Apple reports carbon emissions, touts green hardware

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple this week launched a new section of its Web site devoted to promoting the company's energy efficient machines and environmentally friendly manufacturing techniques.



The new feature, entitled Apple and the Environment, provides information on how the Mac maker has made efforts to eliminate toxic substances from its machines, and also worked to make its hardware highly recyclable.



Years ago, the company was targeted by Greenpeace over the use of toxic chemicals in its products. In 2006, Apple was given a 2.7 out of 10 rating in being environmentally friendly. Since then, the hardware manufacturer has made a clear effort to improve its image within the environmentally conscious community.



"With a complete life cycle analysis of greenhouse gas emissions, Apple sets a new standard of full environmental disclosure," the company said in a press release. "We?re the only company in our industry that considers the environmental footprint of every product we make. And we?re the only company to add up all our greenhouse gas emissions and tell you how they are distributed across ? and beyond ? a product?s lifespan."



In 2007, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs unveiled a timetable for the removal of toxic chemicals from the company's products. The new Web site is a means for Apple to tout the progress it has made since then. The page also marks the first time the company will disclose its carbon emissions, according to BusinessWeek.



"Apple's real goal is to change the terms of the debate," the report said. "Company executives say that most existing green rankings are flawed in several respects. They count the promises companies make about green plans rather than actual achievements. And most focus on the environmental impact of a company's operations, but exclude that of its products."







Apple officials reportedly said that the use of Apple products by consumers accounts for more than half of the company's annual 10.2 million tons of carbon emissions. The environmental Web site states that less than 5 percent of the company's emissions come from manufacturing facilities, while more than 95 percent of Apple's greenhouse gases are from the products they make.



"A lot of companies publish how green their building is, but it doesn't matter if you're shipping millions of power-hungry products with toxic chemicals in them," Jobs told BusinessWeek. "It's like asking a cigarette company how green their office is."



The new Web site also pushes Apple's recycling program, where users can learn how to send in their old iPod, iPhone or Mac. Users of handheld devices can fill out a form with their name and address and will be provided a prepaid mailer, while Mac owners can recycle their old system for free with the purchase of any new system in an Apple Store.



«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 84
    Interesting. Jobs himself even speaks out in this article. He must really care about this himself although it should come as no surprise. It good to see Apple leading the front on environmental awareness.
  • Reply 2 of 84
    I'm very happy to be able to read about this effort by Apple. It makes me feel better when using my new MacBook Air, for what it's worth. I'm a very active volunteer and donor to and for environmental efforts, primarily watershed and river cleanup and maintenance but also a number of other efforts, so this is right up my alley. Way to go Apple!
  • Reply 3 of 84
    Very progressive.
  • Reply 4 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Very progressive.



    I agree, but you can also say this about a lot of things they do. They're on the cutting edge with their products as well as the environmental impact those products have.
  • Reply 5 of 84
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member
    The credit crunch has taken all the headlines, but there's still a climate crisis going on



    This a mature answer from Apple to the misleading Redmond ads of cheap PCs. Remember, it's not business as usual. The world has changed for the better. And it's good to see that Apple is at the forefront
  • Reply 6 of 84
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    I thought it wasn't clear the carbon is the cause of climate change. This could all be a big waste of time by Apple.
  • Reply 7 of 84
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    I'm sorry, but in NO way is the APPLETV environmentally green or progressive.

    From its lack of an "On/Off" switch to the thermal heat it emits continually, it is the exact opposite.
  • Reply 8 of 84
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post


    Interesting. Jobs himself even speaks out in this article. He must really care about this himself although it should come as no surprise. It good to see Apple leading the front on environmental awareness.



    AL Gore sits on the Board- what would you expect?

    Why do you think we wound up with envornmentally friendly though totalling annoying high gloss screens for the last 3 years? You can thank Al Gore.

    Thank god that is beginning to change. Love the new non-glare.
  • Reply 9 of 84
    I think this article is a little misleading. This is not a "new" section of the Apple Website. Apple has had its environment reporting section for years. All this is is an "update" to www.apple.com/environment
  • Reply 10 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    I'm sorry, but in NO way is the APPLETV environmentally green or progressive.

    From its lack of an "On/Off" switch to the thermal heat it emits continually, it is the exact opposite.



    The Apple TV consumes about 14 watts in standby and between 17 and 19 watts while in use.



    You should be more worried about the 60 watt incandescent bulb above your head.
  • Reply 11 of 84
    Well done Apple - a very admirable start - makes me glad to use your products.



    Now please go buy and protect $100 million of rainforest and really make a balanced offset difference that nobody can deny.
  • Reply 12 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    I'm sorry, but in NO way is the APPLETV environmentally green or progressive.

    From its lack of an "On/Off" switch to the thermal heat it emits continually, it is the exact opposite.



    Since the current Apple TV is several years old, it may have been designed before they actually started their "green revolution." Plus with rumors of the a new aTV coming out sometime in the near future, I'm sure it'll be on par with the rest of their products. (In terms of its environmental impact)
  • Reply 13 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post


    Interesting. Jobs himself even speaks out in this article. He must really care about this himself although it should come as no surprise. It good to see Apple leading the front on environmental awareness.



    Let's be honest, the pressure from Greenpeace prompted this. Where was the "environmental progress" page when Macs were full of poisonous plastics - you remember, two or three years ago?
  • Reply 14 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    The Apple TV consumes about 14 watts in standby and between 17 and 19 watts while in use.



    You should be more worried about the 60 watt incandescent bulb above your head.



    Not really. It doesn't turn on. Switch or no switch.
  • Reply 15 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    I'm sorry, but in NO way is the APPLETV environmentally green or progressive.

    From its lack of an "On/Off" switch to the thermal heat it emits continually, it is the exact opposite.



    You can easily put the ATV into very low power state by using the menu item System Standby on the settings (?) menu.

    Power consumption drops and heat dissipation drops and ATV cools down.

    The ATV comes to life when you hit the menu key a few times on the remote. (It's alive! It's Alive!)



    To reduce power draw to zero, pull the AC plug from your power source or use a power strip and turn the strip off. I don't do this myself cause I am impatient with the system IPL.
  • Reply 16 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    The Apple TV consumes about 14 watts in standby and between 17 and 19 watts while in use.



    You should be more worried about the 60 watt incandescent bulb above your head.



    I like to think of it in more relative terms. For example, a big screen TV is going to use more power than a light bulb. They're different products that use different parts. It's not so much how many watts each device is using, but more about how that device is minimizing its own usage as much as possible.



    Even in standby, that 14 watts is running constantly. If there was even a simple on/off switch you can minimize how much power its using drastically.
  • Reply 17 of 84
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    You should be more worried about the 60 watt incandescent bulb above your head.



    Bad try at an insult but I realize it's too early in the morning for you.
  • Reply 18 of 84
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    The Apple TV consumes about 14 watts in standby and between 17 and 19 watts while in use.



    You should be more worried about the 60 watt incandescent bulb above your head.



    Only you could defend the Apple TV as being environmentally friendly. I got to hand it to you- this stoops to an even lower level than I thought you were capable of.
  • Reply 19 of 84
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Not really. It doesn't turn on. Switch or no switch.



  • Reply 20 of 84
    The AppleTV will have about the same effect on your bill as leaving a 50 watt light bulb on continuously. If you want to calculate the cost, figure about 1.1 kilowatt-hour (kWh) per day times the number of days in the billing period times the kWh rate your electric company charges. (The actual cost will be lower, assuming it doesn't draw full rated power continuously - this is a worst case scenario.)



    For most, it works out to only a few dollars more per month.



    The Apple TV has to remain on at all times in order for automatic syncing to work properly. Also, if you want the thing to be able to be turned on via the remote, it needs to be "on" in some form or another, listening for that signal from the remote. All VCRs, DVDs, Cable Boxes, etc. are "on" technically, as long as they are plugged in.



    The Apple TV is a computer with its own HD. Do you shut your computer off completely every time you don't use it after 15-20 min?



    Let's not overstate the consumption issue.
Sign In or Register to comment.