Interesting timing on Apple's green initiatives

Timing?

The Greenpeace extortion piece hit last year as did the Apple's announcement of an internal investigation. If Apple wanted to divert attention from the accounting issue, it seems to me it would have made more sense to do it 6 months ago rather then after the FTC (& Apple board) have essentially cleared Jobs of culpability.

Besides, Jobs' Open Letter points out that Apple is already doing a far better job policing it's environmental practices than the other computer manufacturers. He's not saying, "oh we'll start being greener", he's promising to stay the course and make improvements.

Job's' Open Letter actually had more data in it than the Greenpeace so called "Report Card".

Pretty shabby of you Zac to try and stir up controversy.

Perhaps your time would be better spent looking into Greenpeace predatory behavior against corporations. You might find that they're less concerned about the environment and more concerned about slandering corporations when they don't receive their hush money.

What struck me was Gore's position…I'm baffled. Did I read that incorrectly?

"Gore recently backed the board in opposing shareholder proposals that would have called for more stringent environmental standards at the company"

What is going on? I thought Gore would definitely not have done that? Tell me it isn't so…where did you get that information. This is contrary to what he has been preaching.

If I understood this correctly, the board opposed the corporate report requested by Trillium Asset Management because it was already investigating Apple’s current practices and it would have been redundant. Moreover, Steve Jobs' memo was just around the corner. Trillium is now withdrawing the resolution. Apple's commitments have been disclosed, they don't need to discuss the issue at the forthcoming shareholder meeting.

http://www.socialfunds.com/news/release.cgi/8403.html

"Trillium Asset Management, filer of a shareholder resolution pending on the May 10 proxy at Apple, Inc., today applauds Apple and CEO Steve Jobs on their newly disclosed commitments to using environmentally safer materials in Apple products. Trillium announced that it is withdrawing the resolution, which requested a corporate report on safer materials policies from consideration at Apple's shareholder meeting."

What's funny is that everybody is focussing on the plastics because Greenpeace uses that in their "report card".

What amazes me is that Greenpeace does not take into account that Apple computers generally use less than half the power of the PC to do the same thing. Surely the power consumption must be imortant too, with all the talk about energy saving lightbulbs and such?

I think this has to do with the same reason for this blog entry: journalists are biased conspiracy theorists. They see a plot where there is none, and are always looking to bring news in "world disaster" form to make headlines.

Jobs just corrected the wrong "guesstemates" done by Greenpeace. Apple was green all along, but didn't make a fuss about it until Greenpeace started their campaign. Greenpeace timed this, not Apple.