Greenpeace wags finger at eco-laggards
But lays off Apple
Greenpeace has released its latest "Cool IT" report ranking which tech firms are doing most to combat global warming and reduce emissions, and which are failing to rise to the challenge.
The group urged companies to use the upcoming Copenhagen Climate summit to take action to improve things.
Melanie Francis, Greenpeace International climate campaigner, said: “Though the IT industry will profit from strong emissions reduction targets, disappointingly, it is not coming close to its potential of leading the way to a low carbon economy.
"IT giants like Microsoft, Google and IBM need to rapidly put their weight behind a strong deal at Copenhagen or the climate will lose out to dirty industry’s negative lobbying.”
IBM keeps its top spot because of its "extensive range of climate solutions", but HP is only one point behind. Dell, Nokia and Sony were reprimanded for failing to improve their scores on those released last May.
Apple was also congratulated for its recent decision to leave the US Chambers of Commerce until the organisation came up with a decent climate change strategy.
Sharp is also singled out as the only Japanese company to support its government's emissions targets. But Nokia, Dell, Microsoft and Sony were all criticised for staying silent on the subject.
Google was criticised for not disclosing its own greenhouse gas emissions, nor its electricity usage if memory serves...
Greenpeace began looking at the tech industry with an examination of energy use and the materials like PVCs and Brominated Flame Retardants used in gadgets and laptops. This seems to have morphed, like much of the environmental movement, to a focus on global warming.
First in Greenpeace's firing line was Apple despite its hippy-chic credentials.
The top 14 firms:
The complete list, with several new entrants, will appear in early 2010. ®
Copenhagen vs Patents
Small wonder that Greenpeace is urging IBM, etc to push for a signing of a treaty that has the potential to revoke Patents and to ban future ones under mandatory technology transfer arrangements.
I suspect that e.g. IBM has enough IP lawyers to spare to peruse the UN-FCCC document drafts and the various "options" proposed. Doesn't take long to find the offending clauses.
Always check your pockets after talking to Greenpeace.
Just wanted to correct two bits of FUD you are peddling, there:
Apple are one of the few companies who _HAVE_ done something to reduce the toxic materials in their products, unlike HP, Dell, etc. who just say they will. See http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/
Apple batteries are replaceable, just not _USER_ replaceable. To replace them, you take your iThing into an Apple store and get them to replace it for you. OK, so it may take a day or three, but the upshot is they recycle the old battery at the same time. How many user replaceable batteries get recycled? Oh, and not forgetting that user replaceable batteries don't last as long because they have a lower capacity (due to space being taken up by mountings, etc necessary to facilitate their user-replaceableness).
Slightly echoing Roland above here: if you're a CEO or COO, and you read a Greenpeace report that says your company has a very high Gaia rating or whatever, then you have a clear indication that your company's in trouble. Specifically, you aren't producing anything, you aren't selling anything, and you are in all probability clinically dead.
What I want to know is whether Greenpeace's interns ate any meat while compiling this report? According to the front page of today's Times and Comrade Stern, that's what's killing the planet at the moment. Surprise surprise. Whenever you hear talk about the ecosystem, you never have to sniff very hard to detect the foetid, decaying stink of the ascetic.
"Look at me! Look at my superior way of living! You can tell I'm better than you, materialist weakling, because you don't have the endurance to live in a cave among your own excrement, eating nothing but twigs, now do you! Yes, go on, leave! Your punishment will come in the afterlife, or possibly 2050, or some other date far enough in the future that you'll have forgotten my prediction by the time it comes to test it!"