Greenpeace: Apple’s iPhone is killing our Green Earth
Posted by Will on Tuesday, October 16th, 2007 at 12:42 pm under Announcements, Apple, iPhone
We support protecting the environment as much as the next person, but sometimes Greenpeace can get a little annoying. This time around, the Eco-protectionist group is whining about some harmful chemicals found in Apple’s iPhone.
Turns out, the iPhone contains “toxic brominated compounds (indicating the presence of brominated flame retardants) and hazardous PVC.” Greenpeace took apart an iPhone and found “brominated compounds in half the samples, including in the phone’s antenna, in which they made up 10-percent of the total weight of the flexible circuit board.”
Apple has previously volunteered to rid their devices of these toxic compounds by late 2008, so we’re not sure what Greenpeace’s whining is all about. Seriously, these guys must really want Apple to hurry up and go “green” - they’ve put together a pretty extensive report (warning: PDF) on the iPhone’s toxic makeup.
Just make sure you don’t eat your iPhone, okay?
Keep reading for Greenpeace’s press release and a vid of the actual testing process.
International — Scientific tests, arranged by Greenpeace, reveal that Apple’s iPhone contains hazardous chemicals. The tests uncovered two types of hazardous substances, some of which have already been eliminated by other mobile phone makers.
In May, due to our successful Green my Apple campaign Steve Jobs, the boss of Apple, claimed: “Apple is ahead of, or will soon be ahead of, most of its competitors” on environmental issues.
We watched closely when the iPhone was launched in June for any mention of the green features of the phone from Apple. There was none.
So we bought a new iPhone in June and sent it our Research Laboratories in the UK. Analysis revealed that the iPhone contains toxic brominated compounds (indicating the prescence of brominated flame retardants (BFRs)) and hazardous PVC. The findings are detailed in the report, “Missed call: the iPhone’s hazardous chemicals”
There have been thousands of media articles about the iPhone. Few of them have discussed the phone’s environmental credentials. Check out our video of the disassembly of the iPhone and what the tests revealed:
An independent scientific laboratory tested 18 internal and external components of the iPhone and confirmed the presence of brominated compounds in half the samples, including in the phone’s antenna, in which they made up 10 percent of the total weight of the flexible circuit board. A mixture of toxic phthalates was found to make up 1.5 percent of the plastic (PVC) coating of the headphone cables.
“Steve Jobs has missed the call on making the iPhone his first step towards greening Apple’s products,” said Zeina Alhajj, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner. “It seems that Apple is far from leading the way for a green electronics industry as competitors, like Nokia, already sell mobile phones free of PVC”.
Dr. David Santillo, Senior Scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories, commented, “Two of the phthalate plasticisers found at high levels in the headphone cable are classified in Europe as ‘toxic to reproduction, category 2′ because of their long-recognised ability to interfere with sexual development in mammals. While they are not prohibited in mobile phones, these phthalates are banned from use in all toys or childcare articles sold in Europe. Apple should eliminate the use of these chemicals from its products range.”
Here’s a slideshow of how the iPhone was disassembled for testing:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/photosvideos/slideshows/iphone-toxic-hazardous-chemicals-test
The disassembling also revealed the iPhone’s battery was, unusually, glued and soldered in to the handset. This hinders battery replacement and makes separation for recycling, or appropriate disposal, more difficult, and therefore adds to the burden of electronic waste.
Behind the competition
Nokia is totally PVC free, Motorola and Sony Ericsson have already products on the market with BFR free components. Apple’s competitors have also identified extra toxic chemicals they intend to remove in the future - beyond current minimum legal requirements.
Nokia and Sony Ericsson have a global take-back policy for their phones and accept responsibility for reuse and recycling of phones they manufacture. That saves resources and helps prevent old phones from adding to the mountain of e-waste that has been dumped in Asia.
Apple does not have a global free take-back policy so the eventual fate of the between four and 10 million iPhones expected to be sold in its first year is uncertain.
With next month’s European launch of the iPhone, Apple should sell a version which is at least as green as the offerings from Sony Ericsson, Nokia and Motorola.
Only then can loyal fans of Steve Jobs believe that his promises of a greener Apple will bear any fruit. Right now Steve appears to have any green product news ‘on hold’.
October 16th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Everyone else is going green, Nokia has been for a while now, why not Apple? Also- it’s not just inside the iPhone, these substances are found in and on the earbuds.
Steve Jobs is actually ending the lineage of Apple Fanboys… you gotta find that a little funny!
October 16th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
[...] Thomas Ricker wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptTurns out, the iPhone contains “toxic brominated compounds (indicating the presence of brominated flame retardants) and hazardous PVC.” Greenpeace took apart an iPhone and found “brominated compounds in half the samples, including in … [...]
October 16th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
[...] Charlie White wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptInternational — Scientific tests, arranged by Greenpeace, reveal that Apple’s iPhone contains hazardous chemicals. The tests uncovered two types of hazardous substances, some of which have already been eliminated by other mobile phone … [...]
October 16th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
omg thyr destroyying our environment! :[
October 16th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
[...] willpark wrote an interesting post today on Greenpeace: Apple's iPhone is killing our Green EarthHere’s a quick excerptInternational — Scientific tests, arranged by Greenpeace, reveal that Apple’s iPhone contains hazardous chemicals. The tests uncovered two types of hazardous substances, some of which have already been eliminated by other mobile phone … [...]
October 16th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
No MMS, video recording, 3G, AND it’s not eco-friendly?!
October 17th, 2007 at 12:19 am
wtf- I think the point is being missed- it’s not just that it isn’t eco-friendly, it ruins your reproductive organs. I wrote a bit on this about 12 hours before the story here, but with a very different take than the masses here apparently-
http://www.nokiausers.net/Headline/Why-I-nominate-Steve-Jobs-for-the-Darwin-Award.html
Long live the Apple Fan boy, ’cause it stops here…
October 17th, 2007 at 1:00 am
DEHP (the most concerning chemical in the iPhone because it’s present in the plastic headphone wiring/bud), or any phthalates, affect humans through injestion or come into direct contact with the chemical. I don’t plan on chewing/licking/eating my iPhone, thank you very much. Phthalates are used in plastics. That’s why they’ve been banned from toys - kids rub, chew and eat toys. These toys are made from the plastic.
We are constantly exposed to these chemicals in everyday life. Drinking your water exposes you to phthalates. The plastic bottle/tubing/processing equipment that your water was exposed to will likely (studies have indicated that even properly cured plastic will leach chemicals to water) expose you to these chemicals. Oh, and by “expose” I mean “injest” - the worst type of exposure.
As far as the other dangerous chemicals, like the brominated compounds - they are found primarily in flame retardants contained in the printed circuit boards, cables, connectors, etc. Where are these components located? On the inside of the iPhone. Will they effect me? Nope
I agree that Apple should get off its ass and stop using these chemicals because it’s bad for the environment. But to think that these chemicals will harm me more than drinking my Fiji bottled water is ridiculous. To insinuate that iPhone-users will not be able to have healthy babies is just ignorant (even as satire, because it’s just spreading FUD).
October 17th, 2007 at 5:27 am
Well, these phones or rather the materials used are likely to sooner or later end in waste dumps. Not sure, but some of the chemicals may end in the leachate and in the ground water etc.
I think Greenpeace is doing a great thing by ranking electronics companies and making them take more environmental responsibility.
In this particular case, it is rather entertaining, as the target is that Fruit of the Loom. “we are holier than thou” bunch… I guess they are not 5 years ahead of the competition in this regard EITHER.
October 17th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
While Will does have a valid point, I wouldn’t go so far as to call it “FUD”. Sure, Apple has “voluntarily” agreed to stop using chemicals that are harmful to humans and the environment down the road, and that’s great- but it’s the fact that Apple has known about this for years and has chosen to do nothing at all- to just keep using the crap. There is no reason that Apple needs to use these materials, Nokia hasn’t for some time, even Motorola and Sony/Ericsson offer models already that don’t use the stuff. I see that as a problem, especially when Steve Jobs gets up and yells from the mountaintop about how better Apple is for the environment than his “competition”. He’s doing bad, and lying about it. Don’t you have a least a little problem with that?
The point that Viipottaja picked up on, is the “holier than thou” situation. Steve Jobs keeps boasting (lying) about how his company is so far ahead of the competition with regards to the products and the manufacture of products and their impact on the environment- and he’s continually wrong. The marketing of the iPhone was no different than many of the claims that Steve Jobs makes- misleading at best.
That’s the problem I have with the whole thing- that no one is calling him out on his BS. People keep choking down ever word from him as gospel. There’s the ignorance, actually- it’s even worse, it’s propaganda. It’s the deliberate lying to promote his company while slandering the competition to knock them down.
Steve Jobs is a smug, snide, liar. That’s what makes this funny- despite the lies and how “advanced” Apple is, you have to admit that it’s at least a little funny to think that he could be playing a big role in the elimination of the Apple Fanboy gene from our gene pool. Darwinism. It’s funny. Go ahead and laugh.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
No doubt. I thought I made it clear that I believe Apple should stop using these chemicals because they are bad for the ENVIRONMENT.
You insinuated that the chemicals will prevent iPhone users from reproducing and thus reducing the Apple/Nokia FanBoy clashes - to quote you directly. That is completely ignorant - um, and even propaganda.
As far as FanBoys go, it works both ways. Think on that one
Steve is obviously a liar and greedy, no one is arguing that point. I think you are just taking offense to a perceived threat for reasons that you may or may not be aware of.
Who is choking down every word from Steve Jobs’ “gospel?” Did anyone here ever say that Steve is right and Greenpeace is wrong? And, slander? Do you know what slander is?
And who is “holier than thou” here? Aren’t you guys the one saying how much better Nokia is because they don’t use these chemicals? (I’m not saying Nokia is bad, mind you, because I’m not a blind fanboy). That’s like saying, “I’m an organic vegan so I’m better (holier) than you.”
I am definitely laughing, just not at what you think I am.
October 18th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
You’re missing my point- fist off that it was just intended to be a little amusing, I’m not seriously promoting the possibility of another human’s reproductive organs being rendered useless as a glorious thing- I just thought in the sense of a Darwin Award, it was a little funny. Not sure you had to be so offended.
And the big point is that I’m not, nor is anyone else, saying that Nokia is better because they don’t use the chemical. If anyone is saying Nokia is better- it’s because they’re not only not using the chemicals, they’re not bragging about it they way Steve Jobs is. He’s making a big deal of it, and what’s worse is that it’s a lie. That’s the problem- he’s saying that his company is greener than the rest of the industry, and that is an outright lie. I don’t really think you can dispute that. That’s the Holier than Thou- that he’s going on and on about how his company is better than everyone else for the environment, when in reality- he’s just about the worst. In a report of 14 computer companies with regards to their impact on the environment, Apple was dead last. I bet if I tell you who number one is- another reference to my eyesight would be made…
But seriously, calling me a fanboy doesn’t hurt- I’ve admitted MANY times here and elsewhere that I’m a proud Nokia Fanboy. Though if you knew me at all, you’d know that I’m very critical of Nokia on many points. So no, I’m not a “blind” fanboy, but yes- I do embrace my fanboydom.
And for the record, maybe I did get it wrong- but…
slan·der
–noun
1. a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report
Steve Jobs deliberately, and falsely, stated that Apple is ahead of the rest of the competition on environmental concerns in an obvious attempt to build his company up by lying about the state of affairs with other companies in the industry. If that’s not borderline slander, my humble apologies for getting it wrong.
Cheers
October 18th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
I wasn’t trying to hurt your feelings by calling you a FanBoy, and I respect that you do keep a critical eye on Nokia. I consider myself an Apple and Windows Mobile FanBoy - I’ve admitted it many times. But I’m hesitant to use the term “FanBoy” because it has such a derogatory connotation due to all the idiots out there blindly following a particular brand without logical consideration of pros and cons.
I agree that Steve is an ass, so I guess we’re just talking about the same thing in different ways. But, I’d like to say one thing - blindly hating a brand is just as bad as blindly following (I’m saying you do, I just wanted to put it out there).
For the record I did find the satire in the Darwin Award amusing, it’s just that there are plenty of people out there that will hang on your every word - fueling their FanBoy-ness, if you will.
I still don’t think it was “slander” - it was false, not necessarily malicious or defamatory.
In the end I think we’re cut from the same cloth.
Respect.
October 18th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
I suspect that you are right.
And yes- Blind hatred is just as bad as blind loyalism.
Cheers.