As Business Insider points out, Apple’s renewable energy efforts have ranked it well on Greenpeace’s “Clicking Clean: How Companies are Creating the Green Internet” study. Apple scored an “A” rating in ‘energy transparency’, ‘renewable energy commitment & siting policy’, and ‘renewable energy deployment & advocacy’, while it scored a “B” in ‘energy efficiency & mitigation’. Facebook and Google both averaged well in the same categories, while Amazon, Microsoft, and Twitter all scored poor to dismal ratings in each category. Full report card below:
Earlier this year, Apple released its Supplier Responsibility Progress Report announcing it was increasing the number of environmental audits it conducted on its supply chain by 50 percent while upgrading several issues from less serious breaches to unacceptable violations.
Apple CEO Tim Cook made news at February’s shareholders meeting when he shot down a proposal from a representative from the National Center for Public Policy Research that would have required the company to disclose its expenses for its environmental efforts. Cook notably quipped back that “If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.”
Though Apple’s new Mac Pro isn’t exactly readily availably months after its debut, the new machine showcases Apple’s focus on energy consumption as the upgraded model consumes 68% less power in idle mode than its predecessor, according to Apple.
Finally, Greenpeace, the same organization that conducted the study released today, praised Apple for hiring former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson to lead its environmental efforts.
Jackson can make Apple the top environmental leader in the tech sector by helping the company use its influence to push electric utilities and governments to provide the clean energy that both Apple and America need right now.
You can view Greenpeace’s full report here and Apple’s renewable energy microsite here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
And it is increasingly important matter, so kudos to them
Apple’s “Environmental Footprint Report” makes interesting reading.
It frequently mentions buildings “powered …… with 100 percent renewable energy.”
I wonder how many readers misunderstand that as ‘buildings 100% powered by renewable energy’? Which is something entirely different. Knowing Apple’s precision with word use, their choice of phrase is not surprising.
I know you’re getting at fine difference in phrasings, but I don’t get it yet….can you expand?
For example, solar energy is ‘100% renewable’.
Further, a building dependent (solely) upon solar energy, gets its energy ONLY when the sun shines. What does it do at night? Or on cloudy days?
I gotcha. One phrase, the one Apple uses, implies that they use 100% renewable energy (solar, wind, etc.), but there is a possibility they are also using some non-renewable resources along with it. As opposed to the other phrase, which you seem to be pointing out that Apple isn’t saying, implies that a building uses only 100% renewable energy.
I’m sure powered only by renewable energy is what they are striving for, but that is not what they are saying they are currently doing.
Your 7:23am response – You’ve got it in one.
What Apple (or any other company) ‘strives for’, what they actually do, and, what they allow other people to consider they do (particularly where Green brownie-points are up for grabs) are 3 different things.
If Apple used ONLY solar power at their NC Data Centre they’d shout it from the rooftops. If the media state something similar because the ‘reporters’ fail to appreciate the subtleties – Apple get the good publicity. Just sayin’.
I see that Greenpeace is still skewing the results, with that silly “transparency” metric. The chart they release doesn’t match the data so it’s lies to begin with, but to give a company 100% on Green energy, and then put them in the same groups as other companies that scored less than 50% simply because Apple’s CEO won’t take Greenpeace’s calls is a bit beyond the pale. Why does anyone take these guys seriously?
Yaaay. So ? I couldn’t care less about Greenpiss.
Don’t care. I care about great products as a consumer (where is my iWatch, new Apple TV, and bit screen iPhone?), and a high stock price as an investor.
I think Tim Cook’s advice might apply to you…
Is that the same Tim Cook who proclaims the company has a ‘Social Conscience’, yet uses every mechanism legally available to avoid paying taxes in the countries that provide Apple with significant profits?