Apple tries to explain why it pulled out from EPEAT

Apple turned some heads a few days ago when it was revealed that it pulled all of its products out of the US government's Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT). The list was first released in 2006 and was created by the Environmental Protection Agency to certify tech products that can have their materials recycled.

In a statement to the website The Loop, an Apple spokesperson said:

Apple takes a comprehensive approach to measuring our environmental impact and all of our products meet the strictest energy efficiency standards backed by the US government, Energy Star 5.2. We also lead the industry by reporting each product's greenhouse gas emissions on our website, and Apple products are superior in other important environmental areas not measured by EPEAT, such as removal of toxic materials.

The statement doesn't really state why Apple decided to pull its products from EPEAT. However, this move is already impacting its business. The Wall Street Journal reports that the city of San Francisco's Department of Environment has now issued an order to all of the city's government agencies that Apple's laptops and desktops cannot be purchased with money from the city.

Melanie Nutter, director of San Francisco’s Department of Environment, is quoted as saying, "We are disappointed that Apple chose to withdraw from EPEAT and we hope that the city saying it will not buy Apple products will make Apple reconsider its participation."

Source: The Loop

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Source Filmmaker now available as free beta

Next Story

Microsoft and Motorola stay some patent lawsuits

74 Comments

View more comments

Jason Stillion said,
Apple's model of frequent new stuff, while only typically supporting the "current" product, plus one behind. Apple products don't have longevity.

And where is your evidence? the first and second generation iPhone were quickly obsolete due to rapid improvements in technology but the 3GS is still with us even 3 yeas after its launch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_3GS with iOS 6.0 coming to the 3GS iPhone thus pushing the total life span out to almost 4 years (by the time the next iOS is released) if you bought it on launch day. I don't know about you but I can't think of a single Android phone that has received four years worth of Android upgrades from the handset vendor - heck, the Samsung Galaxy S was released almost a year after the iPhone 3GS and Samsung has refused to provide Android 4.0 for the said phone (the claim that it doesn't have the hardware to support Android 4.0 is a load of crap - all Samsung would have to do is remove TouchWiz and it would fit into the builtin storage without any problems).

When it coms to the iPad for example, the iPad 1st generation model is not supported by iOS but based on the use of the iPad 2 as a 'price fighting product' as they've done with the 3GS I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing the iPad hang around for at least 3-4 years. Again, if you look at the history of Apple the best you can do is point out a few examples out of a long history of supporting hardware longer than the industry average - heck, they even provided firmware updates for laptops sold in 2010! even Dell or Lenovo can't be bothered providing an upgrade to UEFI for laptops/desktops from 2010 so then end users can experience the improved boot speed provided by Windows 8 in combination with UEFI.

Edited by Mr Nom Nom's, Jul 11 2012, 4:21pm :

Spirit Dave said,
I love how Apple products can't be bought by SF anymore so they'll spend money on nastier products which get replaced more frequently, causing an overall larger effect on the environment and cost to the tax payer ... all that tech support they'll need hehe

Why would they be replaced more frequently? Apple and their supporters like to point out how many computers are running XP. Many of those computers running XP are quite old. Meanwhile, Apple just obsoleted a bunch of their computers today, including my 4 year old Mac mini, which will soon be upgraded from snow leopard to Win8.

Spirit Dave said,
I love how Apple products can't be bought by SF anymore so they'll spend money on nastier products which get replaced more frequently, causing an overall larger effect on the environment and cost to the tax payer ... all that tech support they'll need hehe
Right. Non-serviceable product=longer lifespan over a repairable and serviceable product. Hmm, I don't think so. If I had to replace my entire car every time a belt went out, how is that better?

KCRic said,
Right. Non-serviceable product=longer lifespan over a repairable and serviceable product. Hmm, I don't think so. If I had to replace my entire car every time a belt went out, how is that better?

Logic is useless against them.

Mr Nom Nom's said,

When it coms to the iPad for example, the iPad 1st generation model is not supported by iOS but based on the use of the iPad 2 as a 'price fighting product' as they've done with the 3GS I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing the iPad hang around for at least 3-4 years.

3-4 years? sure, unless Apple plays again their "forced obsoletization" card as they did with the iPad 1, which is way more powerful than the 3GS but they simply decided to drop support for it.
Or well, remember Siri? yeah, a 100% web based product that the iPhone 4 doesn't have the "processing power" for it. As if my Motorola L7e from 2006 with a no-name sub 100mhz CPU couldn't do offline voice recognition...

That's Apple, forcing your product to become obsolete as they please.

gonchuki said,

That's Apple, forcing your product to become obsolete as they please.

Yeh, I hate it when my device stops working completely because it doesn't receive new features/updates. *rolls eyes*

KCRic said,
Right. Non-serviceable product=longer lifespan over a repairable and serviceable product. Hmm, I don't think so. If I had to replace my entire car every time a belt went out, how is that better?

I was just making a joke you bunch of muppets.

But you just made an incorrect statement, as Apple products are all 100% serviceable ... even if it is via Apple. Who in my experience will do a good job quickly. IT support guys in house at companies are almost always lazy ass geeks who will never get things done anyway. Sorry if anyone here is one of those IT Support managers, but I do question every one of them when it comes to their genuine knowledge.

Trihawk7 said,
Hmm, if Steve Jobs was still here none of this would have happened... Too bad his isn't :'(

Oh Jesus... Of course this comment was incoming sooner or later... *eyeroll*

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

Oh Jesus... Of course this comment was incoming sooner or later... *eyeroll*

GS:mac

Nah, not Jesus, STEVE. It's easy to get mixed up I know

Trihawk7 said,
Hmm, if Steve Jobs was still here none of this would have happened... Too bad his isn't :'(

What a load of crap - Steve was involved with the development of a the next line of products right up till his death. I wish some people would shut up and stop perpetuating this messiah crap that some how Steve Jobs was the anointed one just as it irritates me when people go on about how perfect and wonderful Bill Gates is.

Lame asses will always be lame asses. The problem is far bigger than apple does this better than the other or vie versa...

Recyclability of a product is necessary if we want our children to have a planet that we just borrowed to them... (I don't remember who said something like that but I think some people should think about it)

Any company choosing to build non recyclable or not easy to dismantle products is commiting a crime against our environment because they are not smart enough to figure out a way to built a better, slimmer, cooler product which is more green altogether...

As for companies trying to built a greener image by using solar power... the impact of building solar panels in terms of CO2 is enormous and not easily balanced by the use of their production...

MaDDentist said,
Lame asses will always be lame asses. The problem is far bigger than apple does this better than the other or vie versa...

Recyclability of a product is necessary if we want our children to have a planet that we just borrowed to them... (I don't remember who said something like that but I think some people should think about it)

Any company choosing to build non recyclable or not easy to dismantle products is commiting a crime against our environment because they are not smart enough to figure out a way to built a better, slimmer, cooler product which is more green altogether...

As for companies trying to built a greener image by using solar power... the impact of building solar panels in terms of CO2 is enormous and not easily balanced by the use of their production...

Agreed - the problem is bigger than Apple. The cause and the solution lays in the hands of consumers demanding replaceable components and more importantly voicing the fact that they would happily trade 'thinness' for the sake of having a computer with more usable replaceable parts. Apple may like to think they're trend setters but the demand for thinner and lighter laptops is an industry wide trend that is being pushed by end users who want devices that are more mobile. If people think the MacBook Pro 'Retina' is bad then I think they need to prepare for the tsunami that the tablets (iPad, Windows 8 RT, Android etc) will unleash given the low price entry point, portability, and short life span when compared to more traditional desktops/laptops/etc.

The big problem is that the MAC fanatic's buy new laptop, phones and gadgets when an update comes out. Eventually, that's going to impact the environment, so making these a bit more unfriendly, poses a higher risk than those who keep their computers. phones and gadgets longer.

hagjohn said,
The big problem is that the MAC fanatic's buy new laptop, phones and gadgets when an update comes out. Eventually, that's going to impact the environment, so making these a bit more unfriendly, poses a higher risk than those who keep their computers. phones and gadgets longer.

1) It is Mac not MAC.
2) Don't pant every Mac user as a fanatic - most Mac users I know tend to hoard their devices for years; I kept my last Mac for 4 years with this current one I'll probably keep for around 4-5 years too.

ahhell said,
It's "paint" not "pant".
Don't knock him on it. He was thinking about the next pair of tight nut squeezing hipster pants he was going to buy while he typed that. Happens to the breast of us.

Apple's insistence on Aluminum and other components that are NOT environmentally friendly are a concern, even if Apple wants to try to fool the public.

(Just by using Aluminum instead of plastic or another composite or metal, Apple's devices produce 40% more green house gases when manufactured.)

This also doesn't even begin to factor the disposal design of the products.

If you don't care about the environment, that is your choice. However, you cannot be a fan of Apple and also dedicated to the environment, as Apple is not eco-friendly despite how often they try to say they are.

(They don't always tell the complete truth and this is where they get by with misinformation.

This is a peeve, that annoys me, especially when they cheat consumers that mean well. For example, their MacBook site today reads that it is the most advanced Notebook, but based on what qualifications?

They don't tell their customers that the GPU is lacking, nor would they dare to do a comparison to other similar notebook models. Even as 'new' and 'cool' as the new MacBook may be, this doesn't remove the fact that there are notebooks that are FASTER, LIGHTER, THINNER - and 1/2 the cost.

So what metric are they using to say it is the most advanced?

The only 'plus' is the display being a jump from the other's 1920x1080 screens, which becomes a problem, as the GPU in the Macbook stutters using even the OS X composer on things like web pages, let alone trying to get a game to get OK FPS, which is a problem even at lower resolutions scaled up due to the lack of a dedicated display controller, forcing the GPU to do the scaling.)


Because apple know majority of consumer won't care much about spec because those people are 99% clouded by their taste of design without even thinking of comparing other notebook base on their look. That's the best answer i can think of.

I am disappointed in Apple's behavior here. I will not purchase any more Apple products until they correct their behavior.

Out of curiosity, if someone can side load Window 7 on their mac laptop etc. Why can't it be done the reverse way like buying ultra book or buying dell and install OSX. Additionally, up until now how come no hacker that does jailbreak able to install ipad onto other tablet etc. Just curious.

minster11 said,
Out of curiosity, if someone can side load Window 7 on their mac laptop etc. Why can't it be done the reverse way like buying ultra book or buying dell and install OSX. Additionally, up until now how come no hacker that does jailbreak able to install ipad onto other tablet etc. Just curious.

It's possible...but not average user will love to risk it.

If I were a SF resident, I'd be pretty glad that my tax dollars aren't being used to buy overpriced computers that a Windows machine can do just fine. What do government agencies need Macs for?

Commenting is disabled on this article.