is what Al Gore said about 20 years ago. More BS from the BSers. Climate change was called “weather” until idiot liberals with the scientific awareness of a toilet plunger decided to “fix the climate”. These people can’t even figure out how many genders there are. Dogs are smarter than the “climate change” leftists.

    2. Take a look at “Apocalypse Never” for a tempering of the hype. A life-long enviro’s view on the topic.

      Believing that we can reverse such a dire earth pattern in 10, 12, or 25 yrs is simply absurd and to think IT’S coming to an end in less than a decade is every more absurd. It’s comparable to thinking we could make an oil tanker to do figure 8’s in the space of a mile in rough seas. Big systems aren’t nimble.

      The amazing thing about those that think the 10-12 prediction has credibility…they’re not acting with any level of equivalancy, even though extinction is coming they’re way. They’re still eating meat, using fossils fuels to drive and make their cars, heat their homes, (whatever the type-incl electricity), building homes of wood, steel, concrete, buying things from those that create with coal. The list is exhaustive. So much for urgency.

      “But, but“, they respond, “we are waiting, we need the govt to act broadly and regulate”. So, if a forest fire is rolling through your neighborhood, where’s the sense in waiting for the go-ahead from the city to evacuate…if you’re facing death? Inaction in light of the planet’s death being so close is what I’d call relaxed, OR there’s another agenda.

      Few people realize what life would look like if the plan was fully implemented. Forget anything made out of concrete or steel…50% of fossils fuels usage is portioned to process these materials. At this time, there’s no viable substitute fuel/process. Without new technology, let’s head back to pre-Industrial Revolution times.

      No, please don’t do the TX-lawyer-thing here, I didn’t say I hate the planet and I dump oil on the ground when doing an oil change. Nor did I say research into clean materials, or processes was a waste of time.

      1. Actually, Ronner, I agree with most of what you say. We aren’t going to turn things around overnight or even in a decade or two. Still, we need to start trying sometime if we are ever to even slow the rate of CO2 growth. If sometime, why not now?

        1. Your question of “why not now,” is very much like the naive “what can it hurt” asked of many when considering the pop-enviro pursuits.

          As long as the push is driven by an organization that has members that would vote to compromise our sovereignty and strength of our union, I view the current “movement,” involving the UN and their IPCC, as nothing but duplicitous…esp when the measuring stick doesn’t apply evenly. This same “movement” led by polit-pop icon AOC, fortifies my repulsion to popular way/means that seek for a cleaner environment. Her senseless doc, if fully implemented, means we will live in pre-Industrial Revolution times. The true end result of her doc is never discussed. Amazing and startling. She and anyone who embraces her thinking, needs to look at and defend their position in light of book mentioned; Apocalypse Never. No conflation…I didn’t say it was THE end-all statement, but critical to calm the knee-jerking.

          I know we disagree on the basic belief of what’s behind all of this because you dismissed the point months ago when quotes posted from some IPCC leadership that stated this isn’t about environmentalism, but about economics and the leveling, or spreading of wealth. In typical form with bias leading, your reply was with doubt as it was simply presented…”there must have been some other meaning per context.” The words were/have been spoken by various IPCC leadership.

          If the scenario is code-red and if disaster is coming our way in 8, 10, 12, or whatever the scare number is this day, why are China and India permitted to continue with very HIGH levels of enviro contamination, but we’re not? We’re facing extinction, after all! In short, it’s been determined, “we’ve had our time of riches and it’s time to let others catch up”. “Fairness” is being pursued. To mandate the enviro rules across all countries and all peoples would prevent some from rising to desired levels. That’s interesting in itself as it shows the favoritism inherent in the UN, but shows that the standards being pursued will result in an undesirable standard of living. Again, the book mentioned has solid alt ideas.

          Also, a significant component of “The Accords” is taxation and these monies are spread around to other parts of the world to assist econ growth in smaller countries…often times with an enviro cover, or explanation. Where’s the impending disaster in all of this?

          Lastly, we don’t need, nor do I want anything to do with the UN determining the hoops the US needs to jump through, for the reasons mentioned. Two, we don’t need them and Apple is a prime example. Though Apple bends the knee to the UNs mindset, they are executing superbly with green technology, without any of the UN’s mis-routed taxation for fairness.

          I don’t ascribe to the impending disaster and the US is progressing steadily, with diminishing contamination levels and rising enviro tech gains–on our own–without sending $$ sideways to the UN. Per this summarizing statement, I’m going to guess we agree on very little. You’re much more welcoming to the UN’s involvement and I believe you ascribe to “dire” pertaining to GW.

  4. Cook is the only CEO of a major Capitalist corporation who is attempting to do something real about protecting the environment and reversing the corporations’ past bad practices. It has become apparent just how different he is but in a surprisingly good way from Jobs. Absolutely no one that I know predicted this pleasantly surprising turn of behavior and personality.
    By contrast, I notice that no pro-big oil Right-winger Teabagger making comments here has proposed any remedy better than Tim’s comprehensive, real-world solution. None, just hair-on-fire, Fox News-like outrage to entertain themselves. And I am surprised that they have not announced like an obedient sentinel for big oil, “Bird Lives Matter!”

  5. Using less energy is good business practice. Using recycled and recyclable materials rather than digging up more of a finite resource is also good business practice and keeps a lid on prices.

  6. So, does Apple’s carbon neutral stance include all of the coal plants powering China’s industrial base that produces all of Apple’s gadgets?

    Or is it just the LED lights in Apple stores?

    The later is practical, the former would require planting a new Amazon forest every year.

    1. Gary, yes it does. The policy requires that Apple suppliers be carbon neutral, not just the company itself. They are required to avoid using electricity generated from fossil fuels. To the extent that is not possible, they are to offset their consumption with generation from renewable sources.

Reader Feedback

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