I didn’t expect to uncover a conspiracy of greed, blackmail, protection money, and other mob tactics hiding under the sheep’s clothing of environmentalism.
Pay for Rank
Job reportedly ended the discussion immediately. Does paying off the SVTC protect companies from the wrath of its publicity stunts? The SVTC talks about environmental goals, but doesn’t support their conspicuous rage against Apple with facts. What kind of green are they really after?
Apple’s Environmental Standing
Stephen Russell, a materials consultant to the IT sector, reports that “Apple has had for many years, by far the strictest eco-material specification in the industry, bar none.”
“I know this because I've worked for numerous material suppliers who continually moan at Apple for tying their hands with obsessively strict requirements that go years ahead of regulatory bans. Greenpeace's gripe is that Apple doesn't publish their specification, but everybody knows that Apple has to keep its design related specifications hush, hush... that's why Apple maintains its leading position as an innovator for the industry and has such fantastic material efficient product designs.”
Two Sides of the Same Coin
If Apple is recognized as a leader in green computing by environmentalists, why are they singled out for punishment by the SVTC and Greenpeace?
Ready for more facts dismantling to the SVTC/Greenpeace report?
Get the Lead Out
“Out of all the IT companies listed in the ranking, Russell explained, “Apple is the only company to be RoHS compliant worldwide across its major IT product lines, and is the only company to have come up with clean wireless (PVC-free) applications across all of its products, and is the only company that has ceased shipping CRT monitors altogether.”
How Green is Nokia?
Further, Russell pointed out that “Nokia even exempts accessories from a PVC phase out. Accessories are where the greatest quantities of PVC tend to be found. Greenpeace's ranking calls this "Good." Whatever the Nokia boys told Greenpeace is not what Nokia is telling us in the supply-chain through its substance specification.”
“Nokia was once the largest distributor of CRT containing TV's, before their cell phone days. They still refuse to take-back these heavy lead-containing TV products. They do a great job on cell phones, but that's only because it is profitable for them to do so, hence them conveniently forgetting about their TV history.”
So while the takeback campaign cited Apple for having no system in place for finding and recycling old Apple II computers, the equipment sold by Nokia and others is given a free pass. Double standard, or simply a case of using Apple’s name to sell a story?
Apple has banned its use, and is fully compliant with the European RoHS restrictions on hexavalent chromium.
In contrast, Russell reports that “HP used its lobbying machinery last April to persuade the EU Commission to allow an additional exemption to the RoHS ban on hexavalent chromium. The Commission caved-in... so now we have to put up with toxicity of hexachrome as a result of HP who are now ‘Greenpeace's leading example of environmental proactivity’”
Dell in a (Toxic) Handbasket
SVTC/Greenpeace handed out a lot of points for having goals. While it’s good to have goals, some are rather weak.
“Dell gets top marks for committing to phase out PVC and TBBA (a flame retardant) by 2009 if it is cost effective for them to do so.” Russell said. “Big deal, Dell may not even be around by 2009 and if it's cost effective to use the alternative materials then of course everyone will use them, so what's so great about that commitment?”
Don’t Say A Word
Despite the facts, the shoddy SVTC/Greenpeace report, along with grandstanding by the SVTC, has created an impression that Apple is behind the curve on their environmental efforts, when just the opposite is true.
However, a number of websites refused to carry the story. Was it too controversial, or did they consider it simply impolite to call Greenpeace and the SVTC on their incompetent and misleading campaigns?
The Busy Blogger
BoingBoing blogger Cory Doctorow couldn’t fit the Greenpeace scandal story into his blog schedule because he was too busy lambasting Apple for the “dramatic failure” of the iTunes Music Store paradigm.
“Be prepared to lose four of the tracks when you burn it to CD,” he warned, comparing the iTMS album download against the CD version, which was advertised by Amazon as having 14 tracks.
It turned out that his expose of the iTMS was in error; Amazon was selling the same ten tracks, they just listed it as having 14 audio tracks in error. Oops! At least he managed to drop Apple into a derogatory context.
Slashdot
Slashdot also refused to carry the story, and instead posted ‘from the valid-concerns-falling-on-deaf-ears dept.,’ an article clumsily titled “Information Security and Ignorant Management?” Remember when Slashdot was smart?
This Series