Apple says the iPhone is a valuable readiness aid in a world impacted by climate change
To a degree, Apple could actually benefit from the impacts of climate change with the iPhone a crucial part of a customer's readiness for a crisis, the company said in an unusual statement made public on Tuesday.
"As people begin to experience severe weather events with greater frequency, we expect an increasing need for confidence and preparedness in the arena of personal safety and the well-being of loved ones," the company wrote in a submission to the non-profit Carbon Disclosure Project, seen by Bloomberg. The CDP grades companies on their awareness and response to climate change.
Products like iPhones "can serve as a flashlight or a siren; they can provide first aid instructions; they can act as a radio; and they can be charged for many days via car batteries or even hand cranks," Apple said.
It's not clear whether Apple cited any downsides to the company's business as a result of climate change. Some direct impacts could include property damage from fire, storms, or flooding, and tougher water access at facilities like its Arizona data center. Apple has a presence in a number of at-risk places, ranging from San Francisco to Tokyo.
Indirectly, the economic hardship caused by climate change could sabotage the company's customer base.
Apple is presumably concerned, as it was one of 30 U.S. companies to receive an "A" from the CDP, some others being Home Depot and Johnson & Johnson. That may still not bode well for the environment though, given that north of 1,800 U.S. companies submitted CDP reports for 2018. Worldwide, over 7,000 businesses made submissions.
Some of Apple's attempts to offset carbon emissions include protecting forests and worldwide investments in clean power. All of its first-party operations use renewable energy, and the company has been working to soften the damage caused by its supply chain.
Observers have pointed out that Apple's logistics remain a pollution source, and that by its very nature the company depends on increasing resource consumption to turn a profit.
"As people begin to experience severe weather events with greater frequency, we expect an increasing need for confidence and preparedness in the arena of personal safety and the well-being of loved ones," the company wrote in a submission to the non-profit Carbon Disclosure Project, seen by Bloomberg. The CDP grades companies on their awareness and response to climate change.
Products like iPhones "can serve as a flashlight or a siren; they can provide first aid instructions; they can act as a radio; and they can be charged for many days via car batteries or even hand cranks," Apple said.
It's not clear whether Apple cited any downsides to the company's business as a result of climate change. Some direct impacts could include property damage from fire, storms, or flooding, and tougher water access at facilities like its Arizona data center. Apple has a presence in a number of at-risk places, ranging from San Francisco to Tokyo.
Indirectly, the economic hardship caused by climate change could sabotage the company's customer base.
Apple is presumably concerned, as it was one of 30 U.S. companies to receive an "A" from the CDP, some others being Home Depot and Johnson & Johnson. That may still not bode well for the environment though, given that north of 1,800 U.S. companies submitted CDP reports for 2018. Worldwide, over 7,000 businesses made submissions.
Some of Apple's attempts to offset carbon emissions include protecting forests and worldwide investments in clean power. All of its first-party operations use renewable energy, and the company has been working to soften the damage caused by its supply chain.
Observers have pointed out that Apple's logistics remain a pollution source, and that by its very nature the company depends on increasing resource consumption to turn a profit.
Comments
edit: anyway, fear of climate change apparently helps sell iPhones. A great adaptation strategy that also helps my shares, meaning I will be better placed financially to adapt too..
It also seems kind of silly to suggest things such as mass defortestion in combination with significant carbon output wouldn’t likely have an appreciable impact on the climate any more than saying lighting a fire in a small room won’t effect air quality. I certainly see appreciable changes where I live in Michigan.
Even if scientists somehow got got it wrong, which I doubt, planning to avoid the potential crisis seems prudent. I’m certainly not taking your word for it.
Also combating climate change will be very profitable for the private sector, and if done correctly won’t have serious impact on people’s lives.
Check out this review.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/william-vollmann-carbon-ideologies/568309/. If you like read the book. Warning: It will need a little attention span.
Unfortunately Vollmann is wrong - his future readers won't even be able to eat insects . . .
https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/10/15/hyperalarming-study-shows-massive-insect-loss/?utm_term=.9c0cbc5861b4
https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/01/15/lessons-learned-from-camp-fire-could-augment-data-utilization-and-community-resilience/
Even assuming that residents were notified as early as possible, there is still the problem that the road network could not sustain the traffic, and in fact, many casualties were people trapped on various stretches of road by the fire.
https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/01/18/the-new-director-of-cal-fire-addressed-climate-change-9-years-ago/
The result, amongst other things;
https://wildfiretoday.com/2019/01/15/facing-liability-over-wildfires-pge-to-file-for-bankruptcy/
Power distribution failures, ie downed power lines in extreme wind events, are a leading trigger for many of these massive fires in California, but surely construction practices and zoning laws are contributory factors.