14 DAY TRIAL // There is no love lost between Apple and Greenpeace, and it is becoming a well known fact. In the latest rankings of major electronics makers for their environmental friendliness, Apple was given the lowest scores.
Greenpeace spokeswoman Iza Kruszewska said that Apple failed to stop using several types of harmful chemicals in its manufacturing, and -- unlike many other companies -- has not set any timetable for phasing them out.
Apple, however, sees things differently. "We disagree with Greenpeace's rating and the criteria they chose," Apple spokeswoman Sheryl Seitz said. "Apple has a strong environmental track record and has led the industry in restricting and banning toxic substances such as mercury, cadmium and hexavalent chromium, as well as many brominated flame retardants."
By looking at the Greenpeace list, one might come to the conclusion that Apple's products are especially toxic, but that is not the case, according to standards developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
Interestingly enough, the Green Electronics Council, funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, runs a web site that allows buyers to judge products on a score comprised of 23 different categories established by the IEE, including the materials used, energy conservation and packaging. Apple scored generally better than Lenovo and Dell. Furthermore, none of the computer makers in the Greenpeace study actually eliminated the use of BPRs and toxic vinyl plastics.
Kruszewska conceded that the choices of manufacturers and judging criteria were subjective, but pointed out that Greenpeace tried to be "fair and transparent" in giving advance warning to the companies on the way they would be rated. She also added that Greenpeace's relationship with Apple has deteriorated since it set up a spoof web site devoted to criticizing Apple's environmental policies. "Once we launched the 'Green my Apple' Web site, we stopped hearing from Apple altogether."