EPA: Apple notebooks are most eco-friendly

from now on, your only interest is Apple should be how to make a bong out of one!

Seems like GreenPeace should be targetting a lot of 'other' manufactuers if Apple is the 'best'

just wanted PR. Go after someone big, get attention.

You'll never convince Greenpeace of their errors. They're ideologically stunted pseudo-hippies that only listen to people that agree with their misguided views.

Thank you for making my day. I'm still rotflmao!!!

Giving both the EPA and Greenpeace some benefit of the doubt - I'd like to know precisely what's so different about their criteria that could lead to such different reports.

Interesting. The complaints of Greenpeace were mostly the use of toxic chemicals. So one of two things is true: Either Greenpeace is talking about an entirely different chemical (very probable), or something is awry in one of the two ranking systems.

(http://www.epeat.net/Criteria.aspx)

One of the things listed "required" is a product take-back. I didn't think Apple had this. They should be disqualified; am I wrong?

The EPAs assessment uses various criteria, Greenpeace focused on toxic materials. Interestingly, EPA ratings gave Mac product very good ratings for environmental toxins, even PVCs. That is contrary to Greenpeace's assertions about PVC. The EPA also gave poor Energy Conservation ratings and Materials Selection (recycled sources) to Apple's products.

However, there is one glaring omission and this invalidates that statement that all Apple's laptops have the best rating. The EPAs ratings for Apple laptops DO NOT INCLUDE MACBOOKS, only the MacBook Pros. So, we can't say because those laptops are not included. And they could contain PVCs, as their cases are not metal.

Second, Apple did not get the highest rating on their laptops. They got a Silver rating; the highest would have been a GOLD rating. We can't say their Silver is higher than all other notebook makers, as 140 some other non-Apple notebooks also had Silver ratings. There were no Gold ratings. I suppose you could say since they had equal to 140 others they are among the highest. But Bronze/Silver/Gold categories are not themselves quantitative.

Lastly, Greenpeaces assertions also focus much upon iPods, which have quite a bit more plastic in them. These estimates don't include music players.

Did Greenpeace overstate its claims? Maybe, but without better data we can't completely exhonerate Apple.

I wonder if Greenpeace takes into account the impact of the Itunes Music store and the iPod with respect to the removal of thousands if not millions of plastic discs, paper CD inserts, and Jewel cases that Apple has kept demand for very low by offering a way to keep thousands of songs in the palm of your hand and delivered electrnically. Sometimes its less about materials used and more about the bigger picture.

For every billion songs Apple sells via iTunage, I'd wager they keep at least 100 million CDs from being pressed. Word.