Greenpeace posts latest Guide to Greener Electronics: Sony Ericsson first, Nintendo in dead last
By Nilay Patel 
posted November 27th 2007 12:20PM
posted November 27th 2007 12:20PM
posted November 27th 2007 12:20PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
we'll care when global warming is actually an issue.
You'll care when you can't afford to keep your lights on and keep gas in your car.
Surprised Sharp didn't place higher since all their Japanese factories are largely run by solar panels, and they are the largest soloar panel producers in the world. They have one of the cleanest factories in the world, not sure if thats considered.
What is funny is if Sony had not released figures like Nintendo have apparently not done, then everyone would ignore this and go, 'Yeah Sony are so f*****g out of order' and 'another reason to hate Sony...'
Its funny how so many people are so eagerly willing to criticize Greenpeace for helping to change the industry so that their electronics can be all fun and not a health risk to us or our planet. Who has given a thought to the fact that the chemicals and materials used in these devices can eventually kill you, which in turn would prevent you from criticizing Greenpeace. Eventually those chemicals might even lead to the destruction of our planet, which would make electronics a thing of the past. Would put Engadget out of business. I love electronics, and would like to see them around a little while longer and certainly don't want anything in my home that will kill me. Plus, the evolution of greener materials means companies will do more research into their product development, which means more new and exciting products made from new technology. How many of you don't care if new products are released and would rather the development be slow?
It would be nice to run an experiment and put all the people who could care less about the environment and put them on one planet, and put all of us who do care on a different one then see who is better off in the end.
What would REALLY be funny is if an asteroid hit your planet, and you died anyway. Think Jim Fix.
well at least it would be a quick death, and not a slow one brought on by lack of oxygen to breath, depleted sources of food, no drinkable water, etc. So you might laugh at me, but in the end i'd rather not have my chances of survival in the hands of people who don't even care about their own.
Meh, I'll just evolve or something.
@Fred: You sir have made me to LOL, that was one of the best comments ever!
Meh... Who cares?
When the Thermohaline Current collapses y'all be bitching and moaning to the gummint to "do something" as temperatures in the north plummet, but by then it will be too late. When the earth reacts to climate change the fix tends to be pretty abrupt.
To those who say we only have 150 years of data: wrong again. There's a branch of climatology called paleoclimatology. I'll let you figure it out.
In climatology circles the debate about climate change and the cause is over. Only politicians and clueless laymen deny it. "Golly it sure was cold this winter, global warming my a$$." Keep on thinking that, newbs.
Things are fine now, well except for the polar bears, poor guys. Who knows, maybe we'll dodge the bullet on this one, but as long as we let China, India and other rising industrial nations get a free ride on these issues that ain't gonna happen. As an American I would like to see our nation LEAD on these issues. Set an example, rather than just kiss the ass of the oil, gas and coal industries. We have the technical know-how to make this happen. But I guess those days are over.
As to the newbs pointing out that life emits more carbon than mans activities: correct, but they also consume it. They are carbon neutral. This is a common climate newb error. When you dig carbon out of the ground release it via combustion: this is not carbon neutral, it is adding to the carbon loading of the climate. Thus man has a direct and measurable impact on the environment. In the past effects like this were caused by global bouts of volcanism. That is not the case at the moment.
The earth is gonna pwn n3wbs. The teabagging is coming. Mother Earth's gonna need a strap-on to do it but she's gonna teabag us all if we don't get on the clue train.
How can you sound so smart and so FREAKING STUPID at the same time?
You know, you global warming alarmists are all so annoying that I'm going to create as much carbon as I can. Seriously, if companies want to use hazardous materials in their products, I don't care, as long as they don't leak. Like so many other people said, I'm not going to eat it. Guess what? Technology requires some hazardous materials and guerrilla groups like Greenpeace only serve to make noise and don't actually do anything. Like another commenter tried to mention, the co-founder of Greenpeace left because the organization had become such a perversion of what he wanted it to be.
But if you're so concerned about the environment, don't act so high and mighty in your stupid little Prius. Do something actually good for the environment, and remove your genes from the gene pool, like those Europeans that you love so much.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=495495&in_page_id=1879
Despite all your clamoring, there is still plenty of dissent among the scientific community about global warming. And quite frankly, I'd like it to be true. It's 40 degrees (F) here in Seattle and I'm freezing.
I've got to run, I need to have my car idle to warm up the environment.
I've released my productivity graph. Greenpeace is on the left, in the red, at 0%. Companies that actually make something useful are on the right.
Companies on the left blow a lot of hot air, and not much else, contributing to almost-free PR over the interwebs, for their still-considered-relevant-but-really-a-bunch-of-losers organisation. Companies on the right actually have some sense, and sure they are not perfect, but they do make something and keep sensationalism and exaggeration and inaccurate 'studies' to their marketing departments.
The .PDF sites most of Nintendo's zeros to a "lack of information"? Why rate a company that you have no info on?
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/greener-electronics-nintendo-r.pdf
Oi fair sure that Samsung is beating Sony Ericsson on that little chart there.
You'd really like this short read, Fred.
http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264835
I am in the same boat as you, and often find myself tired from fighting both fronts. On the one hand I have to defend my disbelief in man-made global warming, then on the other I have to defend my environmentalist ideals from people who take their talking points written in stone.
There is a lot we can be doing to help out our environment, but we still have our communities to run. It would be fantastic to get everything completely green, but we shouldn't have to sacrifice everything to achieve that goal next week just because there is a hysteria over global warming. People love taking angles in order to get what they want, and it just seems as if they are using climate change as leverage for popularity and warm fuzzies.
P.S. Nuclear energy all the way, %100. Oops, Greenpeace is against that greenest of options. Fruit irradiation as the new Pasteurization revolution? Nope, that's gone as well.
Sounds to me like another radical kook! He's not in lock-step with the rest of the "scientific community" so he must be a corporate shill! Very nice article!
Sony first and Nintendo last? I smell PS2/3/P fanboyism at work here.
I bet this Sony is involved in this scheme to make Microsoft and Nintendo look bad. Seriously, who cares if your game machine is polluting the hell out of your backyard? It's nintendo's 100% of 3 lb vs. Sony's 30% of 20lbs. It's all the same.
I too am a huge supporter of cleaning up the companies and at making a concerted effort to cleaning up the environment.
Going Green Now
http://gonintendo.com/?p=20145
This proves that Nintendo is environmentally-friendly. PERIOD.
To HELL with GREENPEACE! GO NINTENDO! Give 'em Hell MARIO!