Slashdot Mirror


Greenpeace Complains Game Consoles Aren't Green Enough

jasoncart writes "None of the major games consoles are 'green enough', says environmental group Greenpeace in a report released today. Zeina Al-Hajj, Greenpeace's International Toxic Campaign co-ordinator, said: "We were shocked with Nintendo; it was our biggest surprise." The company is described by the group as the least 'green' tech firm."

19 of 450 comments (clear)

  1. Who Cares? by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Honestly, who cares what these people think about gaming consoles. What's next? Reporting on what Hamas or Al Qaeda or some other terrorist organization thinks about the XBox 360?

    --
    Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    1. Re:Who Cares? by garett_spencley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree.

      Greenpeace has every right to whine and bitch and express themselves. But slashdot is giving them a voice every time they chose to whine and bitch about a technology company and that's annoying.

      Free speech is glorious but it doesn't give the individuals the right to be heard.

      But then, it gets us whining and bitching which fuels the community so there's what slashdot gets out of it in a nutshell. I suppose it's a case of don't feed the trolls. It would be a nice fairy tale if, the next time the editors post a story about greenpeace, NOT A SINGLE PERSON COMMENTS.

      Alas, I'm dreaming.

    2. Re:Who Cares? by Nicolay77 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only if Greenpeace would speak with truth.

      After the Apple issue, I will no longer listen to these zealots on anything regarding electronic technology.

      Once a liar, always a liar.

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    3. Re:Who Cares? by lattyware · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's called exaggeration. No, they are not terrorists, but it's annoying when idiots group together in numbers to protest something they don't even understand properly.

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    4. Re:Who Cares? by Sentry21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Terrorism is also the use of fear and intimidation tactics as a form of unconventional or psychological warfare, which I think includes most of Greenpeace's activities pretty well.

      Greenpeace for years has used fearmongering and scare tactics to frighten people into thinking that the world will explode if we don't do whatever they say. They've lied repeatedly to the public to try and make their point, and they've performed (potentially valuable) scientific studies, only to ignore the results when they didn't match up with what they wanted the study to conclude.

      There are a lot of things wrong with how we treat the environment. There are a lot of groups out there that are trying to make things better. Greenpeace is not one of them, and its actions only give a bad name to those people who do honestly and truly care about environmental issues and the life of our planet.

      That's why they're terrorists.

  2. Yeah yeah, no environmental policy. by NeoOokami · · Score: 5, Insightful

    http://www.nintendo.com/corp/faq.jsp#environment Assuming you ignore that. This is a repeat of old news anyways. Their criticisms of Nintendo basically boil down to them not having an answer to everything on their checklist exactly how they like it. Greenpeace means well but they tend to demonstrate a horrifying lack of thought or genuine consideration of anything other than their own agenda.

    1. Re:Yeah yeah, no environmental policy. by maxume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Using whatever methods you feel like in following your own agenda is not the same thing as meaning well.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  3. Re:Sigh.. by Tsoat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'Greenpeace reserves the right to arbitrarily change a company's score if they decide the company did something disagreeable' I tkae this as popularity points so to speak, the companies have to "suck up" to them if they don't want to "lose" points. I find this whole thing utterly ridiculous. Im surprised JT hasn't reared his ugly head.

  4. Just Picking the "hippest" target by MaizeMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Face it, this is just like green peace singling out Apple as the computer company they were going to harass about manufacturing methods. They pick the brand best known to their political base and go after it for practices shared by the whole industry because they get a lot more press coverage attacking a "hip" company like Nintendo or Apple, than a boring one like HP or Microsoft.

  5. That's a bit of a fallacy. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Greenpeace != Terrorist organization

    Still, asking those bastards their opinion about any electronics is pointless. They won't be happy until it runs on fairy dust (harvested from free-range fairies, of course).

    Greenpeace is a great example of one of the environmental organizations that give environmentalism its freaky leftist reputation. The environment is not a left or right issue; we all live here, we all should care.

    But having an organization who honestly believes we should abandon most aspects of our current technological society in order to be more in tune with the planet polarizes the issue, and drives more moderate people away.

    This is a great example, along with all the rest of their consumer electronics whinging lately. That stuff is minor league in terms of global pollution problems, but they know that they have a better chance of getting the boomers to protest apple or microsoft than they do of persuading them to give up their hummers.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    1. Re:That's a bit of a fallacy. by sm62704 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That stuff is minor league in terms of global pollution problems

      Indeed. The efects of just transporting games and game consoles dwarfs any negative environmental impact of their manufacture and disposal. Greenpeace should think about how much more it would harm the environment if you had to drive to an arcade to play electronic games like you did in the 1970s.

      Speaking of the seventies, in the 1870s someone actually predicted the huge environmental problems that would be posed by the futuristic society of the 1970s - the continent, he predicted, would be hip deep in horse shit.

      Technology solves far more problems, environmental and otherwise, than it causes.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  6. Re:Green ?! Jesus, they are not SAFE enough by Justin+Hopewell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not aware of Nintendo having a problem with exploding consoles. Perhaps you're thinking of the original Xbox power supply that caught on fire and had to be recalled? Generally, Nintendo has built more reliable hardware that can usually take a bit of abuse before conking out in any form. I still have my original NES from the late eighties. All Ol' Bessie needs is a puff of air in the cartridge to get it going.

  7. Yes, and? by Auckerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What do they expect? Industrialized societies destroy their surroundings. From shipping products, to driving to the store to buy it, all the way to the manufacturing process. The best you can honestly hope for these days is that the product doesn't poison your kids and even that isn't a guarantee. To call out "consoles" over, say computers in general, is merely an attempt to ride the media buzz surrounding a market that isn't being hampered in the United States during it's recession.

    To be honest, I could never take these guys seriously anyways. They aren't interested to solutions or working within the economic reality of the planet, they seem to want to end the industrial revolution and have everyone go back to farming. Nuclear power, nope. Working with companies to make an imperfect process better, while letting it remain imperfect, nope can't do that rather continue to yell at them from over here rather than work with them. It's all or none.

    Nature conservancy is an example of a environmental group actually making a real difference. Green peace is a bunch of self important attention whores.

    --

    Burn Hollywood Burn
  8. Re:Sigh.. by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More useless propaganda, and the idiots that fall for it.
    Nice troll-ish leadin, I'll bite.

    Propaganda is not useless, and this particular propaganda is definitely not useless. Environmental concerns are very real, and bringing attention to them serves a useful purpose. By making consumers aware of environmental concerns with products, consumers may factor them into their purchase decisions. Without information about environmental practices, there is no way for purchasers to compare products along those lines.

    So I ask you, why is it useless for purchasers to have more information when purchasing a product?

    Note that this doesn't mean that Greenpeace doesn't use misleading information, which while not useless is detrimental. But Greenpeace uses publicity campaigns in order to affect the decisions made by consumers... and there is nothing wrong with that. In my opinion, it is a useful counter to the corporate propaganda (advertising/marketing) that runs practically unchecked.

    All that said, one would be wise to take any information from an interested party with a grain of salt. Whether it's Greenpeace, industry organizations, or the producing company itself, critical analysis always helps... but dismissing information out-of-hand is probably the most useless act to take with regards to market choices.
    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  9. Re:What's so hard about re-usable materials? by oahazmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or, make controllers out of some kind of steel? If the very first Xbox controller was made out of steel it would be like holding a small Buick in your lap.
    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
  10. Re:Sigh.. by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't anyone even pay attention to Greenpeace's bitching anymore? I mean, if you've got someone who tells you every day that the sky is falling, no matter what you do, how long before you just tune them out?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  11. A word to Greenpeace by moosesocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Learn how to choose your battles.

    To me, Greenpeace is almost completely irrelevant as an organization, and have lost pretty much all of their credibility. They oppose everything, and offer very few practical solutions to the world's ills, whilst continuing to decry virtually anything fashionable or popular.

    As a result of their anti-nuclear tactics, construction of new nuclear plants stopped, and a great many coal plants were constructed instead, which had a far more hazardous effect on the environment as a whole. Heck.... wildlife in the areas around Chernobyl are doing quite well thanks to the complete lack of human activity in the area.

    Instead of encouraging us to all drive electric cars, the enviromentalists should have been promoting hybrids as a reasonably practical segue into developing electric cars. Now that hybrids have been proven to be practical and effective, companies are turning their attention to plug-in hybrids and true EVs.

    Instead of demanding full and widespread adoption of wind and solar power, they should have been encouraging experiments with small-scale wind and solar farms, as well as more R&D into those two technologies. Small wind farms have slowly proven to be practical and economical in certain areas, and if NanoSolar can keep true to their word on production costs, we should be seeing solar panels being printed onto every exterior surface imaginable over the next few years.

    The thing is....you can't force a revolution. GreenPeace need to learn that they might actually have a chance of achieving their goals by lightly prodding industry and consumers in the right direction.

    Instead of proclaiming "GAMES, NINTENDO EVIL," perhaps they could instead publish a headline such as "Greenpeace study finds that Nintendo could drastically cut landfill waste by using biodegradable hemp-based plastics for just $0.02USD per unit"

    Perhaps that's a bit of a mouthful, but it's a lot more likely to provoke a response from the public: "Hey, why don't they do that? Sounds awfully selfish of them not to," and a resoponse from the company: "Hey, why don't we do this? It'll help us improve our image, and won't cost much"

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  12. Re:Sigh.. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only when they harass me on my way home from work to some some idiotic petition or another. I always just ask if Greenpeace is still opposed to nuclear power, and if they say yes, I keep walking. Haven't had to listen to them yet.

  13. Greenpeace are scumbags by Quattro+Vezina · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even the founder of Greenpeace has disowned them, because they go way too far.

    They're a bunch of nutjobs, and only one step away from terrorists.

    --
    I support the Center for Consumer Freedom