After Greenpeace claimed Apple’s iPhone contained toxic chemicals, California’s Center for Environmental Health said it has given Apple a 60-day legal notice that may be a precursor to a lawsuit. The CEH’s hoped-for result? That Apple with “reformulate their products to make them safer from cradle to grave, so they don’t pose a threat to consumers, workers or the environment.”
Apple has said previously they intend to remove the “phthalates” from their products by the end of 2008. In the meantime, the CEH will levy for Apple to put warning labels on their products that contain hazardous chemicals.
From Macworld:
The Center for Environmental Health wants Apple to clearly label the iPhone saying that it contains phthalates, but ultimately it wants the company to get rid of them altogether.“In general what we try to do is encourage the manufacturers through a negotiated settlement to reduce the use of these chemicals,” Caroline Cox, a spokeswoman for the Center for Environmental Health, told Macworld. “That would be our goal with Apple.”
It’s been my impression that Greenpeace has been paying special attention to Apple over recent months, perhaps disproportionately to Apple’s overall share in the consumer electronics space. On the other hand, Apple is probably the highest-profile American electronics company, so if you’re going to pick a target to shame, they’re a natural choice.
Apple faces potential environmental lawsuit [Macworld]
Interesting… and in May 2005 the National Institutes of Health’s journal “Environmental Health Perspectives 113: 1056-1061″ featured an extensive study regarding prenatal exposure to phthalates causing underdeveloped genitals in males.
There are just too many jokes, but I’ll resist.
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2007/10/04/if-wishes-were-iphones