Greenpeace has decided they'll get more attention from praising Apple than by trying to bury it.

The environmental organization is singing hosannas and heysannas to the Cupertino-company for taking a green stand and resigning from the US Chamber of Commerce. Apple walked away from the organization on Monday over Chamber actions seen by Apple as opposing efforts to limit greenhouse gases.

Chamber President Thomas Donohue says his organization does want to see "legislation to address climate change," though the Chamber is against current proposals that, he says, will "significantly raise energy prices, (and) throw more Americans out of work."

Greenpeace revels in the kerfuffle, saying in a post on its website, "Apple has stormed out of the biggest lobby group in the United States. At issue is the US Chamber of Commerce's use of funds to oppose climate change legislation. Apple has done the right thing, and IBM and Microsoft should think different too." (See what they did there?)

The environmental organization says the Chamber should consider the number of jobs that would be created by helping clean up the environment. It's hard to see these two groups hugging it out.

Still, it's praise and adoration for Apple, with the "save the whales" set saying, "The stakes have never been higher for the climate. Apple's move will throw an uncomfortable spotlight on any company that stays on in the Chamber but doesn't act to change its policies."

Interesting. I wonder if Apple thought of that.

[via cnet]

Apple aired a new television ad here in the US earlier tonight. It touts the MacBook's low power consumption, recyclable enclosure and lack of some of the toxins present in other computers.

Activist group Greenpeace has been pressuring Apple to adopt more environmentally-friendly production methods and materials over the last couple of years, and last month responded favorably to Apple's efforts to go green.

Additionally, Apple has posted a page to their website describing not only their efforts toward environmental responsibility with the MacBook, but their overall efforts as a company. At the risk of sounding like a tree-hugging hippie, let me say, well done Apple!

Greenpeace is reacting favorably to Apple's new, environmentally friendlier product line, but chides the company for not reducing the amount of some toxic chemicals more quickly.

According to a blog post on Greenpeace's website, Apple's new MacBooks are not entirely free of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), a kind of plastic. Apple says that internal cables now contain no PVC, but Greenpeace wants to see the entire computer free of PVC.

Greenpeace also examines Apple's update to Apple's Greener Apple policies, some of which we highlighted on Tuesday. Apple has promised in this update to have its product line complete PVC free by the end of this year.

The environmental activist organization releases a quarterly Guide to Greener Electronics, where Apple scored a 4.1 (out of 10) last month. Greenpeace's blog post hints that these new changes to its product line will increase its score. Nokia has the highest score of any company, 7 out of 10.

Thanks, Tom!

Apple has received a lot of flack, especially from Greenpeace, for their supposedly less-than-stellar commitment to "green" design and manufacturing processes. However, the MacBook Air might be a sign of changes to come, as it is officially the most environmentally-friendly Apple product on the shelves. The latest, thinnest Apple notebook boasts the following:

• Fully recyclable aluminum case
• Apple's first mercury-free LCD display, with arsenic-free glass
• Circuit boards are BFR-free and PVC-free
• 50% less packaging than the previous MacBooks
• Meets ENERGY STAR requirements
• Receives a EPEAT Silver Rating

Continental Europe's first Apple Store - Italy's Roma Est - received a huge number of visitors this past weekend, including Greenpeace. One representative, dressed as "Eva," offered a fig leaf-wearing "Ecco Steve Jobs" a green, eco-friendly Apple. The couple also brought two large, "green" iPod cutouts. If Google's Italian-to-English translation is accurate, they were eventually asked to leave.

Greenpeace has been after Apple to stop using toxic materials in manufacturing of their machines for quite a while now. If there's one thing you can say about these folks, it's that they're persistent.

The Greenpeace activists behind GreenMyApple.org claim that Apple may begin taking steps to address several of the company's environmental issues, despite their denial of said concerns because of a disagreement with Greenpeace's ratings and criteria. In particular, Greenpeace is concerned with Apple's use of several hazardous chemicals in its products which can have adverse effects on the environment and people's health once the equipment is disassembled. Other manufacturers have already begun to ditch some of these same toxic chemicals, and Greenpeace claims Steve Jobs recently met with a Social Responsibility Fund investor to discuss some of these environmental matters.

Apple has not yet responded to this claim of meeting with Greenpeace, but they did issue a statement to a new report, which ranks Apple lower than HP, Dell, Nokia, and Sony for its global policies and practices on eliminating dangerous chemicals and on taking responsibility for products once they are thrown away by consumers. ``We disagree with Greenpeace's rating and the criteria they chose. Apple has a strong environmental track record and has led the industry in restricting and banning toxic substances such as mercury, cadmium and hexavalent chromium, as well as many BFRs (brominated flame retardants)." Despite the arguments, let's hope Apple can come to terms with stronger and more effective policies in this delicate day and age of increasing environmental concerns.

[via MacNN]

Are you paying attention, Greenpeace?

Blogger Chiggs at Torents examines the iTunes Store's impact on the environment, and it's a favorable one. The production of a single CD results in aluminum, nickel, dyes, polycarbonates and more. At this month's Macworld Expo, Steve Jobs announced that the iTunes Store had sold 2 billion songs. At an average of 12 tracks per disc, Chiggs figures, that's the equivalent of 166 million CDs worth of those dangerous materials. What's more, that many CDs would cover 1,050 miles when laid flat. That's quite a chunk of landfill.

He also considers the results of transporting all of those CDs by truck. It's certainly a good article, and worth your time. So buy your music from the iTunes store...and save a tree, hippie.

[Via MacNN]

Greenpeace today, as part of its GreenMyApple.org initiative, "greened" Apple's flagship San Francisco retail store to raise awareness of toxic substances present in electronics manufactured and sold by the Cupertino, CA company. Greenpeace members handed our flyers while a large-scale projector was set to RGB 0,255,0 and pointed at the iconic glowing Apple on the stores facade. This TUAW reporter was there, camera ready, to document the dramatic display. Click through to the gallery.

Is Apple environmentally friendly? They certainly seem to think so. Their Apple and the Environment webpage says that Apple recognizes "its responsibility as a global citizen and is continually striving to reduce the environmental impact of the work we do and the products we create."

They've set up a free recycling program for purchasers of their products. They strive for energy efficiency and are continuing to reduce idle power consumption. Their products use recyclable materials and conform to a set of environmental specifications. Most of all, they claim their goal is to reduce or eliminate environmentally harmful substances from the manufacturing process.

So is Greenpeace completely off the mark when it claims that the production of Macs, iPods and iBooks is exposing children in India and China to dangerous chemicals? Greenpeace is lobbying for a greener Apple and has set up a lobbying group at .mAct to make this happen.

So what do you think, TUAWers? Is Apple doing enough? Does Greanpeace have a point? Does Apple deserve the low e-Waste score assigned to it today by Greenpeace? Let us know in the comments.

Thanks Gyve

A few days ago we mentioned that Greenpeace had gotten kicked out of MacExpo in London and I hinted that it was the Apple Goon Squad that was responsible for their eviction. I was being cheeky, of course, as I am wont to do - but it turns out that Apple wasn't the sole complainant. In fact, it was Greenpeace's refusal to play by the rules that got them escorted out. Macworld UK has the scoop...

According to Bob Denton, Event Director, the removal of Greenpeace had nothing to do its message or the materials being handed out. Bob said: "They paid money and had the right to be at the show." The problem started when a group of 12 Greenpeace activists gathered outside the show entrance and started handing out flyers and apples to attendees. Bob Denton said: "We want people to be cool and calm as they enter the show".

He explained to the Greenpeace organisers that it would be acceptable for two activists to stand by the stairs inside the show and hand out flyers, but the event management would not allow a gathering outside the main door.

There then followed a number of complaints about the behaviour of Greenpeace activists from four visitors and five exhibitors, one of which was Apple. Allegedly, Greenpeace attendees were invading other stands for mock photo shoots and replacing other exhibitors' promotional material with their own.

The problem came to a head when one woman complained that they had placed an apple in her child's pram and were taking photographs of him without her permission.

Despite several warnings, Greenpeace continued behaving badly and after two more visitors and two more exhibitors complained later in the day, Denton ejected the activists, citing clause 13 of the terms and conditions that Greenpeace signed, which prohibits deliberate and unprovoked attempts to create conflict as well as drunk and/or abusive conduct.

So there you have it. Radical activists taking the peace out of Greenpeace.

Thanks, Mike!

Apple is not Greenpeace's favorite computer company, as we all know (though I'm not sure what company Greenpeace actually likes, but that is a subject for a different blog). Continuing their 'Why must Apple sell poison' campaign Greenpeace has launched a site that parodies Apple.com. While this is a clever idea, I have to wonder why there is no Dell page. They explain that Dell has pretty good standards and that Apple would force them to be even better, but somehow I doubt that (the forcing bit, I know nothing of Dell's environmental record).

Ah, right, in their FAQ they say, 'No - this is not a campaign against Apple - it's a campaign to change Apple for the better,' and 'Apple should be setting the trend for a green future.' I just hope that Greenpeace isn't targeting a sexy computer company (probably the only computer company on the planet that can be called sexy) to get attention. I'm sure they are just concerned for us all.

[via Daring Fireball]

Over at Download Squad today, we're talking about the report on "green electronics" and "e-waste" that Greenpeace released this morning. It's no secret that environmentalists have been unhappy with Apple--despite their claims to be an eco-friendly company--for a long time. This is the first time, though, that a big environmental group has gone out and ranked some of the major players, and Apple came in 11th out of the 14 companies rated. More disappointing than the ranking--somebody's got to be last, right?--was Apple's overall score: 2.7 out of ten. Companies were scored on a number of factors, from recycling programs, hazardous materials usage, and Apple came up wanting in just about everything.

The good news? Many of the issues are easy to fix. For instance, Apple has a lousy recycling program. They only accept consumer takebacks in five markets, and then only with purchase of a new Apple machine. They could change that policy tomorrow to accept any used Apple product for recycling, free of charge. In the grand scheme of things, it wouldn't cost that much and it might keep some Lithium and Mercury-laden computers and batteries out of the trash. They could also start accepting any machines as trade-ins. Bring in your old ThinkPad and leave it at the Apple Store when you walk out with your new MBP. They already do this for for corporate and education customers. Heck, if you're a school they'll even give you money for a trade-in on your old Dells. Why not at least offer to accept consumer equipment, and make a point of publicizing the fact.

Apple also needs to make a public and transparent commitment to banning hazardous substances. They've said they're committed to stopping the use of toxic PVC parts and Bromine Fire Retardant (BFR) coatings. But when? Just give us a date, Steve. Nokia stopped using PVC in 2005 and will be BFR-free by 2007. The parts that go into a MacBook aren't that different from the parts that go into a Nokia 770. There are more of them in the MB, but they're not that different. The other thing most companies seem to be able to do that Apple can't be bothered with is actually publishing a list of all the materials in their products. On that issue, transparency would itself be a huge step in the right direction.

And finally, they need to stop passing the buck when it comes to their partners. We know that Apple employees are environmentally conscious, and 1 Infinite Loop is a pretty green place. Even Greenpeace acknowledges that. It's time Apple starts holding its suppliers, contractors, and manufacturers to the same high standards.

There's no reason the answer to "Who will be first to go green?" shouldn't be "Apple." And since they've got one of the smallest manufacturing operations of the companies surveyed and they already claim to be eco-friendly, it'll actually be kind of sad if that isn't the answer.