Greenpeace Declares Nokia Super-Green, Nintendo Not-So-Much

greenguide.jpg

Greenpeace released its annual eco-rankings of electronics manufacturers. And the winner is… NOKIA, which scored a 7.45 out of 10 (10 being green-tastic). The whole report is worth a gander, but here’s the highlights, which I recommend reading to yourself in a Howard Cossell voice.

Bad news: Apple finished towards the middle of the pack with 4.7/10.

Apple fails to score top marks on this criterion because it uses unreasonably high threshold limits for BFRs and PVC in products that are allegedly PVC-/BFR-free. The company needs to be commended for running a bold advertising campaign highlighting the green credentials of its MacBooks. Apple still needs to commit to phasing out additional substances with timelines, improve its policy on chemicals and its reporting on chemicals
management.

Worse news: Nintendo brought up the rear with 1/10.

The company has banned phthalates and is monitoring use of antimony and beryllium and although it is endeavouring to eliminate the use of PVC, it has not set a timeline for its phase out. It continues to score zero on all e-waste criteria. On energy, Nintendo loses a point due to a second year of increases in greenhouse gas emissions, despite a commitment to cut CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases by 2% over each previous year.

How will any of this affect sales? I’m guessing not too much. Feel free to disagree.

[via EcoGeek]

This entry was posted in apple, environment, nintendo and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Greenpeace Declares Nokia Super-Green, Nintendo Not-So-Much

  1. spazzm says:

    One might disagree with Greenpeace on a lot of issues (I disagree with them on nuclear power and GM food, for example) but there’s no denying that they are the most influential pro-environment organisation around today. Sea Shepherd are doing good things, but they are a one-issue organisation with little or no political clout.

  2. toxonix says:

    I think it will impact sales. For example, I’m looking for a new, small, efficient refrigerator. I will tend towards a Samsung model rather than one made by Nintendo.

  3. spazzm says:

    Of course, if anyone has a better guide to buying green electronics than the one posted here, I’d love to hear about it.

    I’d be vert interested in which of the chip manufacturers I should go with, for example.

  4. Steven Leckart says:

    @Tyson: Greenpeace’s ranking is based off of info published by Nintendo, including the company’s Environmental Control Standards, which is linked to in the Greenpeace report.

    http://www.nintendo.co.jp/corporate/en/csr/report2008/07/

    Not to say these rankings shouldn’t be taken with a grain of salt, but just saying they’re not bogus altogether.

  5. CANTFIGHTTHEDITE says:

    Yeah, SPAZZM, I was wondering the same thing. If someone has green ratings for PC component manufacturers (mobos, RAM, HDD, etc.), it would be very useful.

  6. nnguyen says:

    I read the headline, and then I saw the word “Apple” in the graphics, and I immediately knew Apple would be discussed in the post. Nevermind that other big companies are also included in the story.

    * sigh *

  7. phisrow says:

    Huh. I wonder what Nintendo is using Beryllium for… Quite pricey, extremely nasty to work with. Normally only seen in Real Serious Aerospace type applications.

  8. none says:

    Has anyone ever watched Whale Wars? I’ve never seen a more incompetant bunch of bunglers in my life. The head guy constantly seems to be setting up contrived situations that use outright deceit and manipulation to further his cause, and constantly seems to put his crew into unnecessary danger. I am against the whaling industry, but I wouldn’t sent the Sea Shepards one thin dime.

  9. therevengor says:

    “The company needs to be commended for running a bold advertising campaign…”

    Cos Apple has _never_ _EVER_ been commended for running a bold advertising campaign.

  10. Downpressor says:

    #8 made up for all the expected WHARGARBLE

  11. Latente says:

    why nintendo is at the last position?

    the DSi is made from pandas flesh.

  12. iRoy says:

    How can Apple be up there in the middle when they continually pump out products that have no access to the battery for Joe Public?

    Until they stop designing products that end up in the trash when the battery stops recharging they are not green.

  13. Hart says:

    Greenpeace parks its canvassers outside of my favorite bookstore every single day to try to get me to pay them money to take pictures of dead whales instead of actually stopping whaling. Long live Sea Shepherd. The world needs more of these kinds of “jerks”.

  14. woolie says:

    Greenpeace is not a credible source. It advocates whatever is fashionable to its funding sources.

  15. Steven Leckart says:

    Check out “Whale Wars” if you haven’t. Stars the co-founder of Greenpeace out on the high seas doing battle with whaling ships.

    http://animal.discovery.com/tv/whale-wars/

  16. Anonymous says:

    hey and the condomds are contaminating usa lakes

  17. jphilby says:

    “I have serious problems with their history”

    Yeah, all that stop-the-atom-bomb-test stuff, putting themselves in harm’s way to stop the harvesting of whales … shocking, huh?

  18. dculberson says:

    The beryllium sphere is cracked.

  19. ScottMcG says:

    So we’re calling something super-green and not mentioning Ruby Rhod?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSFg3pAprdg#t=2m7s

    Green? Super green.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Well, I think these kinds of subtle comparisons between electronics are silly.

    Do you want to help the environment? Stop buying the latest gadget every time it comes out. It doesn’t matter how eco friendly a new Nokia phone is, when you are buying the latest model every 6 months.

    Besides, Greenpeace is a cash-cow not an environmental organization, who would take their crap seriously.

  21. chiefted says:

    Seriously folks why oh why do you even report on this.

    1. Greenpeace always issues this thing
    2. Greenpeace is about as trustworthy as anyone with the last name of Bush.

    Can we stop giving Greenpeace credence for anything and move on.

    Thanks

  22. Tyson says:

    Nintendo continually scores badly on this thing because they refuse to give Greenpeace information, not because of anything they do.

  23. technogeek says:

    Frankly, I automatically discount anything Greenpeace says. I have serious problems with their history and would be much happier if they went away and stopped poisoning the discussion.

  24. dssstrkl says:

    Greenpeace is a disreputable company that does NOTHING for the environment. All they do is collect donations and make noises so they can collect more donations. They didn’t even bother sending the Esmerelda down to the Antarctic last whaling season after collecting money last year to fund that voyage.

    Everyone should ignore Greenpeace and donate to Sea Shepherd. They might be jerks, but at least they get shit done.

  25. Chris S says:

    I wonder how much Nintendo has saved in emissions worldwide by shipping a console that only uses 17 watts when running, vs 200 watts or more for the XBox or PS3?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

More BB

Boing Boing Video

Flickr Pool

Digg

Wikipedia

Advertise

Displays ads via FM Tech

RSS and Email

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution. Boing Boing is a trademark of Happy Mutants LLC in the United States and other countries.

FM Tech