Slashdot Mirror
Apple Goes Back To EPEAT
An anonymous reader writes with a followup to news from last weekend that Apple had turned its back on the EPEAT hardware certification standard. After hearing criticism from customers, the media, and governmental organizations that Apple wasn't being environmentally friendly, the company's Hardware Engineering VP, Bob Mansfield, wrote today that its earlier decision was a mistake, and all of Apple's eligible products are back on EPEAT. (EPEAT welcomed Apple back with open arms.) Mansfield repeated an earlier statement from Apple that EPEAT does not measure all the ways in which the company's products are environmentally friendly. Mansfield said, "For example, Apple led the industry in removing harmful toxins such as brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). We are the only company to comprehensively report greenhouse gas emissions for every product we make, taking into account the entire product lifecycle. And we’ve removed plastics wherever possible, in favor of materials that are more highly recyclable, more durable, more efficient and longer lasting. Perhaps most importantly, we make the most energy-efficient computers in the world and our entire product line exceeds the stringent ENERGY STAR 5.2 government standard. No one else in our industry can make that claim."
Mansfield went on to state that Apple would use only genuine Congalese tantalum, African conflict diamonds, rainforest teak, and Iranian oil based lubricants; and furthermore the iOS developers would smoke only Tibetan opium. "No one else in our industry can afford to make those claims, bitches!" he cackled.
At press time, the reporters were too mellow from the complimentary Afghan bud to harsh his groove. Steve Jobs could not be reached for comment.
John
1. Tell everyone you're leaving an environmental program
2. Issue press release saying you're not leaving
3. Use this chance to tell reporters that your products are more environmentally friendly than the competition
I have to admit it's a clever strategy.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
I think the /. summary has this a bit backwards. Just read the letter from EPEAT:
This was a messy situation and I think EPEAT did the right thing here in moving forward on recycling standards for computers and smartphones with closed cases and non removable batteries. So I'm happy that we are going to end up with better standards for recycling and at the same time Apple doesn't break with the environmental groups. This is a win-win in terms of policy that probably wouldn't have happened if Apple hadn't publicly stormed off. But /. shouldn't be writing this up as Apple caving to criticism. Their policies on recycling (i.e. the need for an expert recycler like http://www.werecycle.com/ ) haven't changed its EPEAT that is altering policy.
Is that 2.718 championships?
They turned their back on EPEAT just to get the news coverage....doing something bad like that made all the haters spread the word just as much as the fans. Then, when they flip-flopped, all the haters suddenly got a nice little spiel about how they are not only EPEAT-compliant, but even better. And the haters actually paid attention because they were interested now.
And the fans are still happy because Apple is still certified now.
Excellent marketing, all-in-all.
I commend Apple for saying in public "we were wrong".
Apple helped create the EPEAT standards alongside the other stakeholders who helped define it.
Apple even has a contract to recycle products from ANY manufacturer, for free, with free shipping fees and boxes provided. What other vendor does this? Who puts their money where their mouth is on the environment?
Apple's products, in real, practical terms, are MORE recyclable, in terms of recyclable content contained therein, and the ability to actually recycle them — albeit by using Apple's programs for things like iPhone, iPad, and now the Retina MacBook Pro — and that many other EPEAT-certified products may be (and are) markedly worse than Apple's products in this sense, but can still be certified because they are able to be disassembled with conventional tools. How does that make them "more green"?
EPEAT alone isn't the end-all, be-all of green certifications. Organizations use EPEAT because it is a metric; a box that is easy to check; an easy way to define the "greenness" of a product. Apple helped develop the EPEAT standard, and has been one of the most committed and transparent manufacturers to green tech, environment, and recycling. No other major vendor has this level of transparency.
And Apple is STILL targeted by folks like Greenpeace, even as Apple is pursuing green more aggressively than its competitors, with Data Center Knowledge noting:
EPEAT didn't cave on anything — but the next generation of EPEAT would do well to consider the real, end-to-end recyclability and carbon footprint of electronic products.
Can you back that up with proof? They have a recycling program and as long as you're not taking something ancient back you can get a gift certificate for bring it back. I can't think of any other company that gives incentives to bring your shit back to recycle it.
Their issues is that a person can't remove their own battery. That is not an environmental hazard and in fact Apple being the only one that can reomve it guarantees it gets recycled. Where as batteries that consumers can remove and replace can and do end up in land fills.
If you disagree feel free to provide proof.
Apple still has many products that met the EPEAT certification requirements. However, the newer products with glued batteries and screen components do not.
The MacBook Pro with Retina Display has an EPEAT Gold rating - so no, that's not it.
If you're talking about phones and tablets... currently EPEAT doesn't rate them - at all - for any manufacturer.
#DeleteChrome
"wrote today that its earlier decision was a mistake"
we thought we could get away with it. our intentions weren't a mistake. Thinking there wouldn't be as much of an outcry was actually the mistake.
Nothing has actually changed except that Apple will go back to identifying products that are EPEAT compliant as such, which lets Apple sell those products to organizations that require that certification. The retina MBP is not one of these; Apple hasn't said anything about modifying its construction, and doubtless doesn't intend to. As a high end laptop sold more to individuals to organizations, its sales are not all that dependent upon EPEAT certification anyway. EPEAT has has indicated willingness to consider input from Apple regarding updates to its certification policy, and I expect that Apple will push for a provision to grant certification to products for which the manufacturer has a credible environmentally friendly recycling program, without nitpicking the details of how the device is constructed.
Too bad the truth is that Apple recycles any of their products for free, and any other manufacturer's products, also for free, and it's all zero-landfill, meaning that image is completely, 100%, provably false.
But again, I know you're trolling — I'm just replying so others following this threat won't have any chance of being duped by any of your posts.
That is why Apple ditched EPEAT in the first place. Being able to disassemble toxic components "with common tools" is a requirement of EPEAT compatibility. Did EPEAT just magically excuse Apple from this?
FTFA linked in TFA: "EPEAT requirements hold that electronics must be easy to disassemble, so their components can be recycled. The iPhone, the iPad, and the new MacBook Pro with Retina display don't pass muster..."
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
If Steve Jobs was around and decided that Apple should not be part of EPEAT, then Apple would remain off EPEAT for good regardless of consumer opinion or corporate backlash. Instead the new Apple appears to pander to the same.
Apple lost its balls with Steve.
Microsoft is the definitive champion of a business model involving brash announcements, gathering of opinion, and eventual backpedaling, hopefully Tim Cooke is not looking to take over that title.
I think you have a short memory. The Apple community has always been very vocal about stuff they don't like and having Apple backpedal. Way back when "Apple is dying" days, there would be an update, or a change and the Apple community would be up in arms across all the Apple fan sites. A week or two later there would be a "Sorry, didn't know you wanted that. There we put it back." announcement.