As Stefan just mentioned, Sony Ericsson took the “greenest” spot in the Sixth Edition of Greenpeace’s “Guide to Greener Electronics,” while Nokia fell to 9th place. But, Greenpeace also bumped up Apple in the “green” rankings. If you’ll recall, Apple took a lot of flack recently for using some dangerous chemicals in the iPhone’s (and headset’s) plastics. Now, unless you shaved off that plastic, boiled it down, and drank the resulting cancerous mixture, no single iPhone user was going to birth any deformed babies. Nonetheless, the blogosphere lit up in a cacophony of iPhone-hating rage at Apple’s use of non-green chemicals.
Well, it looks like Greenpeace has had a change of mind – not that we could give an iota of a damn about what those hippy-freaks think. The hemp-wearing, daisy-loving folks at Greenpeace saw fit to move Apple up a bit in the rankings, giving the iPhone-maker an 11th-place score – snuggling up to Nokia’s 9th-place. Taking 10th place is HP sandwiched between Apple and Nokia’s green-ish whole-wheat buns environmental rankings. Isn’t that better now? Apple and Nokia, together at last.
Hit the link for the full rankings list.
Greenpeace’s list from best to worst (from Greenpeace):
7.7: Sony Ericsson – New leader due to improved takeback reporting, new models PVC free, but falls down on takeback practice.
7.7: Samsung – Big improvements, with more products free of the worst toxic chemicals. Loses points for incomplete takeback practice.
7.3: Sony – More products free of toxic PVC and improved reporting on recycling and takeback especially in the US.
7.3: Dell – Unchanged since the last version, still no products on the market without the worst chemicals.
7.3: Lenovo – Unchanged since the last version, still no products on the market without the worst chemicals.
7.0: Toshiba – Much improved on toxic chemicals but still lobbies in the US for regressive takeback policies.
7.0: LGE – Unchanged since the last version, need better takeback for products other than phones.
7.0: Fujitsu-Siemens – Unchanged since the last version, needs toxic elimination timelines, better takeback coverage and reporting of amounts recycled.
6.7: Nokia- A steep fall! Strong on toxic chemicals but penalty point deducted for deficiencies in takeback practice in Thailand, Russia and Argentina during our testsing.
6.7: HP – Finally provided timelines for eliminating worst toxic chemicals, though not for all products; needs to improve takeback coverage.
6.0: Apple – Slightly improved with new iMacs and some iPods reducing the use of toxic chemicals, takeback programme still needs more work.
5.7: Acer – Unchanged since the last version, needs better takeback coverage and reporting of amounts recycled.
5.0: Panasonic – Unchanged since the last version, need better takeback coverage and reporting of amounts recycled.
5.0: Motorola – Big faller due to penalty point for poor takeback practice in Philippines, Thailand and India revealed by our testing. Still no timelines for eliminating the most harmful chemicals.
4.7: Sharp – New to the guide – some plus points on toxic chemicals elimination but poor takeback policy and practice.
2.7: Microsoft – New to the guide – long timeline for toxic chemicals elimination (2011) and poor takeback policy and practice.
2.0: Philips – New to the guide – no timeline for toxic chemicals elimination and zero points on e-waste policy and practice.
0.0: Nintendo – New to the guide – first global brand to score zero across all criteria!
[Via: Business Week]