Recently the environmental organization Greenpeace has been staging events to pressure Apple into using more renewable energy to power their data centers. They have blocked a shipment of coal to power plants, and have projected messages on to Apple’s headquarters building.
On the one hand, encouraging Apple as opposed to another company may bring more awareness to the need for renewable energy. On the other hand, Apple does a lot in this area already, including powering 50% of its North Carolina data center with renewable energy and stating that they hope to power 100% of its future Oregon center with it.
Should Greenpeace target Apple?
Should Greenpeace Be Targeting Apple?
Comments: 4 Responses to “Should Greenpeace Be Targeting Apple?”
Comments Closed.
green peace are all spoiled brats who have more than 99% of the world's blessings and want to tear down the std of life built through civilization..
progress will happen through positive inventiveness ==not negativity and scrapping the good with the bad.....instead of doing something creative that will raise the living of the poor they just want to stop people from enjoying the life that many have worked for....
Let me say right off that I am not a 'green' person, that religion is filled with too much false belief. Should Greenpeace be targeting Apple or any other company...No. We are still a free nation, I think. Greenpeace has as much right dictating to Apple as it does to me. Now your shareholders can pressure you but not Greenpeace.
I think it's appropriate. Apple is a leader in the technology industry. As such, they have an obligation, or at least an implied responsibility, to lead in every way they can, even if it comes to the way they interface with the environment. And if there's any company that has the means to do this, it's Apple. Even conservative government numbers state that coal extraction and burning is directly responsible for approximately 35,000 deaths a year, in the US alone. This is bad. Not to mention, burning coal is the number one cause for climate change. And if you're still trying to figure out if you believe that or not, the main method of coal extraction in the country right now is blowing up the top of mountains in Appalachia. So should Greenpeace be pushing Apple to set a positive example and power their data centers with 100% renewable energy, especially after Google, Facebook, and Yahoo! have all proven they can, I say yes.
I think that Greenpeace is not targeting Apple because Apple is greatly in the wrong, but because targeting Apple gets them a bit of press, a bit of recognition, and a few extra donation dollars.
Apple does more than most technology companies to not only make their products very green, but also to showcase that they are working on that. I did a quick look on a few PC manufacturer websites and none in any of their marketing material or product pages put anything beyond a possible pdf 'what we're doing' link for their products. Apple on the other hand shows the ways they are working on each product to make it more environmentally conscious.
Also, I'm sure Apple could make their products even smaller, lighter, and cheaper for them to produce if they used less environmentally conscious materials, but they don't. They work to make it more green, while still making the best looking, best designed, and downright best products in the world.