Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday April 23 2017, @10:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the force-them-to-buy-new dept.

From Motherboard (Vice.com),

Documents obtained by Motherboard: "No reuse. No parts harvesting. No resale."

Apple released its Environmental Responsibility Report Wednesday, an annual grandstanding effort that the company uses to position itself as a progressive, environmentally friendly company. Behind the scenes, though, the company undermines attempts to prolong the lifespan of its products.

Apple's new moonshot plan is to make iPhones and computers entirely out of recycled materials by putting pressure on the recycling industry to innovate. But documents obtained by Motherboard using Freedom of Information requests show that Apple's current practices prevent recyclers from doing the most environmentally friendly thing they could do: Salvage phones and computers from the scrap heap.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 23 2017, @11:01AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 23 2017, @11:01AM (#498270)

    The order of the 3 R's is not an accident. Priority should be Reduce, Reuse, then Recycle. Far more emphasis is put on the last one when we really should focus more on the first two.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday April 23 2017, @11:09AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 23 2017, @11:09AM (#498273) Journal

    The 3 R's are good. I agree with them. In fact, you could say that I live by them. I drive older cars and ride older motorcycles, partly because I don't like the newer, and partly because older costs less, and partly because 3 R's.

    Regarding i-Stuff - I'm simply not going to spend the hundreds of dollars for a new i-Thing. A hundred dollars, or two or three hundred, will buy a comparable not-i-Thing. Or, I can wait a year or more to buy an unsold, or used, item off of e-Bay.

    But, if Apple is actively destroying older i-Stuff, that may keep the prices of unsold and/or used stuff artificially high, and I may never buy an i-Thing.

    Yeah, I understand Apple's motive is to maintain an artificially high price on their new stuff, but crap rolls downhill.

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday April 23 2017, @11:10AM

    by kaszz (4211) on Sunday April 23 2017, @11:10AM (#498274) Journal

    This one case when some environmental regulation would be a nice corporate slap-in-the-face.

    Apple into shitlist.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Nuke on Sunday April 23 2017, @09:58PM

    by Nuke (3162) on Sunday April 23 2017, @09:58PM (#498533)

    The order of the 3 R's is not an accident. Priority should be Reduce, Reuse, then Recycle

    Conspicuously absent from most versions is a fourth "R" - Repair. Manufacturing corporations don't like it.i