backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by Ralph The Magi.. on Dec 8 at 7:27 PM


A boy recycling e-waste by hand in India
Apple said "we don't give commitments"

Apple may be producing beautiful products but it apparently is producing a lot of waste as well. According to environmental group Greenpeace, Apple ranks the lowest o ut of all the major tech companies when it comes to environmental issues. The worst part of it is, Greenpeace notes that while other companies have improved year after year, Apple is the only one that has not moved at all.

According to the Greepeace group, no company has received a rating of 7 or higher out of 10. Unfortunately however, Apple's rating stands at an abysmal 2.7, the lowest of all 14 companies in the ranking. Greepeace said that the reason for Apple's low score is the company's ignorance of such issues like chemical policies and waste management. According to Greenpeace:

The ranking is important because the amounts of toxic e-waste is growing every day. It often ends up dumped in the developing world. Reducing the toxic chemicals in products reduces pollution from old products and makes recycling safer, easier and cheaper. Companies with good recycling schemes help ensure that their products don't end up in the e-waste yards of Africa and Asia.

Greenpeace coordinator Zeina Alhajj told reporters that "we were surprised [Apple] were in last place again. We are hoping that by the next ranking they will be the biggest mover." Alhajj also indicated that his group met with Apple on several occasions to speak about environmental issues but the company has not responded in a satisfactory manner. "We have asked for a commitment, but Apple said 'we don't give commitments, we do things.' We haven't seen any commitments, so far," said Alhajj.

Apple was previously in a situation where it was called out for not keeping up with its manufacturing partners on employee and human rights. DailyTech previously reported that e-waste had become a big issue, enough for the United Nations to bring up the topic at a recent summit.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

no surprise here
By swatX on 12/7/2006 4:04:20 PM , Rating: 1
haha.. no surprise here.




RE: no surprise here
By h0kiez on 12/7/2006 4:10:15 PM , Rating: 5
I am. Let's be honest...I won't call Apple's main proponents "hippies", but it's no secret that people who tend to be more art-centric, "alternative lifestyle" type people tend to favor MACs...and are the same people tend to be liberal and environmentally conscious. I have a feeling that many Apple fans out there would be disappointed to hear this.


RE: no surprise here
By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/2006 4:19:17 PM , Rating: 3
Maybe 10 years ago. Today majority of Mac users are probably average college students. I'm not sure they qualify as "alternative lifesytle" type people.

Have you been on a college campus recently? Macs are everywhere. You can't go into a classroom anywhere without seeing at least a dozen Mac products.


RE: no surprise here
By Tegeril on 12/7/2006 4:47:09 PM , Rating: 3
Mod parent up. Of Boston University's approximately 20,000 registered student computers in university dorms, more than 20% are Macs.


RE: no surprise here
By jmunjr on 12/8/2006 3:12:18 AM , Rating: 3
Great, so now they make you "register" your computers.. I guess it is no surprise since it is in Massachusetts..


RE: no surprise here
By thegrimreaper3 on 12/7/2006 5:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
well dont go to penn state.. there far and few between


RE: no surprise here
By spluurfg on 12/7/2006 5:35:09 PM , Rating: 3
Makes sense that you'd find more Mac stuff at BU than at Penn State. BU has one of the highest tuitions in the country, and Mac products generally command a premium compared to other hardware.


RE: no surprise here
By djkrypplephite on 12/7/2006 6:21:34 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, 46% of the mac user demograpic is 55 or older. They're computers for old people, despite whatever marketing image they portray.


RE: no surprise here
By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/06, Rating: -1
RE: no surprise here
By djkrypplephite on 12/7/2006 6:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20061206/tc_cmp/196601...

Says a leading statistics company. I'm not saying Macs aren't cool, I'd get one if I had an exhuberant amount of money to throw away, but alas I do not.

A note to everyone here: don't ever question me.


RE: no surprise here
By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/06, Rating: 0
RE: no surprise here
By djkrypplephite on 12/7/2006 7:21:29 PM , Rating: 3
Just because you go in, doesn't mean you buy anything. Teenagers are in Best Buy all the time, but you know who they sell to? 45 year old moms. Seriously, I used to work there.


RE: no surprise here
By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/2006 7:25:58 PM , Rating: 3
Too true, but in the case of an Apple Store, I can tell you right now that majority of the people walking out of there with something aren't old people.

If you look at data from the OS 9 days and early OS 10 days I'd say that it probably was an older crowd, but not today. I wouldn't even count OS 9 data though, because the Mac of old is so different from the Mac of today that it isn't even the same company.


RE: no surprise here
By djkrypplephite on 12/7/2006 7:30:14 PM , Rating: 2
I'm just stating the stats and facts, so whatever you say.


RE: no surprise here
By Oregonian2 on 12/7/2006 7:49:08 PM , Rating: 2
100% of all Macs are bought from Apple stores, so if one goes into one, one sees a proper demographic of users?

I don't think so.

My late father started out on a Mac when he retired. Why? Because they were supposed to be simple to use -- and that's something he certainly wanted! If you think about it and my late father, the Mac is targeted for the older set: 1) Wants/needs simple UI and 2) Has more money to spend (older folk have more money than youngsters, sorry but true, their salaries aren't anywhere near entry-level).

But note that the article says about half are less than 55, so that means that not ALL mac users are old geezers.

P.S. - He gave up on the Mac because of crashes and the like and replaced it with a windows box which he liked better. Rumors that macs don't crash like MS boxes also seemed to be false and just Apple's great advertising.


RE: no surprise here
By krichmond on 12/8/2006 10:54:56 AM , Rating: 3
read the rest of the article and MAC's reply

"The MetaFacts data you cited in your story is incorrect. Our customer data shows that only around 20% of Mac users are over the age of 55," wrote Lynn Fox, a director of Mac PR at Apple, in an e-mail. "The Mac is more popular than ever, and we are thrilled that our products appeal to people of ages 1 to 100." Fox declined to be interviewed and would not provide stats that would prove the MetaFacts data wrong.

Van Baker, research VP at Gartner, said they don't have specific studies on the age of Apple's installed base, but the MetaFacts numbers are surprising to him.


RE: no surprise here
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/7/06, Rating: -1
RE: no surprise here
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/7/06, Rating: -1
RE: no surprise here
By edge929 on 12/7/2006 4:25:35 PM , Rating: 3
From my experience you would be absolutely correct. Many of my coworkers, or the few I should say, that own a mac, would all fit into this category. Some are graphic designers, others are programmers with Macs at home. All are very liberal and lead an "alternative lifestyle". What do I mean by "alternative lifestyle"? Well let's just say that many of them just discovered there are other Mp3 players besides the holy ipod. And no, I'm not a mac hater, I was thrilled to hear they're running Intel CPUs now.


RE: no surprise here
By geeg on 12/7/2006 4:36:21 PM , Rating: 5
Apple is just another big capitalist corporation exploiting the "hip"


RE: no surprise here
By lemonadesoda on 12/7/2006 6:14:19 PM , Rating: 5
The "hip" need to be exploited, just like everyone else.


RE: no surprise here
By TheDoc9 on 12/7/2006 5:27:10 PM , Rating: 2
What this really only proves is that they care about their environment, not the environment of others. Classic liberal 'me' attitude.


RE: no surprise here
By Bonrock on 12/7/2006 10:24:31 PM , Rating: 2
You need to take a political science class. Last time I checked, putting your own self-interest ahead of the greater good is a conservative political ideology, not a liberal one. That's why Democrats support social programs and Republicans see them as a waste of their money.


RE: no surprise here
By jmunjr on 12/8/2006 3:18:36 AM , Rating: 2
It's a myth that conservatives are about self interest and Democrats are the opposite. Stop believing the propaganda they teach you in those political science classes taught at (liberal)universities..


RE: no surprise here
By Clienthes on 12/8/2006 4:53:16 AM , Rating: 1
There is a difference between economic theory and social theory.

In social theory, there is this concept of a "community morality" that basically means that any community has to have a common set of standards that people within the community adhere to. Liberals want this to go away so that anyone can do anything as long as they don't hurt anyone. This destroys community and hurts everyone in the long run.

In economics, anything that benefits the individual benefits the whole. The bigger the benefit to teh individual, the bigger the benefit to the whole. That's why tax cuts to the top 50% of wage earners does more good to the entire economy that tax cuts to the bottom 50%. Liberals want to directly ease the suffering of the bottom 50%. They end up hurting the whole economy and putting more of the populace in trouble.

So yeah, economically, conservatives believe a healthy self interest is good, but socially its bad. Liberals are the reverse of this. Liberals are wrong, and in a few years they'll prove it.


RE: no surprise here
By thebrown13 on 12/7/06, Rating: -1
Wait...
By daftrok on 12/7/2006 4:04:12 PM , Rating: 2
I thought they made their packaging more eco-friendly with the new generation of iPods?




RE: Wait...
By rqle on 12/7/2006 4:07:52 PM , Rating: 2
really? last time i bought an apple mp3 player it was in cardboard. i just bought another one for upcoming xmas gift and it was in a PLASTIC container.


RE: Wait...
By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/2006 4:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, they made a big deal about using a lot less overall materials in the packaging of iPods. Obviously they did this to reduce shipping costs, but there a positive enviromental impact as well in terms of waste.


RE: Wait...
By Oregonian2 on 12/7/2006 7:55:50 PM , Rating: 2
The two iPods (60Mb 5G) I bought nearly a year ago came in small paper boxes. Actually, I was rather underwhelmed by the packaging considering all the money I laid out (at Circuit City).

Wife and I had one apiece, but -- mine had legs and walked off, so we've only one left between us.


RE: Wait...
By JeffDM on 12/8/2006 4:20:17 PM , Rating: 2
I don't buy that claim. I have both generations of nanos. The weight of the package is pretty much the same. While the package is maybe half the volume, the plastic is absurdly thick. Plastic is recyclable, but it often isn't recycled. Paper is renewable, recyclable and biodegradeable. The only reason the new nano & shuffle boxes might be more for conservation is fitting more of them into a container when shipping.


RE: Wait...
By Ralph The Magician on 12/8/2006 7:27:03 PM , Rating: 2
When you purchase things by container loads (like from China), you aren't charged by weight, but rather a set price per container. So actually, it's volume that's important, not weight.


Greenpeace is a joke these days
By wyvern130 on 12/7/2006 7:04:09 PM , Rating: 5
I find it quite amusing that most of the comments here are simply juvenile knee-jerk fanboism and lack any kind of rational thought on the article or the topic as a whole.

For those unfamiliar with the topic, Greenpeace doesn't exactly have the greatest history with respect to Apple or any of the technology related reports they publish. Probably the best analysis of it can be found here: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/E83D58B3-10E... and in the other stories he wrote regarding the subject. While the author does appear to have a bias favoring Apple, his arguments and observations are pretty sound and show Greenpeace to be a incompetent and irrational organization that lost sight of its stated goals a long, long time ago. Many of you will also find the reader comments pretty interesting (even if they are questionable sources) as they portray Iza Kruszewska as a major technophobe with limited knowledge of the subject she supposedly campaigns for.

In my opinion, Greenpeace has stopped fighting for the environment and has simply become a big social club for incompetent zealots with too much free time looking to feed their egos. Anything they say can pretty much be ignored.




RE: Greenpeace is a joke these days
By derdon on 12/7/2006 7:34:21 PM , Rating: 4
>...and has simply become a big social club for
>incompetent zealots with too much free time looking to feed
>their egos.

Nah... that's what the internet is for.. but thx for demonstrating


Support the GP campaign
By derdon on 12/7/2006 4:57:10 PM , Rating: 3
RE: Support the GP campaign
By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/2006 5:01:06 PM , Rating: 2
Hahaha. You know the best part? I bet that was made on a Mac. :P


RE: Support the GP campaign
By derdon on 12/7/2006 7:56:37 PM , Rating: 2
Tell me, would it help more if they'd throw away all their Apples or if they'd get on the nerves of Apple so long that they'll change their policies.

Tell me this, you're having 2 groceries in town. They share about equal customers and you're one of them. One grocery is doing something bad. Would you rather campaign against it, accumulate a public opinion and get to change that grocery or just ignore him and go to the second. If both had 1000 customers a day, how effective do you think ignoring is over campaigning?


Thinking different
By Aisengard on 12/7/2006 4:16:46 PM , Rating: 4
Oh Apple, you poor, poor bastards.

They've been 'thinking differently' for years now, I guess they want to be so different from everyone else that they wouldn't dare conform to some arbitrary 'standard' that most other respectable businesses have conformed to.

Like the Red Sox trying to be 'different' from the Yankees but really just being more and more like them as time goes on (except for the success part), here we have Apple trying to be different from its PC brethren, but really becoming more and more the same, also without the success. Why try to keep up the act on something that your company can actually make a difference in for a change?




RE: Thinking different
By THEiNTERNETS on 12/7/2006 9:17:51 PM , Rating: 2
You used an extremely banal baseball analogy to attack Apple for being "too mainstream." Not only does your post fail to relate to the article at hand but you have no evidence other than the Red Sox.

So what are you saying? Oh a whole lot of "macz sux LOL!" you say? I see.


new Apple prucuct?
By HeavyB on 12/7/2006 4:16:53 PM , Rating: 2
iTrash?




RE: new Apple prucuct?
By JoKeRr on 12/7/2006 5:44:28 PM , Rating: 2
maybe that's why apple's stock's been doing so very... there's no iTrash hahaa


RE: new Apple prucuct?
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/7/2006 10:44:25 PM , Rating: 1
iPolute?

crapple - think pollution.


Of course....
By tk109 on 12/7/2006 4:44:54 PM , Rating: 5
Of course they aren't as environmentally friendly. There is no "you", "us", or "we" in "I"pod or "I"mac. Only "I".




Apple doesn't copy Windows
By MonkeyPaw on 12/7/2006 6:40:42 PM , Rating: 4
Quite funny, especially when you see that Windows has a Recycle Bin, and OSX only has a Trash can. It looks like we found yet another program that Apple can't run--a recycling program!




By s12033722 on 12/7/2006 7:27:45 PM , Rating: 4
Remember this?

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4720
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4741

I wonder how much of this is a snippy attack after getting tossed for being too critical of Apple.




By Ralph The Magician on 12/7/2006 4:38:01 PM , Rating: 3
Can you imagine a Mac-loving Greenpeace zealot? *shudders* That would be the kind of person who would say something in the line behind you at Borders that would be so obnoxious you'd turn around and stab them in the face with a pen. Twice.




Greenpeace...
By therealnickdanger on 12/7/2006 4:54:09 PM , Rating: 1
Being preached business ethics by a company that commits borderline acts of terrorism. Idiocy never ends. Steve Jobs should write a formal letter to Greenpeace stating simply:

"Suck my ****s.
-Steve"

Greenpeace won't be happy until everyone but its own members has either starved to death or been eaten by an animal.




RE: Greenpeace...
By UserDoesNotExist on 12/7/2006 5:59:05 PM , Rating: 1
Agreed. I'm no fan of Apple, but if I had to choose between Apple and Greenpeace, it'd be no contest. Quite frankly, the fact that Greenpeace is upset with Apple only makes me like Apple more.


RE: Greenpeace...
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/7/2006 10:37:50 PM , Rating: 1
suck my bushs ?

I don't get it... just kidding I was faking that I was a mac luser.


Makes me want to buy Apple..
By masher2 (blog) on 12/8/06, Rating: 0
RE: Makes me want to buy Apple..
By derdon on 12/8/2006 9:26:23 AM , Rating: 2
And what would that bring about?


By masher2 (blog) on 12/8/2006 12:43:43 PM , Rating: 1
Quote obviously, if Apple's sales rise despite accusations from Greenpeace, then the extortionary stranglehold it has on Corporate America will be weakened. And thats good for all of us.

Half the time a large corporate body shows up on such a psuedo-factual blacklist, one of its first acts to "show its environmental awareness" is to make a large donation to an environmental group...sometimes the very one which accused it.


Don't be surprised
By Termagant on 12/7/2006 6:18:51 PM , Rating: 2
This isn't surprising at all. Company images of environmental friendliness or humanitarianism are just that, carefully crafted marketing. Case in point, "green" "conscientious" BP, which was/is one of the worst oil companies in terms of environmental, reliability, and safety issues.




Action
By bernardl on 12/7/2006 7:11:28 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks to Greenpeace for letting us know this. One negative mark for Apple.

Now Apple has one year to improve... and to "do" things. No need for commitements if something is done. It just doesn't seem to be the case now.

As a user of both PCs and Mac, I find it interested how many folks here use this piece of news to post yet another PC vs Mac, or worse, political comment.

Really hilarious. Gee, there are frustrated people on this small earth.

Cheers,
Bernard




come on - where u hiding? cowards!
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/8/06, Rating: 0
RE: come on - where u hiding? cowards!
By rcc on 12/8/2006 1:22:57 PM , Rating: 2
They are just being sensible. When you find a steaming pile in the road, you don't step in it. Well, maybe *you* do. : )


My take
By iwod on 12/8/2006 1:43:16 AM , Rating: 2
i thought Apple only design products? All hardware are being made by other manufacture?

And personally i dont like greenpeace at all. Although i am not a apple fans either,





the answer:
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/8/06, Rating: -1
"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki