Slashdot Mirror
Apple Exits "Green Hardware" Certification Program
westlake writes "CNET reports that Apple is turning its back on the EPA supported EPEAT hardware certification program. One of the problems EPEAT sees are barriers to recycling. Batteries and screens glued into place — that sort of thing. There is a price for Apple in this: CIO Journal notes that the U.S. government requires that 95 percent of its electronics bear the EPEAT seal of approval; large companies such as Ford and Kaiser Permanente require their CIOs to buy from EPEAT-certified firms; and many of the largest universities in the U.S. prefer to buy EPEAT-friendly gear."
Profit > The Environment
No xserves, Lion Server is a piece of shit, ARD is a $90 add-on, took 3 years for a corporate iOS configuration tool, 5 for a competent one, Final Cut X rivals Windows Movie Composer, Mac Pros are $4,000 for almost 3 year old hardware, and with 10.8 tethering every machine to the App Store there are no "unregistered" machines...
They're pro-sumer devices anymore.
Total Environmental cost = manufacturing impact + use impact - recylcing recovery
typically
recylcing recovery << manufacturing impact
all else being equal you'd like to increase recycling recovery but when there is a trade-off in that that increases the manufacturing or use cost it doesn't balance out.
The hangup is the "easy disassembly" requirement whereas electronics is going to more and more unibody assembly. EPEAT probably is going to have to give on this or be replaced if that is the trend. Since most of the environmental impact happens in manufacture and there isn't a big gain for the environment in recycling It's not necessarily environmentally unfriendly to manufacture a device that is more economical to make and to use. Generally the cheaper something is the less total energy and resources were required to make it. The exception to that is when there is a large exogenous cost not paid by the maker (e.g. say some manufacturer dumping mercury into a river but not having to pay for the consequences). Apple has not said it is planning to shortchange that part of it's environmental policies.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Glue is not a replacement for proper engineering
Where I work we buy a lot of Mac laptops, but all must be EPEAT-compliant (or a variance must be granted, which isn't likely for that many machines.) I sense a lot of disgruntlement coming.
Good move, Apple - you may have just saved Steve Ballmer's job.
EPEAT is only valuable in assessing products that don't have dedicated recycling programs in place. I.e. It's useful for assessing the general case, but fails to take into account any special considerations pertaining to particular products.
For instance, Apple has had a recycling program available for years that is available as a free service to any of their customers. Given that Apple is promising to recycle your devices (including non-Apple ones) for you regardless of how difficult it is to do so, the ease of recycling them should be a non-factor to anyone but Apple, rendering the difficulty of recycling a meaningless measurement for outside consideration. And the fact that they've provided a decent incentive to use their service rather than go to a general purpose recycler has provided a good reason for it to be widely used. Most of the Apple folks I know are aware of the recycling program, even if they haven't had a reason to use it yet.
Specifically, to use it, you just tell them what you have, and they'll send you pre-paid packaging for your device. In the case of computers (including non-Apple ones) or iOS devices, they'll give you a gift card for the fair market value of your device, and they give you 10% off a new iPod if you bring your old one into a retail location for recycling. They also take non-Apple mobile phones free of charge and with pre-paid shipping, though they don't offer any gift cards or discounts.
To me, at least in this one narrow area, that all renders EPEAT's assessment obsolete, since it's failed to keep up with the times. It needs some way to account for such programs.
You are over thinking it and/or biased. Apple uses glue because it is faster to manufacture and it frees you from certain structural constraints. I don't like that from a repair standpoint but I understand why they do it.
The MacBook Retina has soldered memory because that allows the case to be smaller and the structure doesn't need accomadation for an access panel. It also simplifies the trace routing since you don't need to deal with a memory slot. I would also bet that 90% of their users never upgrade the memory in their laptops, so why compromise just for the 10%? I don't like this choice but it isn't some arbitrary scheme to scam people.
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)