Greenpeace Gives Apple Low "Green" Grade

(AP)  Greenpeace International placed Apple Inc. last in its rankings of major electronics makers for their environmental friendliness, while Chinese manufacturer Lenovo Group Ltd. jumped to the top of the list.

An Apple spokeswoman said the company rejects Greenpeace's ranking system and that its products are among the "greenest" on the market, pointing to more technical ratings used by the Green Electronics Council.

Greenpeace ranked 14 computer and mobile phone makers according to their efforts to limit the use of hazardous chemicals in production and in taking steps to ensure that goods that become broken or obsolete are recycled.

Lenovo replaced Nokia Inc. at the top of the list, followed by Sony Ericsson, Dell Inc., and Samsung Electronics Co.

Near the bottom with Apple were LG Electronics Inc. and Matsushita Co.'s Panasonic.

Greenpeace spokeswoman Iza Kruszewska said Lenovo, which bought IBM's consumer electronics division in 2005, has tried to lessen its environmental impact since the list was introduced in August 2006. It was the first of the electronics giants to offer all customers the opportunity to give back computers for recycling.

Lenovo is a rare example of a company bucking the tide in China, which is a dumping ground for hazardous electronics, both domestically made and imported, she said.

She said Apple failed to stop using several types of harmful chemicals in its manufacturing, and — unlike many other companies — has not set any timetable for phasing them out.

"We disagree with Greenpeace's rating and the criteria they chose," Apple spokeswoman Sheryl Seitz said, reading a prepared statement. "Apple has a strong environmental track record and has led the industry in restricting and banning toxic substances such as mercury, cadmium and hexavalent chromium, as well as many BFRs (brominated flame retardants)."

According to standards developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Apple products are not especially toxic.

The Green Electronics Council, funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, runs a Web site that allows buyers to judge products on a score comprised of 23 different categories established by the IEE, including the materials used, energy conservation and packaging. Apple generally scored better than Lenovo and Dell.

All of the computer companies in Greenpeace's study had failed to eliminate BFRs and toxic vinyl plastics, though some of the phone makers did.

In addition, Greenpeace's study didn't take into account that in terms of quantity, Apple produces less toxic waste than larger competitors.

Kruszewska said the study intentionally ignored companies' absolute size to concentrate on their relative performance. She conceded the choices of manufacturers and judging criteria were subjective. But Greenpeace tried to be "fair and transparent" in giving advance warning to the companies on the way they would be rated.

She said Greenpeace's relationship with Apple has deteriorated since it set up a spoof Web site devoted to criticizing Apple's environmental policies, she added.

"Once we launched the 'Green my Apple' Web site, we stopped hearing from Apple altogether," she said.

She said Apple initially participated in regular conference calls with Greenpeace on the ratings scheme, but didn't change its practices any more than required by law.

"Steve Jobs has a lot to answer for," Kruszewska said, referring to Apple's CEO.

Greenpeace's full rating list was: Lenovo, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Dell, Samsung, Motorola Inc., Fujitsu-Siemens, Hewlett Packard Corp., Acer Inc., Toshiba Corp., Sony Corp., LG.Electronics Inc., Panasonic and Apple.

[rf35]

Radical left-wing organization slams a favorite computer of many liberals. This has to have a few on the far left stuttering. Of course, it is convenient to say that Greenpeace is too political and no longer an appropriate liberal org. I think many libs liked Apple because it like to play the part of the small, independent company struggling against the oppressive cooperate giants such as Microsoft. Don%u2019t buy it! Apple is just as cumbersome, greedy, and uncaring as any other major corporation. They intentionally make products incompatible with the majority of equipment on the market so you are forced to buy their software, accessories, and peripherals. I bought an i-Pod a while back and it never worked right on my PC. I had to reinstall i-Tunes and wipe the i-Pod%u2019s hard disk just about every time I plugged it in to synchronize. What a POS and waste of nearly $300! I%u2019m buying a Zune next. As for the computers themselves, Macs are ***. I%u2019ve lost more productivity when forced to work on a Mac than I care to think about. I hope this report takes a big chunk out of their bottom line.

P.S. I%u2019m not a neocon, I%u2019m a moderate. I don%u2019t work for MS, IBM, etc. I%u2019ve never supported Greenpeace.

[rohink-2009]

I like my Mac. I like my i-pod. I like what Steve Jobs said about the teachers union. I don't care what Greenpeace says. I used to donate money to them years ago. I grew up.

[rray52]

This has the appearance Greenpeace taking Apple to the woodshed for talking back to the teacher.

In the interest of full disclosure, did any of the ranked companies provide support for Greenpeace, or its network of foundations and spin off organizations.

[drinuk]

This whole global warming nonsense is a scam. Gore is a hypocrit. This scare as been designed as a medium term excercise to free the Western World of dependency on Middle East and Central American Oil. It also serves as a method of ratcheting up operating costs in the developing industrial nations such as India and China. If they told us the truth we may get there a little sooner, the majority of Americans would I'm sure be pleased to deprive Iran of it's oil income.

[alphaa10-2009]

Of course, Greenpeace is political-- that is by design, to wake people up that the environment is a political issue. Greenpeace is unpopular with Bushheads because the organization has exposed far too many of Bush's closest campaign contributors, who also happen to be polluters.

Greenpeace protested when certain industrial polluters openly dumped their toxics overboard in 55gal drums, on the high seas. The polluters did not think twice that their own children (or ours) might eat fish caught in the same waters.

Today, the latest advisories about eating ocean fish are increasingly alarmed about levels of mercury, PCBs, and other unnatural, poisonous compounds found in fish tissues. These fish indicate what happens to the environment when greedy, irresponsible industrialists are allowed to play unattended.

Full disclosure-- I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of Greenpeace. But an agenda of protecting the environment-- however many warts Greenpeace might or might not have-- is a lot saner than the people who travel with, and fund the campaigns of Bush.

[hawksprings]

Like us_infidel says, Who cares what Greenpeace thinks.

[hypnotoad72]

Guess who's been on Apple's board since 2003?

Al Gore, oh my!

Hasn't he been convincing Steve Jobs to recycle and other things green?

Apparently not. He's only proving he's more of a hypocritical fearmonger, nor do I buy into this "carbon credits" rubbish excuse of his. If he is so rabid about the environment, then he knows it's something you can't lazy around for now and pay later. Not with that interest rate. And not when plenty of real environmentalists who haven't made money combining their names with a hot topical subject saying it's something we cannot sit back on.

www.badapple.biz - a CONSUMER LED program (not Al Gore's!) FINALLY got Apple to start recycling - in 2005. (meanhwile, HP and other companies had/have done/still are doing recycling and trade-up programs for years!)

And since precious little is found about Al Gore's doings in Apple, he's losing credibility FAST. Never mind Apple corp itself, which lost mine a long, long time ago.

[silver9991]

Greenpeace has enough of its own inappropriate controversies in the past that I don't trust their word in particular.

I'd like a reliable organization such as Consumer Reports to do these analyses, instead.

[roadracer9x]

For a reality check, go to:
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2007/tc20070329_721408.htm?campaign_id=yhoo

[truthword]

Greenpeace, Apple, who cares, they're all the same junk ran by the same elitists and their little one world cabal.

Why is there a bite taken out of the apple in their logo is what I want to know?