by paige
Categories: .

iphone.jpg

When we first reported on Apple going green, we couldn’t be more thrilled. Which makes this all the more difficult to report on Greenpeace’s recent exposure of how not so green the iPhone is.   Scientific tests, arranged by Greenpeace, reveal that Apple’s iPhone contains hazardous chemicals including bromine,chlorine, and PVC.

And evidently, Apple could face legal action unless it begins to address the environmental concerns. The Centre for Environmental Health (CEH), a campaign group based in Oakland, California, said that it would launch legal action in 60 days unless Apple took action. According to the Times Online:

A notice sent to Apple and the California attorney-general gives the nonprofit environmental law group legal standing to sue Apple in 60 days. A lawsuit could force Apple to put warnings on iPhone packaging, but is unlikely to lead to a product recall. An Apple spokesman said: “Like all Apple products worldwide, iPhone complies with RoHS [the European Union’s Restriction of Hazardous Substances directive], the world’s toughest restrictions on toxic substances in electronics.” The spokesman added that Apple had already pledged to eliminate the use of PVC and brominated flame retardants by the end of next year. The campaigners’ action may prove embarrassing for Al Gore, a member of Apple’s board, who last week won the Nobel Peace Prize for his environmental work. Apple has sold more than a million iPhones since the device’s launch this summer in the United States. In that time, the gadget has proved itself a magnet for lawsuits – some of more apparent merit than others. This month an iPhone buyer that said she was suing Apple for $1 million (£490,000) after the company cut the price of the device by $200 only 68 days after its American launch.

This really REALLY pains us to have to report this, but in the name of green awareness, check out the  following clip to see the breakdown for yourself and read more of the specifics here (via Techcrunch).

  • http://www.cowtownchronicles.com Pete W

    Umm…. So what? Greenpeace targeted Apple because they’re a high-profile target.

    Don’t believe everything you hear just because it comes from a group that claims to care about the environment.

    http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/10/16/greenpeace_vs_apple/

    The PVC in the iPhone is in the freakin’ headphones, and the 1.5% by weight was the weight of the headphones! 1.5% of a few grams is hardly the environmental catastrophe GP wants you to think it is.

    As for the video:

    Nokia has all their mobile PVC free. (Does that statement include the headset?) iPhone is PVC free as well, except for the included headphones.

    “Both removed SOME OF their worst chemicals…” So they haven’t removed ALL of them? Shame on SonyEriccson and Motorola! I’m sure Greenpeace will get right on making videos to shame them, just as soon as they’re done cooking up new things to hype about Apple.

  • Pingback: Allie’s Answers » Blog Archive » What’s Going On

  • Becky

    Apple has never been a great environmental company.

  • wheywood

    luv mac stuff, even have a dotmac account for my email. but i’m not going to buy an iPhone, even though I desperately want one.

    I posted on Apple’s support pages, “I’m going to be mean until iPhone is green”. Basically putting a link to the Greenpeace test and asking what users thought. I was very disappointed when Apple deleted my post.

    It does feel like a greenwash.