14 DAY TRIAL // The Greenpeace report on Apple's iPhone blasted the company for using hazardous materials and has even led to a lawsuit against the company, but by Greanpeace's own admission, Apple has remained true to its promises and that the device respects environmental laws almost everywhere on the planet.
The Greenpeace report on the iPhone called the company out for using toxic brominated compounds which indicate the presence of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and hazardous PVC. Based on the report, Apple is being sued by The Center for Environmental Health, as California's Proposition 65 law states that products exposing consumers to phthalates or other chemicals known to be reproductive toxins or carcinogens must carry a warning label, but the device has none. "In general what we try to do is encourage the manufacturers through a negotiated settlement to reduce the use of these chemicals," said Caroline Cox, spokeswoman for the Center for Environmental Health. "That would be our goal with Apple."
But aside from the lack of a warning label, which is indeed a violation of California's laws, Apple's iPhone is nowhere near as bad as the Greenpeace report makes it out to be. Once again, the environmental agency has made a big racket over Apple and their high-profile products, but the truth is, there is really nothing to complain about. Greenpeace admits that the device meets the goals that Apple set for themselves and respects the European Reduction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) legislation too. In essence, all the Greenpeace report says is that the company has not moved as fast as the environmental agency had wished.
Much like in previous cases of Greenpeace reports on Apple's products, there is no comparison with other competing products and no foul play, just another case of riding on the Apple fame in order to make the headlines and get a lot of free press coverage.