All Articles Tagged environment

Apple has set up a new, environment-focused section of their website, which covers their full product range and life-cycle — including TiPb’s titular iPhone [PDF link].

Give it a look and let us know how you think Apple’s doing.

[Thanks everyone who sent this in!]

Because of Apple’s high media profile, Greenpeace likes to have a little fun with them. Nothing gets headlines like bashing Apple in the tech industry, especially if you’re hippie enough to make Steve Jobs seem more like Stephen Colbert. With Al Gore on their board, however, it’s probably safe to say Apple has to at least appear to be one of the more — if not most — environmentally friendly major tech company in the US. Case in point, and unprecedented second open letter from Steve Jobs:

For the past several years, Apple has made a concerted effort to be more transparent about the steps we are taking to protect the environment and make our business more sustainable. In this environmental update, I’d like to inform you of our recent progress and introduce you to a groundbreaking system of reporting that we believe is unmatched in our industry.

The iPhone got a brief mention as well:

More recently we introduced our first BFR and PVC-free iPods and iPhone 3G with mercury-free displays.

Sounds okay? Second steppish enough at least? Not quite for Greenpeace:

Not quite the breakthrough we were hoping for.

Ouch. Though, to be less sensationalistic, they did have lots of positive feedback as well.

Hopefully Apple will make true on their timeline, and other manufacturers will follow suit.

It’s not easy being green, but I don’t think any of us want to live on the earth from Wall-E, do we?

Apple’s response to Greenpeace’s report of PVC, phthalates, and BFRs in the iPhone is short and sweet. Witness the words of the Apple spokesperson as told to MacWorld:

“Like all Apple products worldwide, iPhone complies with RoHS [Restriction of Hazardous Substances], the world’s toughest restrictions on toxic substances in electronics. As we have said, Apple will voluntarily eliminate the use of PVC and BFRs by the end of 2008.”

There’s another key quote from the Center for Environmental Health, the California-based organization that filed the 60-day notice of a suit yesterday. They aim to

“encourage the manufacturers through a negotiated settlement to reduce the use of these chemicals.”

I’m not a lawyer, but my wife is. If they want a negotiated settlement, that means they don’t want to go to court. Court is expensive. What exactly they want, I don’t know; if they want money, this is essentially a shakedown job. If they want to hurry Apple’s schedule or force a warning, they may be doing it on the basis of their ideals. Either way, it’s a lot of free publicity.

Apple was sued on the basis of information from Greenpeace’s report card for the iPhone from yesterday. Apparently, California’s Proposition 65 requires the disclosure of phthalates on a warning label, and the iPhone doesn’t have that. So, the Center for Environmental Health is suing. There will apparently be a 60 day notice before the lawsuit is actually, while the CEH independently verifies Greenpeace’s findings. And ensuring that this iPhone lawsuit is just as murky as all of the other ones, the findings that phthalates affect reproductive functions is apparently in dispute. And Apple is on the record for a timeline of getting rid of phthalates; they’ve already vowed to get rid of the bad stuff by the end of 2008 so I’m not sure who wins with a lawsuit like this except for the lawyers. It’s just bad press for everyone involved.

figure 1: Greenpeace currently gives Apple a 5.3 out of 10 as their environmental score.

On the same week that notable Apple board member Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize, Apple gets excoriated by Greenpeace on the presence of Toxic Chemicals in the iPhone.

Chemical Phthalates (yes, I spelled that right) are found in the outer plastic of the iPhone’s earbud headsets, which means that you probably don’t want to hook your baby to the earbuds. Phthalates apparently interfere with reproduction; the chemicals are banned from childrens toys in Europe. They are not banned from electronics, however.

In addition to the toxic phthalates, brominated compounds are present on a significant portion of the iPhone’s circuit board. Circuit board makers include bromine as a fire retardant, but bromine is toxic when converted to a gas and inhaled and functions as an acid when it comes into contact with human skin as a liquid. Liquid is bromine’s natural metallic state at room temperature. Polyvinyl Chloride, or PVC, is also present in the iPhone’s materials.

“With next month’s European launch of the iPhone, Apple should sell a version which is at least as green as the offerings from Sony Ericsson, Nokia and Motorola”

“[Apple] has committed to eliminate all uses of PVC and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in its products by the end of 2008″

So suffice to say, iPhone 2.0 won’t suffer from these environmental deficiencies. If you want to read Greenpeace’s entire report on Apple, it is available here. If instead you’d prefer Greenpeace’s report on the iPhone, that is also available. Apple will get hammered on this position until they’re ahead of the pack. Even then, I’ll predict that their environmental shortcomings will be bigger news than their competitors successes. [via]

I’ve posted short blurbs, little slices, really, about Apple and Greenpeace previously, but it seems that we now have enough green apple slices to bake a pie (I’m sorry about that, really, but I can’t help it).

Read the rest of this entry »