Greenpeace Berates Technology Companies

August 31st, 2006: Apple and Motorola come last in first major eco-test of the electronics manufacturing industry.

14 of the world's most prominent manufacturers of electronic equipment Ranked on their use of toxic chemicals and electronic waste (e-waste) policies only Dell and Nokia scraped a barely respectable score while Apple, Motorola and Lenovo flunked the test to finish bottom of the class. As we went online with this story the local Greenpeace office in Sydney was unable to inform us whether the companies tested voluntarily or were selected from the global marketplace. We expect updates to this story.

The two criteria - Greenpeace calls these demands - are that companies should: (1) clean up their products by eliminating hazardous substances; and (2) takeback and recycle their products responsibly once they become obsolete. The two issues are connected. The use of harmful chemicals in electronics prevents their safe recycling when the products are discarded.p>

The electronics scorecard ranks companies on:
Chemicals policy and practice (5 criteria)

1. A chemicals policy based on the Precautionary Principle
2. Chemicals Management: supply chain management of chemicals via e.g. banned/restricted substance lists, policy to identifyproblematic substances for future elimination/substitution
3. Timeline for phasing out all use of vinyl plastic (PVC
4. Timeline for phasing out all use of brominated flame retardants (not just those banned by EU's RoHS Directive
5. PVC- and BFR-free models of electronic products on the market

Policy and practice on Producer Responsibility for taking back their discarded products and recycling (4 criteria)

1. Support for individual (financial) producer responsibility - that producers finance the end-of-life management of their products, bytaking back and reusing/recycling their own-brand discarded products.
2. Provides voluntary takeback and recycling in every country where it sells its products, even in the absence of national laws requiring Producer Responsibility for electronic waste.
3. Provides clear information for individual customers on takeback and recycling services in all countries where there are sales of itsproducts.
4. Reports on amount of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) collected and recycled.

The ranking is important because the amounts of toxic e-waste is growing everyday and it often ends up dumped in the developing world. Reducing the toxic chemicals in products reduces pollution from old products and makes recycling safer, easier and cheaper. Companies with good recycling schemes help ensure that their products don't end up in the e-waste yards of Asia.

"The scorecard will provide a dynamic tool to green the electronics sector by setting off a race to the top. By taking back their discarded products, companies will have incentives to eliminate harmful substances used in their products, since this is the only way they can ensure safe reuse and recycling of electronic waste," said Iza Kruszewska, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner.

With a average score of only 4/10 it is clear that the electronics industry has a long way to go before it can make any claims to being a green industry.

Nokia and Dell share the top spot in the ranking. They believe that as producers they should bear individual responsibility for taking back and reusing or recycling their own-brand discarded products. Nokia leads the way on eliminating toxic chemicals, since the end of 2005 all new models of mobiles are free of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and all new components to be free of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from the start of 2007. Dell has also set ambitious targets for eliminating these harmful substances from their products.

The rankings are as follows:
Joint 1: Dell and Nokia
3: HP
4: Sony Ericsson
5: Samsung
6: Sony
7: LG Electronics
8: Panasonic
9: Toshiba
10: Fujitsu Siemens Computers
11: Apple
12: Acer
13: Motorola

Lenovo is in bottom position. It earns points for chemicals management and providing some voluntary product take back programmes, but it needs to do better on all criteria.

"It is disappointing to see Apple ranking so low in the overall guide. They are meant to be world leaders in design and marketing, they should also be world leaders in environmental innovation." said Kruszewska.

Companies have the opportunity to move towards a greener ranking as the guide will be updated every quarter. However penalty points will be deducted from overall scores if we find a company lying, practising double standards or other corporate misconduct. For now, companies are scored solely on information publicly available on their global websites.

Comment on this story.