News, info, and opinion by Mac users, for Mac users.

May 2, 2007

business

A look at how Apple fares on Greenpeace’s “scorecard”

Posted May. 2, ’07, 2:49 PM PT by Scott Silverman
Category | Business

RecycleToday’s letter released by Steve Jobs was obviously targeted at—in Steve’s own words—“one environmental group’s recent scorecard.” We all know that scorecard to be the work of Greenpeace. And since that scorecard is publicly available online, let’s have a look at how Apple’s doing. Here are some of the areas Apple was hit hardest, and how Steve’s letter might affect Greenpeace’s new ranking.

PVC phase out. According to Greenpeace’s scorecard, Apple scored so low in this area because it has not committed to a timeline for eliminating PVC from their products. Steve’s letter today states that Apple plans to completely eliminate PVC from all products by the end of 2008. (For comparison, Dell—who earned a top ranking in this category—has committed to eliminate all PVCs by 2009.)

BPF phase out. Greenpeace’s scorecard gave Apple the lowest ranking in this category. In his letter, Steve has committed to have all Apple products BFR-free by the end of 2008.

PVC and BFR-free products. The scorecard hits Apple hard in this category because Apple does not offer any PVC or BFR-free systems, and only a few peripherals. Steve’s letter, however, highlights that Apple began phasing out PVCs 12 years ago, and has been phasing out BFRs since 2001. The largest applications of these chemicals have already been eliminated from Apple’s products, and more than three million iPods have already shipped with BFR-free laminate on their logic boards.

Worldwide recycling program. Because Apple doesn’t offer a worldwide recycling program, the company received a low ranking from Greenpeace. Steve, however, has committed to increase recycling programs to countries where more than 93% of all Macs are sold by the end of the year. Although not perfect, that’s a fairly respectable figure.

Other sections of Greenpeace’s scorecard are fairly unspecific, and thus it is difficult to judge how Steve’s newly released policy might affect ranking in those areas. I can only assume, however, that the elimination of harmful chemicals from their products (ie: lead, mercury, and arsenic via new LED-lit displays) will improve Apple’s chemical management ranking.

Additionally, Greenpeace has published a document titled Steps to a Greener Apple, which, naturally, outlines some steps Greenpeace feels Apple should take to improve their environmental responsibility and leadership.

Personally, I feel as though Apple has taken a good number of these steps, and apparently so does Greenpeace, because Apple’s score was raised from a 2.7 to a 5 out of 10 today (see Greenpeace’s article here). One thing that concerns me in this whole Greenpeace “ranking” system is its level of accuracy. I mean how can Apple’s score double in one day? Removing chemicals, altering manufacturing processes, and implementing recycling programs take time. Thus I question the amount of research Greenpeace has done on Apple’s actual environmental record. Let’s not kid ourselves here: Greenpeace’s “scorecard” is just as much of a marketing system as Apple’s Environment Site was/is.

So while I certainly do respect Greenpeace’s objectives, and in most cases even agree with them, I still question how they were able to rank Apple at 2.7 and Dell at 7.0, when in actuality many of Apple’s policies have out-shined Dell’s for a good time. Has Greenpeace actually set out to give an honest ranking of each company, or are they simply using drastic methods to produce the “environmental leader” they so badly want in the computer industry?


2 Comments

Tony said:

Make no mistake: the Greenpeace "ranking" is bogus.

For example:

PVC and BFR-free products. The scorecard hits Apple hard in this category because Apple does not offer any PVC or BFR-free systems, and only a few peripherals.

NONE of the manufacturers (Dell, HP, etc.) offer any PVC or BFR-free systems. Not one. Also, Apple has "only a few" peripherals that are PVC and BFR-free, but HP has none...yet HP gets a higher score. Apple is the only company on the list with PVC -free packaging, yet they still get the lowest score.

The Greenpeace ranking is specifically targeting Apple with bogus numbers because "Green My Apple" garners far more press than "Green My HP".

May 2, 2007 3:21 PM
Jan said:

IMHO the only real drawback of the current Apple eco-policy is the lack of a free global take-back programme. The other fields seem to be well covered.

May 3, 2007 6:14 AM

Leave a comment

 



Visit other IDG sites: