Apple touts energy, material efficiency in Mac Pro environmental report

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
Apple on Thursday released an environmental impact report regarding the company's latest Mac Pro desktop, noting the cylindrical machine uses 74 percent less aluminum than its predecessor, while keeping greenhouse gas emissions low.

Mac Pro
Source: Apple


The document, published to Apple's Environmental Reports webpage, breaks down the percentage of material used to build and package the Mac Pro, as well as the amount of energy consumed by shipping and predicted consumer use over the computer's lifetime.

According to Apple, the Mac Pro was designed to help minimize the machine's footprint and therefore materials used. The company points out that aluminum and copper, two of the most-used metals in the Mac Pro's build, are highly desired by recyclers. Compared to the old boxy Mac Pro, the black cylinder consumes 74 percent less aluminum and steel.

To maximize shipping efficiency, the company cut down on packaging, using corrugated cardboard made with a minimum 33 percent recycled content. In comparison with the legacy Mac Pro's package, the new version consumer 82 percent less volume. Compared to the old tower, the new Mac Pro can fit three times as many retail packages into an airline container.

As for energy efficiency, the Mac Pro incorporates intelligent components that are able to power down during periods of inactivity, thereby cutting down on estimated greenhouse gas emissions. Meeting ENERGY STAR requirements, the new professional desktop consumes 68 percent less power while idling than the previous Mac Pro.Total greenhouse gas emissions are pegged at 940 kilograms carbon dioxide equivalent, 65 percent of which comes from production, 33 percent from consumer use and one percent each for shipping and recycling.

Finally, as with most Apple devices, the new Mac Pro complies with various governmental best-practice guidelines such as the RoHS Directive, which restricts the use of lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, PBB and PBDE. Apple goes further by incorporating designs that are BFR-free, include PVC-free internal cables and offer PVC-free power cords in all regions except India and South Korea.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 32
    jusephejusephe Posts: 108member
    Why Apple ships power chords with PVC to India ?
    I can understand South Corea, but India ?
  • Reply 2 of 32
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member
    So we have this attitude from Apple, and yet, people still think Apple is going to start loading up cargo planes with cardboard boxes in sizes at:
    60"- 110lbs,
    55"- 100lbs
    42"- 85lbs
    37"- 60lbs
  • Reply 3 of 32
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    bobschlob wrote: »
    So we have this attitude from Apple, and yet, people still think Apple is going to start loading up cargo planes with cardboard boxes in sizes at:
    60"- 110lbs,
    55"- 100lbs
    42"- 85lbs
    37"- 60lbs
    So any company that makes TVs doesn't care about the environment? :???:
  • Reply 4 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    1) I'm not a fan of this wood image.

    2) The graph is not accurate for the values given.

    3) Here is the graph with the given values represented accurately (as well as my quick-and-dirty design using images that correspond to the various items for no other reason than to not use wood).

    700

    bobschlob wrote: »
    So we have this attitude from Apple, and yet, people still think Apple is going to start loading up cargo planes with cardboard boxes in sizes at:
    60"- 110lbs,
    55"- 100lbs
    42"- 85lbs
    37"- 60lbs

    I see your point, but I wouldn't expect them to use anything but modern ultra-slim display technologies which reduces the weight considerably… assuming they would create a TV at all.
  • Reply 5 of 32
    sricesrice Posts: 119member
    bobschlob wrote: »
    So we have this attitude from Apple, and yet, people still think Apple is going to start loading up cargo planes with cardboard boxes in sizes at:
    60"- 110lbs,
    55"- 100lbs
    42"- 85lbs
    37"- 60lbs

    Interesting thought, but I'm sure the perspective will be they are x% more efficient than competing brands and include 100% less suck.
  • Reply 6 of 32
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    How about pie charts suck period? I have yet to find a use case where a pie chart worked better than either a different chart (e.g. bar) or no chart at all.
  • Reply 7 of 32
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jusephe View Post



    Why Apple ships power chords with PVC to India ?

    I can understand South Corea, but India ?

     

    Probably regulatory. PVC is a better flame retardant than the substitutes meaning it's safer in a fire. It's also more flexible, meaning it won't crack and start one.

     

    And why are you not surprised about South Korea? South Korea has a much higher average income than India.

  • Reply 8 of 32
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,426member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    1) I'm not a fan of this wood image.

    2) The graph is not accurate for the values given.

    3) Here is the graph with the given values represented as well as my quick-and-dirty design using images that correspond to the various items.

    700
    I see your point, but I wouldn't expect them to use anything but modern ultra-slim display technologies which reduces the weight considerably… assuming they would create a TV at all.

    You beat me to it. My first reaction was ... WTF .. there is no wood in this thing is there? As I stared at my Mac Pro :)
  • Reply 9 of 32

    Imagine coming on appleinsider, reading an article about how a piece of new technology is efficient, and your main take away from the experience is "I don't like the wood texture on the pie chart they used", and feeling so strongly about the matter, that you have to post it in the comments. I literally can't.

     

    On a related note- good for apple for cutting down on excess materials and continuing to do what they realistically can for the environment.

  • Reply 10 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Imagine coming on appleinsider, reading an article about how a piece of new technology is efficient, and your main take away from the experience is "I don't like the wood texture on the pie chart they used", and feeling so strongly about the matter, that you have to post it in the comments. I literally can't.

    On a related note- good for apple for cutting down on excess materials and continuing to do what they realistically can for the environment.

    Imagine coming on appleinsider, reading an comment about someone not liking a wood texture on the pie chart they used, and feeling so strongly about the matter, that you have to create an account just to mention it. I literally can't.

    On a related note- welcome to the forum.
  • Reply 11 of 32
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    2) The graph is not accurate for the values given.

    Well done for spotting the inaccurate graph. It seems to be something of a tradition for environmental reports to have inaccurate graphs :)

  • Reply 12 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    The reduction in power usage and materials are impressive but what are the odds that one will have to use additional HW? For instance, this new Mac Pro doesn't have any internal 3.5" HDDs. Are buyers likely to purchase TB RAIDs to fulfill a need that was previously met by the large Mac Pro? How do this affect the overall environmental costs?

    ascii wrote: »
    Well done for spotting the inaccurate graph. It seems to be something of a tradition for environmental reports to have inaccurate graphs :)

    Yeah, it's not illegal if the values given are accurate but could or should this be classified as being mildly unethical even if done for visual appeal.
  • Reply 13 of 32
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    So any company that makes TVs doesn't care about the environment? image

    Wasn't my point, at all.

    But certainly, there is no TV manufacturer that cares about the environment as much as Apple.

  • Reply 14 of 32

    Now I remember why I usually just lurk and read. No use throwing oneself to the wolves by trying to talk sense and actually talk about the article rather than something inconsequential that has hijacked the comments.

  • Reply 15 of 32
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member

    And by the way…

    Anybody know what the deal is with this comment board crashing my Safari browser every time I try to type a comment?

    Never seen that anywhere, ever before.

  • Reply 16 of 32
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,677member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    Imagine coming on appleinsider, reading an comment about someone not liking a wood texture on the pie chart they used, and feeling so strongly about the matter, that you have to create an account just to mention it. I literally can't.

    On a related note- welcome to the forum.
    Other than the unbelievably sucky pie chart imagery, imagine writing an article about the latest technology and it's environmentally friendly footprint and then going to the trouble of creating a pie chart made from several different endangered hardwoods! The chart certainly was not made by a woodworker or cabinet maker worth his salt. You can't mix all those species willy nilly. Seriously.
  • Reply 17 of 32
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by BobSchlob View Post

     

    And by the way…

    Anybody know what the deal is with this comment board crashing my Safari browser every time I try to type a comment?

    Never seen that anywhere, ever before.


    There is some kind of bug in Safari but this site is the only one that triggers it. When Apple upgraded the Mac from 10.9 to 10.9.1 it fixed it for me, but the iPad is still not fixed.

  • Reply 18 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Now I remember why I usually just lurk and read. No use throwing oneself to the wolves by trying to talk sense and actually talk about the article rather than something inconsequential that has hijacked the comments.

    Can you point where you've tried to start a discussion about the environmental impact or where you've been prevented from doing so? So far your only comments are doing exactly what you're complaining about.
  • Reply 19 of 32
    solipsismx wrote: »
    Can you point where you've tried to start a discussion about the environmental impact or where you've been prevented from doing so? So far your only comments are doing exactly what you're complaining about.

    Imagine starting a company, putting tremendous amounts of work into creating a product that is more environmentally friendly then is required by law, spending extra money and time to do it, releasing your product into the wild… And you see someone's first comment is – I don't like your pie chart… You shouldn't use wood. I work in a business where I see this kind of stuff often. You literally do everything perfect except for one small minor detail that is negligible at best, and I literally see customers complaining to other customers about it. We are an interesting race.
  • Reply 20 of 32
    Imagine coming on appleinsider, reading an article about how a piece of new technology is efficient, and your main take away from the experience is "I don't like the wood texture on the pie chart they used", and feeling so strongly about the matter, that you have to post it in the comments. I literally can't.

    On a related note- good for apple for cutting down on excess materials and continuing to do what they realistically can for the environment.

    Right at the bottom of my first post. Please just stop, at this point your just arguing for the sake of it, not even over the article, but as a personal attack against somebody who was pointing out that there are more important things in this article than the texture used in the pie chart.
Sign In or Register to comment.