Apple shareholders to vote on green

The largest use of BFRs in computers today... by far... are the Deca BDEs used in the plastic housings (same as in TVs), followed by the TBBPA used in the internal circuit boards and chip cases (same as in TVs).

Those substances have no known effects on human health or the environment, but are under study in the US and EU.

Not only does Greenpeace seek the elimination of TBBPA and all BFRs, but they have their long range sights set on elimination of all flame retardants.

It's important to study and plan, which most CE manufacturers have been doing for some time. But whipsaw reactions to groups such as Greenpeace can have detrimental impacts not just on economies, but also upon the very health of individuals and environment which they seek to protect.

Consumers might also lose, in the short run. Major manufacturers have already converted to Pb-free solder processes for example, but the reliability impact resulting from the correspondingly higher processing temperatures has yet to be evaluated by the industry. We could well be in for some surprises over the next few years as product quality fluctuates as a result of the industry's learning curve with a new Pb-free world.

Seriously though. It's not like other firms are not green. And Apple is still certified by the EPA.
It's Greenpeace that's causing a stir, and they've been focusing on Apple.
If it doesn't make Macs cost a whole lot more, sure, go with it. But if it's going to hurt them economically too much to make the change, and keep Macs affordable, then forget it.

A couple comments:
To Jon - Don't forget that Apple is a business. Changing their manufacturing processes requires money. Al Gore's job is not to 'greenify' the company, but rather to support what he determines to be in the best interest of the company.

To artifex - Regardless what the proposal actually states, the important thing is that it would force Apple to analyze the extraordinarily harmful practice of adding brominated flame retardants and polyvinyl chloride plastics to their products. A simple search of PubMed would show that these substances have proven links to many cancers, among other diseases. They are unsafe, and any steps we as shareholders can take to end Apple's practice of using them should be wholeheartedly supported.

I think a Mac mini is a green machine as far as power and materials it takes to make.
But
The one thing I want to know is can the Apple TV be green when that thing is such a HEAT box? how many WATTS it takes to play some true 720P.

Sorry, Macworld, I put that excerpt in blockquotes, but TUAW has no preview on comments so I had to submit it blindly.

Macworld's one-line summary was wrong, and sadly, you didn't catch it.

The shareholder resolution asks Apple to produce a report, within six months of the shareholder meeting, on the feasibility of “eliminating persistent and bioaccumulative toxic chemicals, and all types of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastics” from its products.

That's doing a study, not actually changing any processes or formulations. I am against the idea of just changing, without real proof, but I see no problem in doing a study.

al gore's bill was that high because he paid extra for greener power. read the whole story before you condemn.

With a name like Apple they should pass it. They will make more money if they meet worldwide standards, look at the auto companies.

i hope they vote to get rid of the BFRs. yes apple is a small company and any of the larger companies have far more impact on the environment, but that shouldnt rid apple of a social conscience and responsibility to its consumers.

oh and Al Gore's utility bills for 2006 were $30,000... not too green there mister environment.

I just hope they don't approve, seriously, who cares about the environment. Will they win more money with it? NO. Will Macs become cheaper? NO. So, who cares.