• Your favorite

    Apple

    ,

    iPhone

    ,

    iPad

    ,

    iOS

    ,
    Jailbreak
    , and
    Cydia
    site.
  • Greenpeace Blasts Apple for Rotting The Environment with iCloud


    On Monday, MMi reported that a number of leading environmental groups and activists in China say they detect a perceptible difference in how Apple has done business in the last twelve months. That is, Apple has been more accountable to and respectful of the environment and its workers.

    But not so fast say the folks at Greenpeace, the well-known non-governmental environmental organization with locations in more than forty countries. A new report from the group is blasting Apple by accusing the iDevice maker of perpetuating "dirty energy," chiefly through the iCloud platform.

    If you're wondering how iCloud is bad for the environment, Greenpeace says it relies chiefly on coal-based power. Apple, much like Amazon and Microsoft, relies "heavily on dirty energy to power their clouds."

    "Instead of playing catch up, Apple has the ingenuity, on-hand cash and innovative spirit to Think Different and make substantial improvements in the type of energy that powers its cloud," Greenpeace says. "If Apple is really interested in having the 'high percentage' of renewable energy it claims to want for the iCloud, it will have to look beyond the initial steps for on-site generation and use its tremendous cash reserves to invest in or purchase renewable energy and also to put pressure on Duke Energy to provide cleaner energy."

    No response yet from Apple over the Greenpeace jab.

    Source: Greenpeace
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Greenpeace Blasts Apple for Rotting The Environment with iCloud started by Michael Essany View original post
    Comments 24 Comments
    1. mr117's Avatar
      mr117 -
      Unless you go into the woods and live in a yurt and catch your own food and make your own clothes from animal skins and cook your own food over a campfire.... oh, wait, then you are burning wood, the smoke of which is a pollutant.

      Nobody here is holier-than-thou. We all use phones made out of plastic. We (well, 99.9% of us) use autos or busses or trains. We live in houses and/or work in buildings that use heat and air-conditioning. If you drive a Prius and feel "better" than the rest of us, well, the lead to make that battery is just as bad/more so than our gasoline-powered engines.

      There's no free lunch. We all pollute, even Greenpeace. But we can at least be aware of it, and try to limit it. I'm glad they are pointing out Apple's "faults," but Apple does seem to be a target these days. Maybe because they got so big and because they claim(ed) to stand for so much, they are now being held more accountable.

      If "green" energy is possible, we should use it. I'm not sure how many of you on these boards remember how it was in America in the 1950s and 60s, before the EPA cleaned things up. I can remember the smog in LA burning my eyes and making me cough. Even in LA now, the air is better. The rivers are cleaner, and don't catch on fire anymore. The same for other parts of the Western world and certainly for Japan, where mercury used to kill people who went near their rivers. I like living in a place where the environment is not killing me or my kids and grandkids. It's kind of self-defeating to harangue Greenpeace or the EPA or any other environmental group for saying we should limit pollution. Pollution can sicken/kill us, has sickened/killed us, will continue to sicken/kill us. We might as well do what we can to stay as healthy as we can.

      The fact is that the new industrialized nations (China and India) are following in our footsteps, and will suffer the same pitfalls of environmental destruction as we did here in the US. There's nothing inherently wrong with being clean, or at least trying to be so. Anyone who says pollution is good has issues beyond what can be rectified by posts on these boards.
    1. Maxime Caudebec's Avatar
      Maxime Caudebec -
      Greenpeace may want to take a small look at this, before trying to get money from apple

      Apple - The Story Behind Apple's Environmental Footprint
    1. AUZambo's Avatar
      AUZambo -
      I was unaware that PETA had an environmental branch.
    1. The Amazing Atheist's Avatar
      The Amazing Atheist -
      Quote Originally Posted by ohthatguyagain View Post
      Yes, the could invent the iCar that runs on iGas and make the iPlant that spits out iLectricity...

      But then we'd have to call it Green Apple.

      And nobody likes them apples.

      I lul'd at this.

      Quote Originally Posted by Xx_Illusions_xX View Post
      Waaaaa waaaaa Apple isn't being earth friendly or whatever. Go cry about something else and go hug some trees.

      Your ignorance is what is killing this planet. I'm not a radical environmentalist, but I know the long-terms effects of this planet if people continue to pollute it. If you and thousands of others want to destroy your ONLY home, then by all means do it. You can fry in the sun during the winter.

      Idiot.

      Quote Originally Posted by mr117 View Post
      Unless you go into the woods and live in a yurt and catch your own food and make your own clothes from animal skins and cook your own food over a campfire.... oh, wait, then you are burning wood, the smoke of which is a pollutant.

      Nobody here is holier-than-thou. We all use phones made out of plastic. We (well, 99.9% of us) use autos or busses or trains. We live in houses and/or work in buildings that use heat and air-conditioning. If you drive a Prius and feel "better" than the rest of us, well, the lead to make that battery is just as bad/more so than our gasoline-powered engines.

      There's no free lunch. We all pollute, even Greenpeace. But we can at least be aware of it, and try to limit it. I'm glad they are pointing out Apple's "faults," but Apple does seem to be a target these days. Maybe because they got so big and because they claim(ed) to stand for so much, they are now being held more accountable.

      If "green" energy is possible, we should use it. I'm not sure how many of you on these boards remember how it was in America in the 1950s and 60s, before the EPA cleaned things up. I can remember the smog in LA burning my eyes and making me cough. Even in LA now, the air is better. The rivers are cleaner, and don't catch on fire anymore. The same for other parts of the Western world and certainly for Japan, where mercury used to kill people who went near their rivers. I like living in a place where the environment is not killing me or my kids and grandkids. It's kind of self-defeating to harangue Greenpeace or the EPA or any other environmental group for saying we should limit pollution. Pollution can sicken/kill us, has sickened/killed us, will continue to sicken/kill us. We might as well do what we can to stay as healthy as we can.

      The fact is that the new industrialized nations (China and India) are following in our footsteps, and will suffer the same pitfalls of environmental destruction as we did here in the US. There's nothing inherently wrong with being clean, or at least trying to be so. Anyone who says pollution is good has issues beyond what can be rectified by posts on these boards.

      +1