Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Greenpeace Decries Lack of Environmental Progress From Console Makers

Posted by Soulskill on from the it's-not-easy-being-green dept.

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."

3 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. Screw Greenpeace by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Greenpeace have pulled this nonsense before. They lambasted Apple for not being "green" enough then came out and admitted they didn't really have a beef with Apple, they just went after them for the publicity as they were such a well known corporation.

    Greenpeace are barely one level above PETA in the asinine self publicity stakes.

    1. Re:Screw Greenpeace by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That thinking is where it gets dangerous.

      There is a balance that is needed to maintain. Enviromentalism and Personal Freedom. It is not one or the other. It is getting a good balance between the two. Greenpeace wants to dictate how people live, and make a huge fuss about any resistance, even if it is relatively minor.

      The way that environmentalism works the best is threw education and marketing. Don't give the people these worst cases of dooms day scenario. This will only get a small group of people and when it doesn't go as plan they drop away and don't believe you any more. (Eg. Durring the 1970 they had predicted Global Cooling, that didn't happen so a lot of people won't believe in global warming. (Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me)) I like the trend that we are going in now for environmentalism. Put effort in research to make current technology more energy efficient. Implementing other sources of power, showing people that they can be green without breaking the budget.

      If they are able to influence my Father to get a win turbine for his house (a staunch republican who still doesn't believe in global warming) then I think we are going in the right direction. Forcing people will only give push-back, showing them alternatives and good cost/benefit information will move to your goal much faster.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  2. Incoherent Propoganda by MrMista_B · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The incoherent propoganda, lies, and lack of science that Greenpeace shouts to the world does very little benefit, and very much harm to actual, real enviromental concerns.

    They're as mindless, cultlike, and factually wrong as PETA.

    Which is terrible and unfortunate, because they are wealthy and powerful, and if Greenpeace actually cared for the enviroment, at all, in any way, they have the capability to actually do enviromental good.