Greenpeace still has zero credibility in this matter.

Let's see you produce some quantitative figures for different industries and manufacturers instead of this emotive nonsense designed to milk contributions and shortcut rational thought.



How about, for example, measuring Apple's actual quantity of "bad" chemicals per computer compared with other manufacturers, rather than making a scorecard of the manufacturers' green marketing materials, which simply rewards the biggest liars?



And how about targeting Dell, who sell eight times as many computers as Apple, each of which lasts only two thirds as long, and contains 50-100% more materials? You are simply targeting Apple because Apple users are more likely to send money to you, not because of any special problem with Apple products.



How about comparing the quantity of PVC used in computers with the quantity used in the building or auto industries?



How about making governments improve measurement and policing of unbranded goods which are sold in vast quantitites?



You shout about at a speck of dirt on Apple while ignoring a mountain of shit produced by others.

------

Greenpeace Reply

On assessment across electronics companies all held to the same criteria - see our Guide to Greener Electronics. For scientific testing and comparisons of how much toxic chemicals see our Toxic Chemicals in Computers Reloaded report.

The Guide to Greener Electronics has lead to significant improvements from many companies, including Apple. This show it has credibility and doesn't allow any company to lie without risking being publicly called on it. See previous criticism of HP.

As for targeting others, we've protested against HP in the past, are right now protesting Philips bad stance on recycling and are challenging in the very post companies like Dell to follow Apple's lead on toxic chemicals. We singled out Apple as an industry leader who companies like Dell follow, now Apple seems to be taking the lead, we'll pressure others to follow.

We've been working on toxic PVC for many years and have challenged many big users of PVC to use alternatives.

We are also working to ensure progressive government legislation is in place to make sure all electronics companies have to remove toxic chemicals and recycle their products.

Just because all our electronics work doesn't always get mentioned on Apple related sites doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Tom

you stressed Apple and results were good. we have now greener macs.

now, please, put yout attention to other more important ambiental issues, not just the hair.

If Apple's products are so bad, which computer company *should* we buy products from?

I completely agree with 'sleepy'.

There are far more bigger fishes to fry and yet Greenpeace wastes enormous time and effort targeting a company that has less than 3% of the world computer market.

i buy anything which works great, i don't care what's it made off.

i like the majority of the world, really doesn't care and i am not even American.

It's hard to believe Green Peace is not writing this article solely to ride on the coat tails of Apple's highly publicized product announcements.

I am also startled Green Peace acknowledges Apple's greener product line only in as much as Green Peace can take credit for the improvements themselves.

Green Peace which once had noble intentions now seems to exist only to promote their own egos, regardless quantitative data.

When Greenpeace started grading Dell 'commitments' while ignoring actual product toxicity it blew it's credibility out of the water.

As an environmental scientist I have suffered scepticism, causing me difficulty during the course of my work, as a direct consequence of the notoriety of Greenpeace misinformation.

-

Sceptics the world over now regularly talk of a "self-serving green mafia" more interested in self-promotion than doing any work of value.

-

This episode has been a disgrace, Greenpeace. Until you end it I will continue to advise people to donate to other, more productive, ethical organisations, such as the Environmental Investigation Agency.

Apple HAS ALWAYS been ahead of its competitors. Tom, you know that. You've always known that. But now you finally admit it.

So where, exactly, are the pickets outside all the premises of all Apple's inferior competitors, and where is the media frenzy? I seem to have been missing these news stories.

The only logical conclusion, is that you guys are inexcusably and transparently full it.

The best thing you could do to detoxify the world would be to shut down. To stop your poisonous, self-serving lies and nonsense, that you fiendishly masquerade as science and objectivity to the ill informed.

I do donate a lot of money to legitimate charities and causes. Which by definition, means that I will never donate a cent to ironically 'Greenpeace'.

Come clean you jerk!

What a bunch of self serving rubbish. You aren't even trying to stop toxic chemicals or carbon emissions anymore. Apple does better than anyone and you criticize Apple instead of Exxon!

Greenpeace earned a lot of credibility over the years. But you're burning it all with this nonsense.

You may have inadvertently awoken a sleeping giant. Apple is now more open about the issue and Steve Jobs, the master of cool, is touting the greenness of the new Macs. In the future, environmental innovation will be a differentiating factor between Apple and the rest of the industry, like Mac OS X, the multi-touch trackpad, etc. The other manufacturers will have to follow suit and phase out hazardous chemicals ASAP because Apple is going to market the hell out of this.

go apple

Thank you, for pushing Apple to make greener Computers.
They should do this year's ago by them self - remember "think diffrent"!

To reply to a few of the above accusations.

If Apple "has always been ahead of its competitors" then why do Dell and Lenovo have free global takeback programs and Apple still doesn't? Even Steve acknowledges Apple is following Dell on now measuring amounts recycled in a standardised fashion that allows comparison.

When we conducted our first actual testing by an independent testing laboratory of toxic chemicals in Sept 06 Apple used the highest amounts of a certain type of toxic flame retardant compared to other computer makers. In our second test of laptops showed Sony used less toxic flame retardant than other companies including Apple. That's why we knew Apple was not a leader on toxics elimination.

As for being "a disgraceful episode" if getting thousands of people to persuade a high profile company to become an environmental leader is a "disgrace" then I'm all for many more!

Tom
Greenpeace

thanks

thanks

Heads-up. The first commercial of Apple's green marketing push:

http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/24/apple-promotes-environmentally-friendly-notebooks-in-new-ad/

I would just like to say greenpeace's efforts are greatly appreciated in this stance. It is about time an organization brought attention to this matter.

thankyou greenpeace

I once saw this one video that through the little packed of the new macbook pro they have made a big difference to the world.