PDA

View Full Version : [SOLVED] most environmentally "friendly" computer company?



pythonscript
September 17th, 2009, 04:00 AM
I'm looking to buy a new laptop, and I'd like to consider the various records of the different companies before I buy. I've heard great things about HP, in terms of their environmental records and consciousness towards social justice. I'd like to know the community's opinion on this. Another example, this one towards the negative end, is Acer. I've read downright terrible things about their factories, environmental records, etc, and I'd like to know people's thoughts/knowledge. I looked at System76 with a lot of promise, especially because I love not having to pay for Windows when I'm just going to use Linux anyways... but then I heard that their computers are simply rebranded Acers, which takes me back to my point about Acer...

Any thoughts/knowledge/input in general would be greatly appreciated.

dragos240
September 17th, 2009, 04:01 AM
Apple brags it's the most environmently friendly company.

starcannon
September 17th, 2009, 04:02 AM
Dell ships out recycle kits with new computers, and offers to plant a tree. Not sure about other companies.

-grubby
September 17th, 2009, 04:04 AM
Apple brags it's the most environmently friendly company.

Yeah, and according to this page, http://www.apple.com/macmini/environment.html, the Mac Mini has been rated the most energy efficient computer by EPA Energy Star. See the little asterick note.

michaelzap
September 17th, 2009, 04:33 AM
Apple brags it's the most environmently friendly company.

Although a number of environmental groups disagree given their excessive use of PVC and other toxic substances:
http://www.greenpeace.org/apple/about.html

pythonscript
September 17th, 2009, 01:55 PM
What have people heard about Acer/System76, in general?

Bölvağur
September 17th, 2009, 01:59 PM
Dell normally send their computers to people by order instead of pushing them into stores.
So this traveling with the computers is not good.
But as they don't have any unsold stocks everywhere which will need to get rid of when they get outdated... then they can be called green I guess.

jimrz
September 17th, 2009, 02:04 PM
Dell normally send their computers to people by order instead of pushing them into stores.
So this traveling with the computers is not good.
But as they don't have any unsold stocks everywhere which will need to get rid of when they get outdated... then they can be called green I guess.

How else is any computer going to make it's way from the origin factory to the end user? One way or another it is going to have to travel.

Udayakiran
September 17th, 2009, 04:33 PM
How else is any computer going to make it's way from the origin factory to the end user? One way or another it is going to have to travel.

There are less number of trips needed when transported in bulk? Then less fuel is burnt and hence less pollution?

MasterNetra
September 17th, 2009, 05:45 PM
There are less number of trips needed when transported in bulk? Then less fuel is burnt and hence less pollution?

What makes you think they aren't shipped in bulk to begin with? Difference being they converge at shipping warehouses then shipped to you. UPS or whatever your carrier is doesn't just load one item onto their trucks after all, your computer but one of many packages to begin with. Also getting a computer from a store generally requires you to drive to it does it not? After all are you really going to try to carry a desktop, monitor, and its accessories back to your home on foot?

hoppipolla
September 17th, 2009, 06:23 PM
I always thought it was Dell.

http://www.www.knowmore.org/wiki/index.php?title=Dell,_Inc.

Apple have always been a bit hazy, I've always heard they were pretty bad ._.

http://www.www.knowmore.org/wiki/index.php?title=Apple

Skripka
September 17th, 2009, 06:29 PM
Guys, guys, guys. This is like asking which pot is the least black.

Making PCBs, heck-even smelting copper just to make the wiring in PCBs is gawd AWFUL for the environment. They ALL do all of their most damaging work in China, where no one (including the government) cares or notices. Excuse me, THEY don't do it-they outsource to other companies to make their parts, which are then assembled by the cheapest labor they can get. After all, they wouldn't want to get their hands directly dirty in killing the environment.


...and then they slap a nice sticker on their boxes when they ship them stateside-in order to have ANY kind of better market appeal.

Udayakiran
September 17th, 2009, 06:29 PM
What makes you think they aren't shipped in bulk to begin with? Difference being they converge at shipping warehouses then shipped to you. UPS or whatever your carrier is doesn't just load one item onto their trucks after all, your computer but one of many packages to begin with. Also getting a computer from a store generally requires you to drive to it does it not? After all are you really going to try to carry a desktop, monitor, and its accessories back to your home on foot?

Okay. :biggrin: I didnt think about that.

pythonscript
September 17th, 2009, 08:55 PM
Guys, guys, guys. This is like asking which pot is the least black.

Making PCBs, heck-even smelting copper just to make the wiring in PCBs is gawd AWFUL for the environment. They ALL do all of their most damaging work in China, where no one (including the government) cares or notices. Excuse me, THEY don't do it-they outsource to other companies to make their parts, which are then assembled by the cheapest labor they can get. After all, they wouldn't want to get their hands directly dirty in killing the environment.


...and then they slap a nice sticker on their boxes when they ship them stateside-in order to have ANY kind of better market appeal.

Sadly, I'm aware of this, but I'm wondering which, if any, has the best record in terms of mitigating these effects. The whole ideas about shipping are moving away from the point, imho, but I appreciate all of the input. Thanks!

starcannon
September 17th, 2009, 09:23 PM
Guys, guys, guys. This is like asking which pot is the least black.

Making PCBs, heck-even smelting copper just to make the wiring in PCBs is gawd AWFUL for the environment. They ALL do all of their most damaging work in China, where no one (including the government) cares or notices. Excuse me, THEY don't do it-they outsource to other companies to make their parts, which are then assembled by the cheapest labor they can get. After all, they wouldn't want to get their hands directly dirty in killing the environment.


...and then they slap a nice sticker on their boxes when they ship them stateside-in order to have ANY kind of better market appeal.
+1 thats reality right there.

openfly
September 17th, 2009, 09:36 PM
Raytheon, or Grumman.

Hear me out... These companies may successfully build devices that end the human scourge on our planet thus securing a safe future for our trees.

Alternatively, the argument could be made that NASA is the best. As they may open the way to humanities flight amongst the stars thus providing a mechanism for the preservation not only of our species but many of the species that inhabit our planet with us.

pythonscript
September 17th, 2009, 10:19 PM
Raytheon, or Grumman.

Hear me out... These companies may successfully build devices that end the human scourge on our planet thus securing a safe future for our trees.

Alternatively, the argument could be made that NASA is the best. As they may open the way to humanities flight amongst the stars thus providing a mechanism for the preservation not only of our species but many of the species that inhabit our planet with us.

We're talking about computer companies here. I understand that these companies make computerized equipment, but I'm not talking about defense contractors or government agencies. I really just want to know what people have heard about these three companies: HP, System76/Acer, Apple. Also, what companies sell high performance notebooks that don't come preloaded with windows? That adds a ton to my price right there... Thanks!

MikeTheC
September 17th, 2009, 11:09 PM
How about getting a computer (or building one) which has the right specs for your needs and not fretting over how tree-huggy the company is?

pythonscript
September 18th, 2009, 12:33 AM
How about getting a computer (or building one) which has the right specs for your needs and not fretting over how tree-huggy the company is?

Uhm... not sure where to start with this reply... Not to be impolite, but
a) have you ever tried building a high performance laptop from scratch, or at least as far as you can come in a laptop? It's not exactly easy, and
b) it's important to me how environmentally conscious the company is. Whether or not you see this as a perjorative ("tree-huggy" makes me think that you do), well, if I might be blunt, we're not all as selfish as you. Does that answer your question?

samjh
September 18th, 2009, 01:11 AM
You should really be considering which component manufacturer is most environmentally friendly, rather than which computer builder. Computers are made up of individual components, built by many manufacturers, so the environmental friendliness of a computer builder depends largely on the environmental friendliness of the manufacturers who make its components.

Gigabyte, I heard, is pretty pro-active on the environmental front.

Unfortunately, the computer industry as a whole is extremely toxic. Merely planting trees won't help toxic waste, or chemicals produced during manufacture and recycling.

handy
September 18th, 2009, 01:36 AM
NEC make some mobile phones out of 100% biodegradable eco-plastics. Which may hopefully be the beginning of a trend which may grow as oil prices rise.

Apple have started making out like they care about the environment. Newish policies & such, which is a turnaround for them.

michaelzap
September 18th, 2009, 01:41 AM
You can see Greenpeace's rankings of many computer manufacturers here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/how-the-companies-line-up

handy
September 18th, 2009, 01:49 AM
You can see Greenpeace's rankings of many computer manufacturers here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/how-the-companies-line-up

Thanks for that link, it's very informative.

Nburnes
September 18th, 2009, 02:09 AM
In that link is looks like Acer is actually near the top and Apple and HP are at the bottom :Phahahaha

pythonscript
September 18th, 2009, 01:38 PM
You can see Greenpeace's rankings of many computer manufacturers here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/how-the-companies-line-up

That's exactly the kind of information I was looking for. Thanks for the help!

Skripka
September 18th, 2009, 02:14 PM
In that link is looks like Acer is actually near the top and Apple and HP are at the bottom :Phahahaha

The funny part being that all the 8/10 of the lowest end companies are all computer system builders...not component manufacturers.


Also the rankings seem to ONLY deal with the end product...not how much environmental damage the companies actually do.

michaelzap
September 18th, 2009, 02:37 PM
The funny part being that all the 8/10 of the lowest end companies are all computer system builders...not component manufacturers.


Also the rankings seem to ONLY deal with the end product...not how much environmental damage the companies actually do.


They explain their process and rankings pretty well, actually, and this is at the bottom of that page:

For more detailed explanation check our Q&A about the Guide to Greener Electronics.

Disclaimer: Our 'Guide to Greener Electronics' aims to clean up the electronics sector and get manufacturers to take responsibility for the full life cycle of their products, including the electronic waste that their products generate. The guide does not rank companies on labour standards, mining, or any other issues, but recognises that these are important in the production and use of electronics products. For more on the social impacts of the electronics industry visit Good Electronics and Make IT Fair.