Greenpeace lauds, then criticizes Apple cleanup effort

[AppleInsider]

Greenpeace has already celebrated Apple's new push towards eco-friendly goods as beating much of the industry at its own game. The Mac maker, however, wasn't completely off the hook.

The environmental activist group didn't hesitate in responding to Apple CEO Steve Jobs' open letter on Wednesday, "cheering" the move as a major step towards electronics free of toxic chemicals.

Complements were especially warm for the consumer electronics firm's turnaround on removing the most hazardous elements from its devices. Brominated Fire Retardants and PVC plastic. Greenpeace was acutely aware of Dell's 2009 target for doing the same and was pleased to hear that the Round Rock, Texas-based PC maker would be eclipsed by its arch-rival a full year sooner, scrubbing the devices clean by 2008.

"Way to go Steve," Greenpeace said on the matter.

The activist group also felt that its targeted campaign for greener Apple hardware had been validated by the change. Efforts by supporters to spotlight the computer builder's shortcomings in dramatic fashion -- which included a complaint-ridden MacExpo protest and a near-literal greening of Apple stores -- had made it "clear" that the wasteful practices needed to change, Greenpeace claimed.

Apple's CEO had mentioned the environmentalists' demands in his letter, but said nothing of the related protests. The company's shareholders had until today been scheduled to vote later his month on an investor-driven green timetable which would have brought the issue to the forefront with or without the demonstrations..

Even with its seeming victory, however, Greenpeace quickly turned its commendation into a jab at Apple's remaining weaknesses. The Mac maker's computer take-back program was singled out as overly US-centric, according to the statement. While it meant that no discarded systems or handhelds from American would filter back to Asia and contribute to local pollution, buyers in other regions would be forced to toss their systems away. Other companies have already implemented worldwide recycling programs.

The environmental advocates also made it evident that the plan had to translate into action, and that the expectations for Apple -- a company known for meticulous design -- would be especially high.

"Apple hasn't gotten an actual green product to market, but no other electronics manufacture has either," Greenpeace commented. "That's a race worthy of the wizards of Cupertino."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Johnny Mozzarella]

I'm all for greening Apple and nuking Greenpeace.

[swmooretiger]

Greenpeace seems to have totally missed one major point, Apple didn't do any of these things in reaction to their request. The efforts described in Jobs' letter have been underway for the last 10-15 years at Apple. All Greenpeace has done to Apple is help persuade them to make their existing programs known to the public; they have not effected any change within the company.

Greenpeace should do more research before making public claims that aren't true. It would be respectful and more effective if they contacted an Apple representative to inquire about their environmental programs, in an effort to work with Apple to make their "green" labors known, rather than slinging mud then claiming their efforts were successful.

[AgNuke1707]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"Apple hasn't gotten an actual green product to market, but no other electronics manufacture has either," Greenpeace commented. "That's a race worthy of the wizards of Cupertino."

See, what do they mean by "green product" ... one that contains no hazardous chemicals? That's going to be impossible for any electronics manufacturer ... it would be nice if Greenpeace actually defined what they wanted...

[SpamSandwich]

Only too predictable... "Even with its seeming victory, however, Greenpeace quickly turned its commendation into a jab at Apple's remaining weaknesses."

Friggin' tools.

[aplnub]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella

I'm all for greening Apple and nuking Greenpeace.

Agreed.

They claim vicotry but all the nerds know that LED is better for the user and just happens to be greener than what we have now. So no victory, just good PR for Apple to get GP off their case just a little. But the little buggers are like roaches and just keep coming with it.

[Ireland]

Greenpeace cause nothing but red wars, they can shove it!

[anantksundaram]

I wonder, do Greenpeace employees use computers at all, either at home or in the office?

If "no," hats off to them. At least, that would be very consistent and honest.

If "yes," then (s)he is simply a third-rate, garden-variety hypocrite. (But nothing in the law says you can't be one.)

[desarc]

without going on a rant that would be ohh-so easy, YES greenpeace can be extremely annoying, but all companies, computer manufacturers included, should be looking more at saving us from oblivion instead of saving 14 cents per unit.

as a design firm we use 100 post consumer paper and soy based inks, unless the client is especially annoying, in which case we use 100% "wind power" paper. never a tacky foil stamp or metallic papers. do we really need a huge hard plastic case to package a matchbook sized ipod? aren't there 100 million of those in landfills now?

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Originally Posted by AgNuke1707

See, what do they mean by "green product" ... one that contains no hazardous chemicals? That's going to be impossible for any electronics manufacturer ... it would be nice if Greenpeace actually defined what they wanted...

An abacus made of soy beans and twigs.

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Originally Posted by desarc

Blah blah blah blah...do we really need a huge hard plastic case to package a matchbook sized ipod?

Yes. otherwise we would lose them because they are so tiny.

Originally Posted by desarc

aren't there 100 million of those in landfills now?

Yes. It is part of Apple's landfill beautification project.

[Slewis]

Originally Posted by swmooretiger

Greenpeace seems to have totally missed one major point, Apple didn't do any of these things in reaction to their request. The efforts described in Jobs' letter have been underway for the last 10-15 years at Apple. All Greenpeace has done to Apple is help persuade them to make their existing programs known to the public; they have not effected any change within the company.

Greenpeace should do more research before making public claims that aren't true. It would be respectful and more effective if they contacted an Apple representative to inquire about their environmental programs, in an effort to work with Apple to make their "green" labors known, rather than slinging mud then claiming their efforts were successful.

More research? More like reading the damn thing the whole way through. That's all the research they needed to do and they even failed at that.

Originally Posted by desarc

without going on a rant that would be ohh-so easy, YES greenpeace can be extremely annoying, but all companies, computer manufacturers included, should be looking more at saving us from oblivion instead of saving 14 cents per unit.

as a design firm we use 100 post consumer paper and soy based inks, unless the client is especially annoying, in which case we use 100% "wind power" paper. never a tacky foil stamp or metallic papers. do we really need a huge hard plastic case to package a matchbook sized ipod? aren't there 100 million of those in landfills now?

I dunno, I kept the case to mine, on the shelf with the rest of my Mac Related Products Packaging and Books. I like the design.

Sebastian

[roehlstation]

Dear Greenpeace,

Apple did not create these policies because of anything you've done, so stop dancing around, Apple was already doing this, they just didn't brag about it, they did it because it was the right thing to do, not as a marketing ploy. Just because you couldn't get the information to twist around before, does not mean Apple didn't have a plan.

Now as far as a computer take back program, you'll find that a lot of Mac users want to hold on to their old Macs, even if they aren't working.

[KeyMACer]

Originally Posted by roehlstation

Now as far as a computer take back program, you'll find that a lot of Mac users want to hold on to their old Macs, even if they aren't working.

Yup, until two years ago, the family computer at our house was almost 8 years old aand 2 years before that was another 8 year old computer we now have 4 retired computers hardrive/monitor and all in our basement, all Macs not filling the landfill, but our basement instead.
The family Comp is now about 7 years old

Don't you just love hand-me-UPs (university kids giving old comps to their parents)

[1984]

So instead of going after companies that have poor environmental policy they go after those that have good environmental policy because they happen to have a popular product? Hmmmm... So if I have one neighbor that recycles and one that doesn't I should pester the one that recycles to recycle more? Um... okay.

[ShadowMac]

Greenpeace just take a cheap shot by saying Apple hasn't produced a green product. No technology company ever have or will.

They've got nothin!! Now, thanks to that lame statement, everybody knows it!

[desarc]

sebastian, the case would still be cool if the same [obviously very talented] packaging designer were told to make it eco-friendly. and when it did EVENTUALLY go from your shelf to a landfill, maybe it could decompose, too?

mozzarella, very funny. landfill beautification project. you're a comic genius. a pure masterpiece of humor. the funniest thing since the first football to the groin. i'm still laughing. seriously. no really. honest.

shadowmac: there are shades of grey in green products. my macbook could be made from 100% post consumer aluminum... or from lead.

finally, as far as no international buyback program... ebay is the only buyback program i've ever used.

[fastred]

I used to be a contributor to Greenpeace's activities; some I still passively support (like their action on whaling)... but their histrionic, half-baked and mis-directed attacks on Apple meant they lost my subscription. I now make donations to less self-important, up-them-selves environmental organisations.

They ain't getting my money back through this sort of carry-on either....

[CJD2112]

I applaud Desarc for making some excellent points against the general disdain for environmental issues that seems prevelant here. It makes me sick when I read pompous comments about how unimportant environmental issues are and that destroying a community that attempts to improve the way of life for generations to come is seen as humor. It's ignorant and sad.

Keep in mind, humanity is just a spec on the timeline of this planet, and nature can flick us off any time she wants. The Tsunami in Indonesia and the rapidly increasing hurricanes and global climate change is just a taste of what's to come from man's disrespect of the only planet they call home. Think about that fact very carefully before you anonymously reply with pompous comments. If attitudes similar to what has been displayed here continue, it's only a matter of time...

[fastred]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

I applaud Desarc for making some excellent points against the general disdain for environmental issues that seems prevelant here. It makes me sick when I read pompous comments about how unimportant environmental issues are and that destroying a community that attempts to improve the way of life for generations to come is seen as humor. It's ignorant and sad.

Keep in mind, humanity is just a spec on the timeline of this planet, and nature can flick us off any time she wants. The Tsunami in Indonesia and the rapidly increasing hurricanes and global climate change is just a taste of what's to come from man's disrespect of the only planet they call home. Think about that fact very carefully before you anonymously reply with pompous comments. If attitudes similar to what has been displayed here continue, it's only a matter of time...

Oh grow up. Very little of what has been said here is "distain for environmental issue". What it is, and quite appropriately, is distain for the *inappropriate* grandstanding by Greenpeace, who targetted Apple not because of its poor environmental record but
a) because Apple has a high profile;
b) Apple didn't play the silly games other computer manufacturers have been playing.

Don't presume to judge my views on the environment, or those of others here either.

What matters is that *all* of us, companies, governments, and individuals take action on environmental issues. Ad hominem attacks on either individuals or companies with high profiles won't cut it.

[interwebs]

I greatly admire both Apple and Greenpeace and think they have both taken mostly positive actions here. I don't think Apple would have released it's environmental policies - even though they are industry leading - unless Greenpeace had done this prodding. And why not? This is not an Apple product announcement, this is about being a good corporate citizen, and that's what Apple has now demonstrated they are. Now, thanks to Greenpeace, Apple is the clear leader in removing toxics, and Dell, and other manufacturers now have to compete with Apple to become even greener. No company wants to be low on the list of toxic manufacturers.

Apple wins by demonstrating it's a leader, and Greenpeace wins by showing it forced Apple mysteriously reluctant hand to be more open.

But neither organization has been perfect. Steve Jobs admitted so in his letter: "we have failed to communicate the things that we are doing well" and "We apologize for leaving you in the dark for this long." And Jobs wasn't only responding to Greenpeace - he admitted "shareholders, employees and the industry... deserve and expect more from us, and they’re right to do so." I think he showed great leadership, owned up, and realized there's no reason to be secretive in this instance.

And while I don't fault Greenpeace for taking aim at Apple on this issue - they did so, in my opinion, not for a hatred of Apple, but precisely because Apple is a leader in so many areas and can shame the other manufacturers into acting responsibly as well - I do think Greenpeace took a bit too much credit. They made it appear that they changed Apple's manufacturing processes, when they really changed Apple's openness about their environmental plans. And the result is a good thing.

[IQ78]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

... Keep in mind, humanity is just a spec on the timeline of this planet, and nature can flick us off any time she wants ...

Exactly! This is why it bothers me a bit when people talk about how we are hurting the "earth" and we should "take better care of the earth." No, man... sorry, you got it all wrong. We need to take care of ourselves. The Earth will roll on just fine. We are a mere spec. One quick event and we're all toast, and then a few million years later we are replaced by something else maybe even better.

We need not feel any pity for nature. She can take care of herself. We can spew crap in the air all day long without hurting "nature. A lot of life forms will adapt, a lot of life forms will die (maybe including us) and others will hardly be effected. What will be, will be. Mother Nature don't go down easily. Look what she did with an ice age. Our existance is nothing on her time scale.

IQ78

[Evoken]

Greenpeace? What's that? PETA for trees?


Evo

[i386]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

I wonder, do Greenpeace employees use computers at all, either at home or in the office?

If "no," hats off to them. At least, that would be very consistent and honest.

If "yes," then (s)he is simply a third-rate, garden-variety hypocrite. (But nothing in the law says you can't be one.)

I say they do, they'll have no choice but to switch to Apple now

[aegisdesign]

Originally Posted by desarc

sebastian, the case would still be cool if the same [obviously very talented] packaging designer were told to make it eco-friendly. and when it did EVENTUALLY go from your shelf to a landfill, maybe it could decompose, too?

I suspect the packaging designer HAS made it eco-friendly. The biggest environmental issue with packaging isn't what it's made of, it's the size/volume of the package. Transporting large, heavy, fragile cardboard boxes around the world is more damaging than small, light, strong plastic boxes.

Greenpeace seem to concentrate on the materials, not how efficient the production and distribution is not to mention power consumption of the final product.

[Aussie John]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

I wonder, do Greenpeace employees use computers at all, either at home or in the office?

If "no," hats off to them. At least, that would be very consistent and honest.

If "yes," then (s)he is simply a third-rate, garden-variety hypocrite. (But nothing in the law says you can't be one.)

Dont be such an apple fan boy (and the other posters) - one can never criticise Apple!!!??

Yes if you are a Greenpeace supporter, you would never drive a car, fly in plane, eat pesticide covered vegetables et al - oh spare me

Computer companies do have a responsibility to produce toxic free (or as close as possible) products and kudos to Greenpeace for being on on the manufacturers' cases and likewise kudos to Apple for any legitimate effort to reduce toxic products and excess waste.

[Banalltv]

"I'm all for greening Apple and nuking Greenpeace."


Asshole.

[Vincent_Agniello]

I don't think it's fair to jump on Greenpeace so viciously. They are concerned about the environment and are just trying to make a difference. It's really great to see that Apple is concerned as well. Kind of a bummer to read all these posts boooing what is a very important issue, imo.

[cnocbui]

Originally Posted by Vincent_Agniello

I don't think it's fair to jump on Greenpeace so viciously. They are concerned about the environment and are just trying to make a difference. imo.

They might be 'concerned' but they are terminally thick so should be ignored. The complete inanity of most of their positions and arguments about big issues, unfortunately detracts from the few issues that actually should be of concern - like deforestation in the third world.

They believe global warming is caused by mans activities yet are anti-nuclear. They decry landfill and yet oppose waste incineration etc.

Greenpeace is really good at telling everyone what they shouldn't be doing but they never have practical answers or alternatives.

[cnocbui]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

IThe Tsunami in Indonesia and the rapidly increasing hurricanes and global climate change is just a taste of what's to come from man's disrespect of the only planet they call home. Think about that fact very carefully before you anonymously reply with pompous comments. If attitudes similar to what has been displayed here continue, it's only a matter of time...

Please don't use the word 'fact' when the correct word is 'myth'

Explain please the causative link between man's activities and the earthquake that triggered the Tsunami - I am really keen to learn how that works.

[ajmas]

Originally Posted by i386

I say they do, they'll have no choice but to switch to Apple now

Maybe they already are, hence their fustration.

[CJD2112]

Originally Posted by cnocbui

Please don't use the word 'fact' when the correct word is 'myth'

Explain please the causative link between man's activities and the earthquake that triggered the Tsunami - I am really keen to learn how that works.

Sure, go stand in front of one and see how it works, then tell me all about it later...

I made no reference to causality, I simply demonstrated man's inferiority to nature and that such acts AS the tsunami are an excellent example of how humanity is no match. RAPID global climate change, on the other hand, has been and is quickly being proven a direct result of man's blatant disregard for the planet through pollution and corp. greed. THAT, dear Sir, is a fact.

[Shintocam]

Originally Posted by ShadowMac

Greenpeace just take a cheap shot by saying Apple hasn't produced a green product. No technology company ever have or will.

They've got nothin!! Now, thanks to that lame statement, everybody knows it!

You know it's funny, people read, or hear what they want. What Greenpeace said was:

"Apple hasn't gotten an actual green product to market, but no other electronics manufacture has either,"

This is the first part of the statement. You read it as a cheap shot at Apple. First of all, they are not taking a shot at Apple only, they are actually commenting on ALL electronics manufacturers if you read the full thing. And, if you continue reading:

"That's a race worthy of the wizards of Cupertino."

So in fact, I read this as a compliment. They are suggesting that since no one else has managed to do this, perhaps, the clever minds at Apple might actually be able to come up with something, and that they likely can take the lead in that regard.

And to suggest that "no technology company ever will" make a green product is a ludicrous statement. Given enough incentive, given enough desire it will and can be done. How can anyone say something will "never" be invented or done....

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by interwebs

I greatly admire both Apple and Greenpeace and think they have both taken mostly positive actions here. I don't think Apple would have released it's environmental policies - even though they are industry leading - unless Greenpeace had done this prodding. And why not? This is not an Apple product announcement, this is about being a good corporate citizen, and that's what Apple has now demonstrated they are. Now, thanks to Greenpeace, Apple is the clear leader in removing toxics, and Dell, and other manufacturers now have to compete with Apple to become even greener. No company wants to be low on the list of toxic manufacturers.

Apple wins by demonstrating it's a leader, and Greenpeace wins by showing it forced Apple mysteriously reluctant hand to be more open.

But neither organization has been perfect. Steve Jobs admitted so in his letter: "we have failed to communicate the things that we are doing well" and "We apologize for leaving you in the dark for this long." And Jobs wasn't only responding to Greenpeace - he admitted "shareholders, employees and the industry... deserve and expect more from us, and they’re right to do so." I think he showed great leadership, owned up, and realized there's no reason to be secretive in this instance.…

Apple's environmental policy has been public for quite a long time. Their Environmental web site (http://www.apple.com/environment/) has been available for a long time and it is not the first time that it has had to be brought to attention.

The fact that Apple seems to walk the talk without fanfare while everyone else is virtually talking the walk, I would suggest that you retrack your comments, in particualar that, "…I don't think Apple would have released it's environmental policies" and "…Greenpeace wins by showing it forced Apple mysteriously reluctant hand to be more open." Obviously, the evidence is to the contrary is overwhelming.

I think that the leasson here is we should all not be so quick to jump to conclusions. And to the likes of Greenpeace, quit acting like a nagging spouse. It only leads to divorce.

[Ronbo]

A few of you guys have got it right, and a bunch of you are missing the point. Pretty much everybody supporting Greenpeace is missing the point. The point isn't the environmental issue.

The point was the slipshod and reckless way that Greenpeace nailed Apple. They repeatedly criticized Apple for failing to do something, without regard for the fact that they were already doing it, doing it better than Greenpeace reported, and doing it better than other companies Greenpeace applauded.

And then, when this press release came out, Greenpeace completely failed to do the honorable thing and admit they'd criticized Apple unfairly.

It's NOT sufficient to fall back and say "Well, the issue is important." Swing and a miss, people. Apple didn't dispute that, and neither have most of us.

What gets most of us is the sheer level of dishonesty and beligerant self-delusion that's characterized Greenpeace's behavior. To try and repair their shattered image of respectability, they need to be able to say, "Hey, we appear to have been wrong on certain points."

And these things were NOT secret. Roughlydrafted.com talked about all these things in great depth. He had access to the information, and so did Greenpeace. The difference was that he did some honest investigation, and they did not.

That's what's got most Apple fans riled. Greenpeace was relentlessly dishonest and ignorant. These people are supposed to be ambassadors for certain causes. Like all ambassadors, when they behave badly, the anger spills over onto their cause. That's just how it is, and you're seeing it in the above posts. If you don't like it, then please for once go criticize the organization whose misbehavior has created such outrage. It wasn't Apple. Apple, as you should be able to see if you've really bothered to read the letter from SJobs or the roughlydrafted articles, has been doing far far more than Greenpeace has been giving them credit.

[cnocbui]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

I made no reference to causality, I simply demonstrated man's inferiority to nature and that such acts AS the tsunami are an excellent example of how humanity is no match. RAPID global climate change, on the other hand, has been and is quickly being proven a direct result of man's blatant disregard for the planet through pollution and corp. greed. THAT, dear Sir, is a fact.

Your juxtaposition of the tsunami reference and comment on global warming were such that I think most people would interpret that you thought the latter was the cause of the former.

This is getting a bit off-topic (apologies). Nothing you allege is fact or proven. Warming is occurring on Mars, Jupiter, Triton, Neptune and Pluto. How is that caused by man's Co2 emissions? The long term historical record indicates that Co2 levels rise after temperatures have risen. Fairly easy to see which variable is causative and which is dependent.

What Greenpeace have done is just as slimy as the behaviors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

They pick on Apple - probably because they are well aware of of it's own unprompted efforts towards 'greener' products - because they know that is the direction Apple is headed. So they make a lot of noise chastising Apple so they can claim the credit when Apple announces/achieves what it was already intending to do.

So Greenpeace looks good and claims credit for what Apple has done - they make me sick!

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Originally Posted by Evoken

Greenpeace? What's that? PETA for trees?


Evo

Don't get me started on PeTA!

[hardeeharhar]

Originally Posted by cnocbui

How is that caused by man's Co2 emissions? The long term historical record indicates that Co2 levels rise after temperatures have risen. Fairly easy to see which variable is causative and which is dependent.

While this may be true historically, it is clear also from prehistoric ice cores that co2 has a synergistic effect on temperature. That is, heat increases the metabolic cycling of carbon (thus resulting in more co2), and the increase in co2 causes more heat to be trapped. Cause and effect are irrelevant since it is a direct feedback loop.

[iPilya]

Ronbo: I could not have said this better or more in a polite way. (I am to much of an opinionated asshole to be so kind). I like your words so much - I hope you don't mind if I quote your entire bit.

Originally Posted by Ronbo

A few of you guys have got it right, and a bunch of you are missing the point. Pretty much everybody supporting Greenpeace is missing the point. The point isn't the environmental issue.

The point was the slipshod and reckless way that Greenpeace nailed Apple. They repeatedly criticized Apple for failing to do something, without regard for the fact that they were already doing it, doing it better than Greenpeace reported, and doing it better than other companies Greenpeace applauded.

And then, when this press release came out, Greenpeace completely failed to do the honorable thing and admit they'd criticized Apple unfairly.

It's NOT sufficient to fall back and say "Well, the issue is important." Swing and a miss, people. Apple didn't dispute that, and neither have most of us.

What gets most of us is the sheer level of dishonesty and beligerant self-delusion that's characterized Greenpeace's behavior. To try and repair their shattered image of respectability, they need to be able to say, "Hey, we appear to have been wrong on certain points."

And these things were NOT secret. Roughlydrafted.com talked about all these things in great depth. He had access to the information, and so did Greenpeace. The difference was that he did some honest investigation, and they did not.

That's what's got most Apple fans riled. Greenpeace was relentlessly dishonest and ignorant. These people are supposed to be ambassadors for certain causes. Like all ambassadors, when they behave badly, the anger spills over onto their cause. That's just how it is, and you're seeing it in the above posts. If you don't like it, then please for once go criticize the organization whose misbehavior has created such outrage. It wasn't Apple. Apple, as you should be able to see if you've really bothered to read the letter from SJobs or the roughlydrafted articles, has been doing far far more than Greenpeace has been giving them credit.

[Abster2core]

For anyone that wants the facts, the open letter from Steve is a great read.

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/

However, I do also like his response in Apple, 2005

"… Jobs said that Apple takes its environmental responsibilities seriously and added that the company is leading the industry on environmental issues. He also expressed frustration at Apple being singled out for criticism over its peers, calling it "bullshit."