Slashdot Mirror
Greenpeace Decries Lack of Environmental Progress From Console Makers
SwiftyNifty writes with an update to Greenpeace's 2007 criticism of game console manufacturers over environmental concerns. Their claim was that some of the chemicals used to make the consoles were toxic, and that the manufacturers' recycling practices were not up to snuff. Two years have passed, and Greenpeace now says that progress is either slow or non-existent.
"... Nintendo has little plan to remove PVC and almost no plans to remove [brominated flame retardants]. Slightly further up the scale, Microsoft was again awarded a poor ranking due to the use of toxic waste materials. And Sony, who rank rather well in their mobile phone partnership with Ericsson (scoring 6.5 out of 10 for improved toxic waste and efficient energy usage) didn't perform as well in the console category, failing to eliminate PVC or BFRs from their gaming products."
Don't be so hard on them. The current mode of global resource allocation requires a Greenpeace to permit us to continue to consume at unsustainable rates. If the consumptive "first world" were faced with how to redress the the vast injustices we cause through consumption, instead of simply buying indulgences through slightly more expensive environmentally-friendly labeled goods, we might slow down to think about why 2/3 of the world's population must struggle through inhumane living conditions so that we can enjoy our dozens of Energy Star appliances.
Also, I don't think the glitter-starved masses would pay attention to lifecycle analyses, total energy equations, comprehensive resource requirements and all that science which would rationally price our disposables based on their impact on fellow humans, as opposed to what some database thinks we're worth.
In what ways does it make sense to ship flavorless but dent- and parasite (life!) resistant fruit from nutrition-deprived regions half way across the world for routine daily consumption, regardless of how its transported when most parts of the world have provided adequate nutrition for hundreds of thousands of years?
There are 1.1... kinds of people.
It's time to stop letting insane left-wingers threaten everybody into living the way they want them to live.
"We have classified them on the imaginary political spectrum, so their arguments are invalid."
Are you implying your right to live as you please is more important than the continued survival of the global ecosystem, and the human race depending on it?