Ads by TechWords
Subscribe to our e-mail newsletters
For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Computerworld Daily News (First Look and Wrap-Up)
Computerworld Blogs Newsletter
The Weekly Top 10
More E-Mail Newsletters 
Preston Gralla's picture
Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Report: Apple is at the bottom of the environmental barrel

Rate this
Rated +9
147 Votes

Apple may be the darling of the hipper-than-thou crowd, but when it comes to climate change, it has one of the worse environmental records of any tech company, according to a new survey. Microsoft beats it by a considerable margin, and IBM is best of all the techs.

Climate Counts, a non-profit group financed by the yogurt maker Stonyfield Farm, just released a report detailing how 60 top corporations rank according to their commitment to stopping climate change. It used a scale from 0 to 100 and 22 criteria to rank companies. According to the group, it determined if the companies

  • Measured their climate "footprint"
  • Reduced their impact on global warming
  • Supported (or suggest intent to block) progressive climate legislation
  • Publicly disclosed their climate actions clearly and comprehensively

Apple scored dismally on all counts, racking up a lowly score of 11 out of 100. The industry that Climate Counts says it is in, Electronics, had an average rating of 56. IBM topped the list, with a 77. Apple was the lowest overall in the Electronics category.

The Apple scorecard was not pretty. It rolled up zeroes in countless categories, for acts such as not setting goals for reducing emissions and not taking steps towards reducing emissions.

Microsoft scored well above Apple, with 38 points. The group noted:

Microsoft improved the scope of its greenhouse gas emissions assessments, which accounted for their increase in score this year.

Microsoft, Google, and several others were in the Internet/Software category. Google topped it with 55 points. The group reported:

The company has moved to measure its emissions and develop significant reduction goals. Their investment in renewable energy technology and in ambitious research and development on energy efficiency helped boost the company’s score in 2008.

Amazon and eBay scored dismally, a lowly 5 out of 100, while Yahoo came in at 37.

For a summary, click here. For full results, click here.

What do the results of Microsoft and Apple mean? It's one more example of Apple not living up to its lofty image, while Microsoft exceeds the image it's been branded with.

Like this blog? Subscribe to the RSS feed!

What People Are Saying

Rate this
Rated -3
101 Votes

A yogurt company sponsored report? Too funny.

They make a product that comes from cows, which emit methane gas which is considered a greenhouse gas. Does anyone else smell bull****?

Rate this
Rated +1
99 Votes

Consider the source

One has to remember that MS is primarily a software company. The nasty stuff is usually from the hardware side of the biz.

Apple has been commended in other reports for it's switch to aluminum components which is more recycle-able than the plastics which are usually burned off in 3rd world countries that extract the other nasty stuff we throw away.

But finally, we have to remember this article comes from Preston Gralla. A guy who kisses the ground Bill Gates treads upon and dreams of being the Rush Limbaugh of the Microsoftican party.

Rate this
Rated -5
113 Votes

Yawn

Since man-made global warming is a politically motivated myth, with zero "settled science" on its side, this story is a complete yawner.

Rate this
Rated +8
116 Votes

33/100 is hardly bragging rights.

I actually bothered to take a look at the scorecards given and 33/100 is hardly bragging rights. Granted, Apple's 11/100 is not exactly a shining example either, but you're basically bragging that Microsoft scored an "E" while Apple got an "F". Both are FAILING grades.

Responding to the comment that Mr. Gralla is a troll: Delusional or clever, he still brings people to Computer World's blogs. Many of his readers just want to scoff and feel superiority to someone who appears to be either on Microsoft's payroll or a mindless Microsoft fanboy.

You can spin it many ways:
Microsoft is 300% more environmentally friendly than Apple.
Microsoft scored 67% better than Apple.
Both Microsoft and Apple scored dismally on the environmental scorecards.

Or, you can show the straight numbers and let people draw their own conclusions, but who does that anymore?

Rate this
Rated +5
149 Votes

You are such a troll

You are such a troll Gralla...