Slashdot Mirror


Apple Forces Recyclers To Shred All iPhones and MacBooks (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Apple released its Environmental Responsibility Report Wednesday, an annual grandstanding effort that the company uses to position itself as a progressive, environmentally friendly company. Behind the scenes, though, the company undermines attempts to prolong the lifespan of its products. Apple's new moonshot plan is to make iPhones and computers entirely out of recycled materials by putting pressure on the recycling industry to innovate. But documents obtained by Motherboard using Freedom of Information requests show that Apple's current practices prevent recyclers from doing the most environmentally friendly thing they could do: Salvage phones and computers from the scrap heap. Apple rejects current industry best practices by forcing the recyclers it works with to shred iPhones and MacBooks so they cannot be repaired or reused -- instead, they are turned into tiny shards of metal and glass. "Materials are manually and mechanically disassembled and shredded into commodity-sized fractions of metals, plastics, and glass," John Yeider, Apple's recycling program manager, wrote under a heading called "Takeback Program Report" in a 2013 report to Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. "All hard drives are shredded in confetti-sized pieces. The pieces are then sorted into commodities grade materials. After sorting, the materials are sold and used for production stock in new products. No reuse. No parts harvesting. No resale."

31 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is, has been, and continues to be a problem. It's easy to blame Apple but it's an industry wide issue. It's so much more profitable to sell a new product than to repair and sell a used one. Also the industry's business model is to dump the old and get the new latest product. This model will not last long if the market is full of old products. So it's not surprising that they rather destroy than repair and sell.
    The solution lies on the user. At some point we have to take blame on how the industry functions. Apple would not be the mammoth it is if we did not buy and support their business model.
    What Apple is doing is to make a show of their recycling effort so that most people don't feel bad about getting a new Apple product but they can still continue to sell and make the most profits. Make no mistake profits will win over recycling.
    To fix this, we could pressure the company to reform their ways by buying the competition's products that follow more sustainable practices. Not likely since they are so good at selling and there probably isn't a direct replacement. Or we can pressure our government representatives to do something about it. A good candidate solution since we have slowly increased what companies must do to protect the environment. We are not at the best point but we are getting there. We need to add pressure to our reps to continue. What they've done is not enough.
    The best thing we can do is to resist the pressure to upgrade our gadgets. No we don't need to upgrade every year and no we don't need the new shiny gadget that will be put in the dump in a few months. The fix starts with us.

    1. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Name one other product that can run iOS and be a phone at the same time.

    2. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by bigfinger76 · · Score: 2

      If I recall correctly, the major manufacturers in the 90s (Dell, Gateway, etc) voluntarily recycled their stuff due to outcry over the newly coined 'e-waste'.

    3. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Why blame Apple when you can blame Apple customers who feel they need a new model every year?

    4. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 2

      Just to put your solution into real world perspective, where real people live.

      Recently a certain auto maker was the front page occupant of many newspapers for a huge diesel scandal (I bet you can't guess who!)
      You know something? I haven't seen so many goddamned Golfs and Jettas on the road since

      --
      I tend to rant.
    5. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by sudon't · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not a direct replacement for an Apple product?
      You're serious?
      Only an Apple fanatic could think something like that, given that there are indeed direct replacements for every Apple product.

      Name another product that can run OS X. The only other choices are Windows, which, Windows, or Linux, which isn't nearly as user-friendly. I have friends who use both of those systems - no thank you! Only OS X gives you a *nix system that is not only very stable and configurable, but incredibly easy to use. Android is a decent imitation of iOS, looks a lot like it, but the iPhone still kills it. I mean, why do you think Apple has fanatical users?

      Hate on Apple all you want. I hate them, too. Always have. But no one can touch their products, even as they try to imitate them. That's just a fact. Whether they'll be able to keep this up with Jobs gone remains to be seen, but I am not about to start using Windows.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    6. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most users of Apple products that I know personally do not buy each new model. And the one that I know does, always sells his old one used. In fact, I can't think of anyone who would just give a working device to Apple when buying a new one. The resale value of Apple hardware almost always makes the bother of finding a buyer worth it.

    7. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Spacelem · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That is debatable. Having used Linux for around 13 years, and OS X for about 4, I personally find Linux easier to use. The number of times I've struggled to make something work in OS X, even something as simple as turn off mouse scroll wheel acceleration and make the mouse movement less jumpy.

      OS X is probably easy to use if you're happy with the default configuration and all your applications can be installed via drag and drop, but the moment you start trying to do something else, or want a different music player to iTunes, then that user friendliness just seems to dwindle away. I still don't know how to make my mouse feel right, or stop many applications from looking horrible on a retina display. I find aptitude much easier than the mix of Mac Ports and manual installation / updating.

      Frankly, if I didn't need access to Microsoft products for collaboration purposes and hadn't been given a MBP by my work, then I'd happily use Linux full time (btw no, I'm not an application developer or full time programmer, just a university researcher).

    8. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      I mean, why do you think Apple has fanatical users?

      Since I have to use Apple because of software that only they have, I gotta say that the integration of the iPhone and MacOS is pretty sweet. It doesn't take a fanboi to appreciate seamless integration.

      I also use Android, Linux and Windows. No solutions on those that are as seamless.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  2. Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple is incredibly anti-consumer and anti-environment to milk tiny amounts of additional profit. I am so shocked...

    1. Re:Imagine that by MouseR · · Score: 2

      You can install bleeding edge OS version (iOS 10.3 in this case) on a five year old iPhone (or iPod Touch) 5.

      Try that on another smart phone, regardless of brand.

      Yes, consumer is first at Apple. Because they dont serve the business well and even those old phones can still make iTunes purchase.

  3. Green Policies by Kunedog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Green policies are for PR, not for everyday use.

  4. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My 2010 MacBook Pro disagrees with you. Running the latest version of macOS very well thanks.

    Your post was essentially fact free and biased garbage.

  5. Data Destruction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thank you Apple for ensuring the data on my old phone won't be compromised.

  6. Imagine this... by Excelcia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, how about imagine this scenario. Let's say Apple's recyclers are allowed to recycle components. NAND flash chips from all sorts of devices are collected - how long before some very embarrassing, sensitive, or even damaging information thought deleted from someone's phone is recovered from one of those chips?

    While I am no fan of Apple nor their business practices, their current recycling method represents the best they can do while taking the precautions they need to take to ensure safety. They can't allow any chips out, or else once that door is opened it's only a matter of time before the wrong chips get out. Shredding the devices and putting policies in place to ensure they are /all/ shredded represents the best they can hope for.

    And yes, before a phone is turned in it /should/ be wiped of anything sensitive, but do /you/ know how to ensure every bit of data is cleaned off your phone at the flash level?

  7. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Karlt1 · · Score: 2

    Old computers simply can't run the latest versions of macOS yet the ecosystem pretty much requires it.

    Tell that to my mom who is running Windows 7 on my old 2006 Era Core Duo 1.66mhz Mac Mini.

    Apple abandoned it years ago with 10.6 but it runs Windows 7 decently well.

  8. This won't really matter by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This doesn't change anything. The people who buy into Apple mindshare will continue to buy Apple, and the rest of us will continue to repurpose old hardware for new roles and pretty much ignore the shiny trendy things. And there will be enough Apple fans for Apple to continue to make boatloads of money. And many of those fans will be all hyped up to save the earth and recycle everything and battle global warming, while not even recognizing the irony of throwing away an $800 phone every 18 months.

    But we will, apparently, continue to argue about it.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  9. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, you've completely missed the point - on average, Macs running Mac OS last in active use longer than most Wintel hardware. I've seen organisations run fleets of Macs w/o upgrading the hardware, that exceed Windows XP's software lifetimes. The 10.8 comment is almost irrelevant - you know the Mac App Store automatically provides OLD versions to OLD OS versions that can't run the latest version of an App, don't you ?

    This article is nothing to do with planned obsolescence - its about devices that are broken beyond economic repair or maybe need high risk / low yield repairs - sure you might be able to desolder and replace components at a surface mount level on a multi-layer board, but doing that at scale, you cause secondary damage a fraction of the time, and the technician time rapidly ends up outweighing the hardware costs.

    Apple policy means that half repaired but forensically recoverable storage isn't thrown out in the trash (as an example).

  10. Recycling data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I really like when my personal data gets recycled and reused, by someone else!!!

  11. except the NAND is encrypted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless they've been blatantly lying to everyone, the non-volatile memory is encrypted.

  12. Re:There are alternatives... by TRRosen · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty sure none of them want broken computers. Apple sells tons of computers as refurbs. if they can be fixed they're resold if they can't be they're recycled.

  13. Load of BS by TRRosen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple doesn't force anybody to do anything here. People hired by Apple are expected to do what Apple hired them to do. Apple refurbs and resells tons of devices. what it can't it recycles. Every junkyard in the world crushes tons of cars with usable parts. there simply comes a point when they are not worth the work required to reclaim them.

  14. Yes, because Apple buyers aren't paranoid idiots. by Brannon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple doesn't do anything to prevent anyone from reselling or giving away an iPhone or Mac--there is a thriving reseller market for both. Macs hold their value much better than PCs do, for example; specifically because they last longer. Apple itself has a refurbishment program that resells pre-owned Macs & iPhones.

    This is just about what happens when Apple sends some old device to an authorized recycler. Should Apple allow that recycler to piece out individual parts and sell them on a gray market? possibly selling hard drives with customer data still on them? Or should Apple insist that they shred the devices and recycle them.

    Reasonable people could disagree about which strategy is more responsible--but in the grand scheme of things to get pissed about, this is pretty lame. Do you have any idea how many electronic devices don't get recycled at all? Who recycles your old cable box? Who recycles your shoes?

    It's increasingly difficult to tell the difference between Slashdot and Breitbart--the same sort of manufactured outrage exist on both.

  15. Reuse materials by blocked_lol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It stands to reason, though, that if they want to make phones from reused materials then they have to strip everything down to the raw materials so they can reuse them, no?

    > After sorting, the materials are sold and used for production stock in new products. No reuse. No parts harvesting. No resale.

    Sounds like they're recycling the raw materials, just not the parts. Not 100% ideal, but it beats them winding up in a landfill.

  16. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by jenningsthecat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Say what?

    Yup, the idea that components can be reused is absurd.

    While re-using parts soldered onto PCB's is usually not practical, there certainly ARE components such as keyboards, displays, and drives that could well be re-used. But that's not even the real point - in may cases we're talking about fully functional devices that are being shredded. That's outright fucking criminal. Each device represents a huge investment of energy - therefore each device should be used as long as it works and someone wants it. Destroying fully functional equipment 'because business' or 'because shareholders' is stupid, shortsighted, and immoral.

    Repair is likely to cost as much as buying a new one...

    'Uneconomical to repair'? Most often these days, that's a pile of contrived bullshit. Manufacturers set it up that way. They do so partly by purposely making equipment difficult or impossible to service, and by charging scandalous prices for replacement parts. They also do it by having artificially low prices for their goods. If the REAL costs were factored in, (depletion of natural resources, environmental damage, climate change, the human costs of slave labour, etc.), goods would be much more expensive to purchase, as they should be. Repairability and longevity would then be not only cost-effective, but necessary, and the market for used equipment would be huge. Instead, we have companies fattening their bottom lines at the expense of future generations, in the service of a Ponzi scheme of an economy whose only guiding principle is "more growth is better, and unlimited growth is best". Which, incidentally, is the guiding principle of cancer, infections, and a whole host of other similar phenomena which rob human beings of life and dignity.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  17. How dare recyclers recycle! by radarskiy · · Score: 2

    If the devices can be repaired or reused, people wouldn't be sending them to recyclers.

    "Grandstanding effort" indeed, just not grandstanding by Apple.

  18. I am going to stand up for Apple for once by avandesande · · Score: 2

    So let me get this straight, people turn stuff in to apple and and sends them to a recycler to have them recycled to for some contract price. Why in gods name would apple let them profiteer by reselling them instead? That would be nuts.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
  19. Not surprising in the least... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who thinks Apple cares about recycling is completely blind to what is really happening behind the scenes.

    Not only Apple does not recycle crap, they also are actively spending money via lobbying to kill stuff like the right to repair bill which would help independent repair shops to fix iPhones, Macs and whatnot and prolong their lives.
    The "official repair" Apple does usually ammounts to throwing away easily repairable units to force costumers to buy refurbished models or newer ones, and they are constantly pushing towards strategies to block independent repair efforts with stuff like error 53 and the more recent software blocking of fingerprint reader replacement on the iPhone 7.

    With crap like eliminating "legacy ports" like the headphone jack due to them being "corageous", they've effectively pushed more bluetooth headsets and more dongles into the market which has even more toxic and non-recyclable materials that will be purchased in greater number and will be replaced or lost in a more constant rate, instead of regular headphones that requires less electronic parts.

    But the company couldn't care less as long as they are making truckloads of money, which is something most corporations do anyways. It's just damn insulting that they keep trying to push this bullshit and that parts of the press swallow it whole. F*cking predatory company that keeps feeding on public misinformation.

    It's known that there are no easy ways of disassembling and reusing old phones component parts to make new ones because it just costs too much more to recover whatever materials were used, but they have no qualms on feeding on regular costumers lack of knowledge on this to paint themselves as a good company that is trying to do "something" about it. Protip for those who don't know about this: it'll result in nothing, and they already know it. It's a token effort. There are no good ways of harvesting raw materials for eWaste to make new components in a financially viable manner, because if there was everyone would be doing it.

    Currently, anyone that is well informed or an active part of the problem know full well that the best way of generating less waste is to use electronics for as long as possible. If smartphone companies really wanted to generate less electronic waste, they'd change release schedules and development time to force consumers to keep their damn phones for a longer period of time, plus do as much as possible to keep older units working instead of making them useless after a certain ammount of OS updates. Another way is to make the architecture more open and standardized so that electronics can be used in multiple ways - like old desktops and laptops that you can install some Linux distro and use as an HTPC or something. Of course, Apple stuff is the harderst type of hardware to do something like that.

    The only thing Apple really has on their favor is that even older laptops and desktops retain some value in the used market, and some of it's users keeps their stuff even years after they purchased it. But make no mistake. If Apple could find a way to avoid that without a huge fanbase backlash, they would.

  20. Functional 2nd hand devices resold for reuse by spinitch · · Score: 2

    Apple has a recycling and reuse link on their website. Some countries directed to Brightstar who runs some programs. Functional working devices get a higher price at appropriate market rates. Compare to Gazelle or others. The working devices are typically resold for customer reuse in as is condition. Apple also refurbs and resells products e.g. Certified pre-owned(CPO). Scrap from damaged non functioning devices appears to be the scope of not reusing. Guessing Apple wants to ensure no bad parts circulating from unauthorized repair dealers. Since it is tough to judge quality beyond the casing of conditions of used parts Apple to be safe does not want other electronics circulating and risking a customer incident which while not condoned by Apple , still they want to demonstrate took extra care to deter potential danger. Perhaps an overly cautious legal stance or PR since potentially some components could be reused safely but swept up in a cost benefit decision. Apple also wants accountability that recycling done vs burying especially in a developing country counter to Basel convention disposal of e waste. Slashdot should direct the article to the waste land since misleading .

  21. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by jeremyp · · Score: 2

    What part of "Running the latest version of macOS very well thanks" did you not understand?

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  22. Apple Certified Repair tech says Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Posting anon as I'm a certified Apple repair technician. But I hate them. So much.

    The design choices they continue to make with each generation are getting progressively more anti-consumer for no good reason. Glued-in batteries. Keyboards that are part of the chassis and require full disassembly of the entire laptop plus $150 for the part. When keyboards and batteries are some of the most commonly-replaced items in the laptop. Soldered in memory, which is unnecessary... no Apple laptop is thinner than a SODIMM.

    And what the fuck is with their proprietary SSD modules? Everyone else is using standard M.2 NVMe. But Apple? Nope... they have their own version which not only has a LARGER connector, but is proprietary and incompatible. Doesn't perform any better, but they can charge to 5-10 times more for it.

    Make no mistake about it: these are 100% without question decisions made to ensure early obsolescence and prevent users from making decisions that are financially in the user's best interest. Instead, Apple gets more money out of their mindless cult zealots who would rather be raped for the sake of owning a fashion statement versus a quality tool.