Apple suspected of forcing Greenpeace out of MacExpo [updated]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Environmental advocacy group Greenpeace was forced to shut down it booth at the MacExpo in London on Thursday after show organizers claimed to have received complaints from "unnamed sources," according to a report at MacNN.com.



Greenpeace is reported to have set up a stall in an effort to raise awareness about the use of toxic chemicals in products manufactured by Apple Computer.



According to the report, volunteers manning the stall "were signing up Mac fans to challenge Apple to 'go green.'" Flyers explaining the group's Green my Apple campaign were handed out to members of the public along with organic green apples.



"This reaction is totally over-the-top," Iza Kruszewska, Greenpeace International campaigner at the expo, is reported as saying. "Apple refuses to address our criticisms on their products, both for the recycling and for the use of harmful chemicals."



"Instead of hiding their head in the sand, Apple should be a world leader in the greening of the electronics industry, not lagging behind," Kruszewska added.



In August, Greenpeace issued a report which gave Apple a 2.7 out of 10 environmental-friendly rating. It awarded the Cupertino, Calif.-based iPod maker with low scores in almost all criteria, including the use of toxic chemicals, recycling, and the quality of its take-back programs.



Apple booth at MacExpo as seen in a first MacNN photo gallery.



"For a company that claims to lead on product design, Apple scores badly on almost all criteria," the group wrote in the report. "The company fails to embrace the precautionary principle, withholds its full list of regulated substances and provides no timelines for eliminating toxic [chemicals]."



Greenpeace volunteers have vowed to return to the London MacExpo on Friday to continue their campaign, MacNN said in its report. The group has also issued a challenge to Apple to have a product range on the market by 2007 which is free of the what it believes are the most toxic of chemicals.



Google's booth at MacExpo as seen in a second MacNN photo gallery.



"It's time for Apple to use clean components in all of its products and to provide a free take-back program to reuse and recycle its products wherever they are sold," said Kruszewska. "We are challenging the world leader in design to also be a world leader in environmental innovation."



Update: Macworld UK offers the other side of the story. The Greenpeace folk were reportedly a bit out of control and disruptive to both attendees and other exhibitors at the expo.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 92
    Greenpeace is just another "astroturf" political group sponsored by Microsoft and Dell whose only real purpose is make Apple look bad.



    All that Save the Whales crap is just a smokescreen to confuse the public.
  • Reply 2 of 92
    I agree with Apple, GreenPeace should have been dumped. Not for giving Apple a bad rating but for being anti-business. Greenpeace founding member Patrick Moore left greenpeace because the group was more interested in shutting down business than having anything do with the environment. Why give floor space to someone who wants to put you out of business? I mean when a founding member thinks that they have gone off the deep end, no pun intended, you have to wonder.



    Don’t get me wrong, I am all for saving the environment, so is Patrick Moore but that is no longer a priority with greenpeace.
  • Reply 3 of 92
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    I dunno if they are "astroturfing" but Apple does MUCH better than Dell or HP that Greenpeace touts as environmentally friendly.



    Personally, I never cared much for Greenpeace. Too much politics over science and I'm green friendly....not green stupid. Which too many of those folks are.



    Vinea
  • Reply 4 of 92
    Greenpeace = hate group
  • Reply 5 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider


    "Instead of hiding their head in the sand, Apple should be a world leader in the greening of the electronics industry, not lagging behind," Kruszewska added.





    ok...hiding one's head in the sand is QUITE different than lagging behind. Who said Apple is ashamed?
  • Reply 6 of 92
    the lower the rating by greenpeace the higher i think of apple (to a point) I dont want to spend extra money on a computer to have it meet all these fanatics standards. I think apples standards are perfect
  • Reply 7 of 92
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member
    I'm not sure either party is going about things 100% the right way towards each other, but I AM SURE of the following:



    * Greenpeace is out to do good here--actual good intentions that benefit all of us. (They are not paid by MS )



    * Apple should improve their environmental practices (and be applauded for what they've already done right)



    * They are not alone, other companies should to0



    * Apple is high-profile now, and part of the price of that is that you WILL be used as an example, by every journalist, blogger, or activist who wants attention. Because attention is what all of the above need (I am not judging this) and targeting Apple works.



    * Greenpeace paid for their booth! And apparently were told to go without specific complaints to respond to?



    * Greenpeace sometimes distorts/cherrypicks facts, just like every other cause out there, and I deplore this when it happens



    * Even if Greenpeace is a criminal joint venture of the Mafia, Microsft, and Oscar the Grouch, blame Greenpeace but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: the surrounding cause is a GOOD one and the issues are still important
  • Reply 8 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nagromme


    I'm not sure either party is going about things 100% the right way towards each other, but I AM SURE of the following:



    * Greenpeace is out to do good here--actual good intentions that benefit all of us. (They are not paid by MS )



    * Apple should improve their environmental practices (and be applauded for what they've already done right)



    * They are not alone, other companies should to0



    * Apple is high-profile now, and part of the price of that is that you WILL be used as an example, by every journalist, blogger, or activist who wants attention. Because attention is what all of the above need (I am not judging this) and targeting Apple works.



    * Greenpeace paid for their booth! And apparently were told to go without specific complaints to respond to?



    * Greenpeace sometimes distorts/cherrypicks facts, just like every other cause out there, and I deplore this when it happens



    * Even if Greenpeace is a criminal joint venture of the Mafia, Microsft, and Oscar the Grouch, blame Greenpeace but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: the surrounding cause is a GOOD one and the issues are still important



    go hug a tree

    who cares what they think
  • Reply 9 of 92
    zandroszandros Posts: 537member
    Are there still hazardous substances in the computers even after they were qualified for the RoHS initiative?
  • Reply 10 of 92
    I'm sure that apple is in compliance with any regulations set by the EPA, if greenpeace has a problem they should take it to the EPA, not Apple. That's dumb.
  • Reply 11 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nagromme


    I'm not sure either party is going about things 100% the right way towards each other, but I AM SURE of the following:



    * Greenpeace is out to do good here--actual good intentions that benefit all of us. (They are not paid by MS )



    * Apple should improve their environmental practices (and be applauded for what they've already done right)



    * They are not alone, other companies should to0



    * Apple is high-profile now, and part of the price of that is that you WILL be used as an example, by every journalist, blogger, or activist who wants attention. Because attention is what all of the above need (I am not judging this) and targeting Apple works.



    * Greenpeace paid for their booth! And apparently were told to go without specific complaints to respond to?



    * Greenpeace sometimes distorts/cherrypicks facts, just like every other cause out there, and I deplore this when it happens



    * Even if Greenpeace is a criminal joint venture of the Mafia, Microsft, and Oscar the Grouch, blame Greenpeace but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: the surrounding cause is a GOOD one and the issues are still important



    Thanks, Nagromme, you took the words right out of my mouth. I couldn't agree more.
  • Reply 12 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iammatt1936


    go hug a tree

    who cares what they think



    Wow! What insightful and constructive comments!
  • Reply 13 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nagromme


    I'm not sure either party is going about things 100% the right way towards each other, but I AM SURE of the following:



    * Greenpeace is out to do good here--actual good intentions that benefit all of us. (They are not paid by MS )



    * Apple should improve their environmental practices (and be applauded for what they've already done right)



    * They are not alone, other companies should to0



    * Apple is high-profile now, and part of the price of that is that you WILL be used as an example, by every journalist, blogger, or activist who wants attention. Because attention is what all of the above need (I am not judging this) and targeting Apple works.



    * Greenpeace paid for their booth! And apparently were told to go without specific complaints to respond to?



    * Greenpeace sometimes distorts/cherrypicks facts, just like every other cause out there, and I deplore this when it happens



    * Even if Greenpeace is a criminal joint venture of the Mafia, Microsft, and Oscar the Grouch, blame Greenpeace but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: the surrounding cause is a GOOD one and the issues are still important



    Greenpeace has lost all credibility over the shonky methodology used in their report and their persistent chanting of half truths and out right lies about Apple. For a thoughtful analysis of Greenpeace vs Apple check out this article and the ones that came before it http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Hom...AAB628676.html

    The ends don't just the means.
  • Reply 14 of 92
    frankiefrankie Posts: 372member
    Wow, most of this board is made up of 99% jerks. What gives?



    I don't know a thing about Greenpeace really, and maybe they are at fault. I really like Apple products, but maybe they are at fault too.



    It appears as though not a single one of you was at the actual show to know what happened,

    but you sure are ready to fight. Fight for what? What the hell are you all so mad about? Mad that somone actually gives a damn about something other than themselves?



    Apple may have it's head in the 'sand', but after reading the responses on this board, most of these people have there head up their 'you know where...'



    What I do give a damn about is the future of the freaking planet. We should all give a damn about the freaking planet.



    I'm not a tree hugger. I'm just a regular Joe. I like Apple and brag about them to everybody, all of them time. I would like them even more, and brag even more, if they were Green friendly, and showed up the other corporations.



    I do believe that most corporations on the planet are only interested in making money, and making money is good. Good for our country, etc. But there are ways to make money and not KILL the freaking planet at the same time. Let's all hope that Greenpeace, Apple, and all the other companies out there, all do at least a little to NOT destroy the planet any faster than it needs to be.
  • Reply 15 of 92
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nagromme


    I'm not sure either party is going about things 100% the right way towards each other, but I AM SURE of the following:



    * Greenpeace is out to do good here--actual good intentions that benefit all of us. (They are not paid by MS )



    No, but they do stuff for political and economic gain that has little to do with advancing the environment. This whole Apple thing is a stunt.



    Quote:

    * Apple should improve their environmental practices (and be applauded for what they've already done right)



    Except that what Greenpeace is pinging Apple on is false. Their own study shows that the levels of TBBPA flame retardant to be 1/4 of the amount of RESTRICTED retardants under RoHS. TBBPA isn't a restricted toxic chemical at all. And they found NO laptops with hexavalent chromium.



    Not to mention that TBBPA in hard plastics show very small emissions (ie gas releases) and even if they did the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) reports it:



    "agrees with the conclusion that there are no concerns for the carcinogenicity of tetrabromobisphenol A and supports conclusions ii) for all exposure scenarios since the Margin of Safety (MOS) are very large. Due to low systemic biovailability and efficient conjugation of the phenolic groups in tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), bioaccumulation of this compound is not considered to be of concern."



    (copied from http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Hom...665EE235C.html)



    But to read their press releases and campaign these things are more toxic than Chernobyl.



    Quote:

    * They are not alone, other companies should to0



    * Apple is high-profile now, and part of the price of that is that you WILL be used as an example, by every journalist, blogger, or activist who wants attention. Because attention is what all of the above need (I am not judging this) and targeting Apple works.



    So? This doesn't make Greenpeace's actions any more ethical than those of papparazi.



    Quote:

    * Greenpeace sometimes distorts/cherrypicks facts, just like every other cause out there, and I deplore this when it happens



    I note no deploring in your post.



    Quote:

    * Even if Greenpeace is a criminal joint venture of the Mafia, Microsft, and Oscar the Grouch, blame Greenpeace but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: the surrounding cause is a GOOD one and the issues are still important



    The end doesn't justify the means.



    Vinea
  • Reply 16 of 92
    I'm not going to presume to judge Greenpeace's intentions or motivations, I'm not informed enough on the issues. I just think that their attacks on Apple are unfounded. I work for a chemical company and they go through very strict processes to stay in compliance with federal regulations, they'll be shut down if they don't. But if a radical group comes to them demanding more, it simply wouldn't make logical business sense for them to change there current practices because a radical group said they should. Greenpeace should take there complaints to the people who have the power to do something about it. The government, sure, going through them is a royal pain I'm sure, but realistically it's the only way they're going to get anyting done IMO. \
  • Reply 17 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea


    No, but they do stuff for political and economic gain that has little to do with advancing the environment. This whole Apple thing is a stunt.



    Except that what Greenpeace is pinging Apple on is false. Their own study shows that the levels of TBBPA flame retardant to be 1/4 of the amount of RESTRICTED retardants under RoHS. TBBPA isn't a restricted toxic chemical at all. And they found NO laptops with hexavalent chromium.



    Not to mention that TBBPA in hard plastics show very small emissions (ie gas releases) and even if they did the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) reports it:



    "agrees with the conclusion that there are no concerns for the carcinogenicity of tetrabromobisphenol A and supports conclusions ii) for all exposure scenarios since the Margin of Safety (MOS) are very large. Due to low systemic biovailability and efficient conjugation of the phenolic groups in tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), bioaccumulation of this compound is not considered to be of concern."



    (copied from http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Hom...665EE235C.html)







    Vinea



    I don't understand a word you just said



  • Reply 18 of 92
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frankie


    Wow, most of this board is made up of 99% jerks. What gives?



    Perhaps we don't like lying marketeers?



    Quote:

    It appears as though not a single one of you was at the actual show to know what happened, but you sure are ready to fight. Fight for what? What the hell are you all so mad about? Mad that somone actually gives a damn about something other than themselves?



    Perhaps we're mad about the FUD? Greenpeace seems to care most about money and influence with the environment coming a very distant 3rd. Ethical reporting of scientific findings does not appear to be on the list at all.



    Quote:

    Apple may have it's head in the 'sand', but after reading the responses on this board, most of these people have there head up their 'you know where...'



    Yes, that would be you since you say you don't know anything about Greenpeace but yet are willing to defend them...



    Vinea
  • Reply 19 of 92
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DeaPeaJay


    I don't understand a word you just said







    I said Greenpeace is lying about the importance of the chemicals they claim are toxic.



    Vinea
  • Reply 20 of 92
    Quote:

    I'm not sure either party is going about things 100% the right way towards each other, but I AM SURE of the following:



    * Greenpeace is out to do good here--actual good intentions that benefit all of us. (They are not paid by MS )



    * Apple should improve their environmental practices (and be applauded for what they've already done right)



    * They are not alone, other companies should to0



    * Apple is high-profile now, and part of the price of that is that you WILL be used as an example, by every journalist, blogger, or activist who wants attention. Because attention is what all of the above need (I am not judging this) and targeting Apple works.



    * Greenpeace paid for their booth! And apparently were told to go without specific complaints to respond to?



    * Greenpeace sometimes distorts/cherrypicks facts, just like every other cause out there, and I deplore this when it happens



    * Even if Greenpeace is a criminal joint venture of the Mafia, Microsft, and Oscar the Grouch, blame Greenpeace but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: the surrounding cause is a GOOD one and the issues are still important



    I think your points are very well made. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Of course, as usual, a lot of people here refuse to believe that Apple is ever wrong about anything. If this article was about Dell, everyone here would side with Greenpeace. I side with niether on this issue. They're both right; They're both wrong. I would have kicked them out too (or never allowed them in the first place).



    Quote:

    go hug a tree

    who cares what they think



    You are the master of debate.
Sign In or Register to comment.