Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Earth Apple

Apple Is Now Forcing Its Suppliers to Go 'Green' (afr.com) 114

Posted by EditorDavid from the think-different dept.
Apple is already running on 100% green energy, according to Fast Company. But Apple is still "keen to show it's a good corporate citizen," reports the Australian Financial Review: Apple's annual supplier responsibility report released on Thursday revealed 20 manufacturing supplier facilities had been removed from the company's supply chain for breaches of environmental permits or workplace rules. "Smelters and refiners deeper in our supply chain are held to similar standards and if they exhibit a lack of commitment to meet our supplier code of conduct, they risk losing Apple's business," the report said...

In 2018, Apple completed 770 audits of its supplier manufacturing facilities, logistics and repair centres and contact centre facilities. There were also 279 third-party mineral smelter and refiner audits conducted... Apple's 13th annual supplier responsibility progress report said all final assembly points for iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple Watch, AirPods and HomePod, were now certified zero waste to landfill, while conserving billions of litres of water and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Apple's suppliers in 45 countries have diverted 1 million tonnes of garbage in three years, saved 28.7 gigalitres of water and reduced greenhouse gas emissions by more than 466,000 annualised metric tons, which is the equivalent to taking 100,000 cars off the road for one year.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Is Now Forcing Its Suppliers to Go 'Green' More

Apple Is Now Forcing Its Suppliers to Go 'Green'

Comments Filter:

  • Having to replace a bunch of parts and drop $700 because a MacBook Pro's butterfly keyboard broke isn't green, Apple. These things have embodied energy, implicit in their manufacture. They're not disposable.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kohath ( 38547 )

      What about [made up story]?

    • Re:What about planned obsolescence? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Freischutz ( 4776131 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @01:15PM (#58243174)

      Having to replace a bunch of parts and drop $700 because a MacBook Pro's butterfly keyboard broke isn't green, Apple. These things have embodied energy, implicit in their manufacture. They're not disposable.

      Huh? I got one of the first MacBooks with a butterfly keyboard, when it broke they happily fixed mine under warranty. I'm now on my third butterfly keyboard equipped MacBook and have not had any problems since.

    • Apple and Green cannot go together with their current business practices such as lobbying against right to repair.

  • Apple is "Green"? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Piranhaa ( 672441 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @12:51PM (#58243074)

    I hope more people see past Apple's sleight of hand here. They design their devices in such a way that makes it very difficult (or impossible) to repair, and it's usually just cheaper to replace it out of warranty since they charge exorbitant prices to due so and don't authorize third-party repair. E-waste is a real thing, but they completely ignore this because "green electricity" is easier to get a headline for and doesn't affect their bottom line.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Kohath ( 38547 )

      Agreed. No amount of effort will ever satisfy critics. No one should bother trying. Just ignore them.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mashiki ( 184564 )

      Simple and short, they're pandering to the environmentalist crowd or aligned crowd. Likely the same people who are buying their products and there's been some noise about how their products really aren't green. Really it's cheap astroturfing, that can be easily canned out via a press release and ignored unless the noise starts picking up again.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I hope more people see past Apple's sleight of hand here. They design their devices in such a way that makes it very difficult (or impossible) to repair, and it's usually just cheaper to replace it out of warranty since they charge exorbitant prices to due so and don't authorize third-party repair. E-waste is a real thing, but they completely ignore this because "green electricity" is easier to get a headline for and doesn't affect their bottom line.

      Are you intentionally just inviting someone to pitch Apple's recycling and refurb programs? All these programs absolutely affect their bottom line. Not everyone is as strapped with cash as they are and can afford to do what they do, but Jesus it's not nothing, try reading past the headline.

    • This is only partially true. Yes, E-Waste is a substantial problem. But climate change is a much more serious environmental problem by any reasonable stretch. If someone is producing E-Waste but isn't contributing to CO2 output that's a net win. Not all environmental problems are the same priority.

      • This is only partially true. Yes, E-Waste is a substantial problem. But climate change is a much more serious environmental problem by any reasonable stretch.

        The two problems are not unrelated. Reuse means less devices are produced, which means less industrial pollution. Recycling is a distant second. It's better than landfilling, but it doesn't reduce emissions nearly as much as reuse. And for older portable devices, reuse often requires repair.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by tsa ( 15680 )

      Yep, you're right. So let them build a new factory in Trump Land, powered by the dirtiest coal plants mankind can build. What does it matter? /s

      • You don't seem to be able to separate Trump's rhetoric from reality. Yes, he's a USA-First, (actually Me first, but whatever) coal-is-best, fuck all the other countries except those run by dictators who pretend to like him, climate change is a hoax-er.

        But his reality is at odds with what's happening in the US. Factories continue to close. Coal power plants continue to be shuttered. Coal mines aren't reopening, and are instead shutting down. Coal is so uneconomic right now that not even government subsidies

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tsa ( 15680 )

          It was meant as a sarcastic lame joke. I don't live in the US but I read about it and it's good to see states just ignoring Trump because they want to be green and/or green alternatives are cheaper than coal. The US is doing more to reduce greenhouse gases than my country the Netherlands.

    • How does Apple ignore e-waste? (Score:5, Informative)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @03:34PM (#58243694)

      E-waste is a real thing, but they completely ignore this

      How on earth can you claim this?

      Not only does Apple accept every product for free for recycling or resale (they will give you some credit if they can sell it again), Apple also carefully recycles each item themselves to extract as much material as possible.

      In fact Apple has gone so far (in a keynote last year) as to say a stated goal is to eliminate the need for raw materials, and get all of the material they need for new devices from recycled ones!

      Apple is the model for how all companies should behave with regards to e-waste.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        How on earth can you claim this?

        Not only does Apple accept every product for free for recycling or resale (they will give you some credit if they can sell it again), Apple also carefully recycles each item themselves to extract as much material as possible.

        In fact Apple has gone so far (in a keynote last year) as to say a stated goal is to eliminate the need for raw materials, and get all of the material they need for new devices from recycled ones!

        Apple is the model for how all companies should behave with regards to e-waste.

        How on Earth can you claim this?

        To start with, that's great that Apple will accept old Apple devices.... just have to hope you live near an Apple store. And since most don't, they will take the easy approach and discard it. People are lazy by default and will take the easy approach, not the correct approach.

        And Apple doesn't do recycling, they send it off to a third party recycler. As from the Apple website:

        we’ll send it to our recycling partner

        https://www.apple.com/shop/trade-in

        Now, the thing with recycling is, it uses a lot of energy and in m

  • This is why I recently switched from Android to iP (Score:3)

    by rgbe ( 310525 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @12:55PM (#58243094)
    Iâ(TM)ve been a long time Android user and was dismayed by all the manufacturer environmental records. Apple rate along side the Fairphone (https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/reports/greener-electronics-2017/) on Greenpeaceâ(TM)s guide to green electronics. Apple is definitely not a perfect corporate citizen, but there are some things they are doing much better than the rest.

  • Apple could do more toward their own goal by easing up a little bit and using those resources to create a cheaper low end model of the phone. Have people buy a 95% purity-test phone instead of whatever Xiaomi or OnePlus are selling.

    No amount of effort will get environmental zealots' approval anyway.

    • Geeze! Now you're complaining. If it helps the bottom line, why argue?

    • Apple makes loads of profit per unit, if they wanted to lower their prices, they could do that already. They're not interested in those users, because those users aren't going to spend big bucks on apps or media.

      If Apple wants to be more environmentally friendly, they should encourage repair. But they're not interested in that either, because they want to sell new units... at their typical high-profit prices.

  • Apple is still "keen to show it's a good corporate citizen," reports the Australian Financial Review:

    Apple's a good example of corporatism, because they literally invented a tax dodging system whose name sounds like one of those made-up degrading sex acts. ("Double Irish With A Dutch Sandwich" sounds like you take two shots of whiskey, then slap two prostitutes with your penis at the same time.) But they're not a good example of being a good citizen, for the same reason.

    • Apple is still "keen to show it's a good corporate citizen," reports the Australian Financial Review:

      Apple's a good example of corporatism, because they literally invented a tax dodging system whose name sounds like one of those made-up degrading sex acts. ("Double Irish With A Dutch Sandwich" sounds like you take two shots of whiskey, then slap two prostitutes with your penis at the same time.) But they're not a good example of being a good citizen, for the same reason.

      The EU forced Ireland to shut the 'Double Irish' down in 2015 and they are now kicking the Irish in the nuts over the newer variants of it. Some of those have been shut down as well. The 'Dutch Sandwich' scheme was invented by Joop Wijn, dutch State Secretary of Economic Affairs, with the diligent help from a battalion of US corporate tax lawyers in 2003 (meaning that he was basically just the enabler aka. useful idiot). The EU is currently nut kicking the Dutch in order to get this loophole closed as well

      • It's also worth keeping in mind that Apple is not the only user of these schemes by a long shot.

        There's no shortage of sleazebags out there, but they are widely credited with inventing this scheme.

  • Going Green, is same as Organic (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SirAstral ( 1349985 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @01:28PM (#58243230)

    Just marketing words to make uninformed people feel better.

    Everything costs to make and making things out of "green" things is not automatically greener. I had the same complaint about Incandescent vs LED bulbs. What is involved in each one? Most people just talk about the run time. Check out the worlds longest burning bulb.
    https://www.popularmechanics.c... [popularmechanics.com]

    LED's are made of plastic and plastic is a hydrocarbon, and they break down and expire and will go into land fills too. Most of them are engineered to only barely meet the very weak regulatory requirements to be energy efficient. Apple is no more green or honest than De Beers and blood diamonds.

    The only objective with announcements like this are to win brownie points and nothing else. Apple can require whatever they want, their suppliers will just put on enough of a facade to look green so Apple can say they are green because there is a shiny new badge saying its green... green or not. Kinda like how Monsanto keeps staying in business under different names despite the destruction they have wrought aided entirely by regulatory agencies that claim to be there to protect us.

    Any yes, people are dumb enough to believe it, you can most definitely fool most of the people most of the time. If you use the internet and do not see that one basic truth then you are part of that unfortunate majority.

    • Re: Going Green, is same as Organic (Score:4, Informative)

      by c6gunner ( 950153 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @02:53PM (#58243526) Homepage

      What is involved in each one? Most people just talk about the run time. Check out the worlds longest burning bulb.
      https://www.popularmechanics.c... [www.popularmechanics.c]

      LED's are made of plastic and plastic is a hydrocarbon, and they break down and expire and will go into land fills too. Most of them are engineered to only barely meet the very weak regulatory requirements to be energy efficient.

      Wtf? You can't be serious with this shit ....

      The LED bulbs I have in my home right now literally use 1/10th the electricity of an equivalent incandescent bulb. That's not "barely energy efficient", that's an order of magnitude more efficient. They also last a hell of a lot longer. So far I've gotten 3 years out of them and lost 1. In that time period I would have replaced a minimum of 27 incandescent bulbs. Probably more.

      Lastly your "world's longest burning bulb" has lasted as long as it has because the filament is ridiculously thick. Which makes it even LESS efficient than a standard incandescent bulb. The damn thing is basically a resistance heater which happens to produce some light. If you think that this is in any way more "green" than modern LED bulbs, you've been smoking a bit too much green yourself ...

      • You seem to have missed the point of my post.

        You do realize that the efficiency of the end product is not the ONLY important factor here right? Materials have energy costs themselves. Are you factoring the cost to mine those hydrocarbons? How about the cost to fabricate them? You are just one individual, some folks have really bad experiences with LEDs not performing as expected and so those actually increase the energy and waste required to have more efficient bulbs. How about the damage done to the e

        • You are just one individual, some folks have really bad experiences with LEDs not performing as expected and so those actually increase the energy and waste required to have more efficient bulbs.

          That sounds like a load of utter bullshit. I tried to a quick google to see if anything like that could be found, and I came up empty.

          Do you have a source for that claim? Because switching to LEDs was one of the most awesome things I've done in my house, and I find it rather hard to believe your claim. Everyone I know who has done it has had a similar experience.

          • Yeah he's full of shit. I went traveling around some third world countries recently, and one of the things that struck me is that several rather poor countries I visited have essentially eliminated incandescent bulbs in favour of LEDs.

            We are talking about places where the average person makes 10% or less of what the average american makes. Places where an LED bulb costs between 2 and 5 hours wages at the average salary, yet I didn't see a single incandescent bulb the entire time I was there. Why? Becaus

            • Yes, we can all make up stories as well.

              But that is still a straw-man argument. The problem NOT just about how long a bulb runs and how much energy it saves operating for the end consumer only. Once again, since you seem to be too thick to understand. There is a cost to the materials those LED's need. Do those "technically" offset the cost of the energy & waste we have to consider? Or are you okay with destroying the environment just to shave a few pennies off your home lighting bill?

              I am not again

              • Yes, we can all make up stories as well.

                Yes, you've certainly demonstrated that.

                Look at the article. They had to show cost savings over 23 years to see a large number.

                That article is talking about a $162 saving, dimbulb. Given that you can now get decent LED bulbs for just about $2, that's something like an 80,000% ROI.

                You're getting your panties in a bunch over the 23 year all-inclusive projection, but they fucking give you a breakdown right above that, so you can do your own math. Energy cost difference alone:

                $180-$30 = $150
                $150 / 23 = $6.50 per year per bulb

                So the electricity savings alone over the course of one year are enoug

          • "That sounds like a load of utter bullshit."

            https://www.photonics.com/Arti... [photonics.com]
            https://www.eenewseurope.com/n... [eenewseurope.com]
            https://www.ledsmagazine.com/a... [ledsmagazine.com]

            I guess your "confirmation bias" switch is set to the on position?

            That or you did not even bother to check or just assumed that none existed, which is typical of an ignorant person.

            If facts will not change your mind how do you expect to become informed? the LED component itself is not the only thing that can fail.

            I have personally had 25% of my LED lights fail far t

            • Re: Going Green, is same as Organic (Score:4, Informative)

              by willy_me ( 212994 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @07:09PM (#58244602)

              LEDs must be used in modern light fixtures that have improved cooling. Older light fixtures were designed for incandescent bulbs and were often sealed with no air flow. This is fine for incandescent bulbs which can handle very high temperatures. But LED bulbs, despite generating less heat, will run too hot and incur a limited lifespan.

              So if one is upgrading to LED lights, be certain to check each fixture and change those that do not facilitate cooling of the LED bulb. If you do not, the LED lights will die early. FYI, compact florescent bulbs have the exact same problem.

  • Going green on the consumption end doesn't help (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Saturday March 09, 2019 @02:32PM (#58243458)
    All it does is force other consumers to move away from using green energy (switch to fossil fuels), because you are now using the green energy they used to use. e.g. Everyone used to use 20% green energy, 80% fossil fuels. Some company decides to buy up all 20% green energy for its own use so it can claim its energy consumption is 100% green. That forces everyone else to use 100% fossil fuel energy. And the net result is... 20% green energy, 80% fossil fuels - exactly the same as before this pointless gesture.

    To truly increase the fraction of energy derived from green sources, you have to change the supply end of power generation. That means adding new green power sources, and shutting down fossil fuel plants.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by tsa ( 15680 )

      They don't buy green energy. They produce their own. This makes them independent from whatever idiot is currently in power or controlling the energy flow.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You know how you, as a consumer, can effect the supply of goods? By buying those goods.

      If I run an energy market, and some customers only want "green" energy, I can charge them more for it than black energy. If nobody wants the black energy it's worthless.

      If I am looking to build a power plant, and I can get a better return on investment if it's green than black, then I'll build a green one.

      In the absence of government regulation forcing people to pay for the externalities of their business, consumer demand

  • Betcha the higher ups at (Cr)apple still drive/ride in limos, SUV's, take private jet trips, live in huge McMansions. Do as I say, not as I do.
  • If Apple was so concerned about what plastic is doing to the environment, perhaps it should make a phone that isn’t made of glass doesn’t require a thick plastic case for the vast majority of users. Apple has singlehandedly created and continues to fuel a massive market of third-party iPhone case makers, many of whom have much lower environmental standards and concerns that Apple alleges to possess. Apple’s self-righteous claims as a green company are overshadowed by the mess that it crea

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close