It’s not easy being green. Not for Apple anyway.

Internet forums are awash with Apple fans bemoaning a new Greenpeace campaign which aims to highlight the use of toxic chemicals in laptop manufacturing[1].

Greenpeace tested five popular brands (Acer, Apple, Dell, HP and Sony) for toxic chemicals such as brominated flame retardants (BFRs), polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC) and lead and found that HP and Apple were the worst offenders[2]. As a result, Greenpeace have launched a new site which mocks Apple’s own, urging people to contact CEO Steve Jobs and ask him to reduce the amount of these chemicals used in Apple’s laptop production, as well as asking for Apple to offer and promote a “take back” recycling program for all their products.

Why only target Apple?

This seems to be the issue most Mac-heads have with the campaign. Apple were not bottom of the list after all (although they were not far off) and they only recently moved to a 12% market share[3] so why single them out?

I would have thought this was obvious but if not, just try and answer these questions off the top of your head:

  • Who is the CEO of HP?
  • Can you name a specific model of HP laptop?
  • Name a bulletin board and rumour site solely devoted HP products

Apple tell people to “Think Different”. They market themselves as being something special in a PC world dominated by banality and mediocrity. In terms of PC product design they unarguably lead the world. They are something special. In environmental design, they’re exacly the same as everyone else. The internals of a MacBook Pro are effectively indistinguishable from the latest ‘Brand X’ laptop. Intel inside, hazardous materials inside.

Greenpeace simply want Apple to apply this ‘different thought’ to their use of toxic chemicals. They’re acknowledging that Apple are different, and recognising Apple as the company most likely to make a positive difference. If Apple do this, others will follow.

Take back

The one thing I find odd is Greenpeace’s request for a “take back” recycling program. I find it odd because from what I can see on the Apple website, they already do this. Are Greenpeace missing something?

* * *

What remains to be seen is how Apple respond to this. I’m hoping Apple will work with Greenpeace to remove, wherever possible, these toxic chemicals from their products and take the lead in producing greener solutions. It seems to me that they’re already doing more than other PC manufacturers in this area, but clearly there is a long way to go.

Reducing chemical usage is a step forward, but it isn’t a long-term solution. A better approach would be for Greenpeace to start lobbying these companies to work towards a more sustainable PC design as well. If we could send our computers back to the manufacturers after a couple of years to have the CPU or motherboard replaced whilst keeping all other components intact, we could greatly extend the lifetime of PCs, significantly reduce e-waste and save a heap of cash at the same time.

Mighty oaks from little acorns grow.

Posted by Olly on September 27, 2006 Comments Off | Permalink

Comments are closed.