Apple’s toxin-free devices

Filed under: Computer, electronics, social media

Apple’s toxin-free devices

In its latest report, Greenpeace continues to hammer Apple for not disclosing comprehensive statements about future reductions in greenhouse gas emissions or having specific public policy statements about energy and climate. (This is despite Greenpeace’s claims that its criteria have changed to focus more on actions than words.) Greenpeace’s latest “Guide to Greener Electronics” was released on Wednesday, ranking Apple in fourth place among several of its consumer electronics peers.

Apple’s efforts have garnered some faint praise from Greenpeace. Last year, the organization awarded Apple four gold stars for eliminating PVC and BFR from its products. In the latest guide, Greenpeace also praised Apple for its leadership in product efficiency and voluntary recycling efforts. For instance, two years ago, energy consumption by its products amounted to 53 percent of the company’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Apple allows some of its engineers to test prototypes of its upcoming gadgets out in the wild.But it also takes serious precautions with those prototypes.Apple will “ugly-up” the casing with prototype material. If your holding an ugly prototype from from Apple, “usually that’s a good tip off that there’s a prettier version that actually exists and they went back in and made it ugly so you can’t enjoy it.”Greenpeace may not like that the company doesn’t disclose specific future plans or policy positions.

Of course, investors expect the company’s growth to be driven by the iPhone AND the iPad. If the iPad is slowing down after less than two years, and just as competition starts to heat up, it could be a problem.Speaking of record growth, Apple noted that its rate of increase of greenhouse gas emissions is far lower than its sales growth. Since 2008, Apple’s sales volume has increased 74 percent, while emissions only increased 57 percent.

Dell and HP continue to outscore Apple in Greenpeace’s rankings, largely based on policy statements and stated goals. It’s worth considering that both companies are responsible for nearly a third of the PCs shipped globally and half of PCs shipped domestically. If both companies were to design products with greater efficiency, use more recyclable materials, and eliminate chlorine, bromine, mercury, and arsenic from their products, they would have a far greater overall impact on the environment than Apple currently does.

Comments are closed.