GreenPeace Rips the iPhone
The iPhone showed no traces of cadmium or mercury, typical causes for violation. While the iPhone appears to have met EU and U.S. environmental standards, it did not meet those of Greenpeace. Greenpeace found trace amounts of lead and other carcinogenic compounds in the device.
Lead is a carcinogen and can cause brain damage. Despite a large amount of medical evidence, only one state, California, recognize lead based solders to be carcinogenic.
Greenpeace also was not happy with the glued and soldered battery which made disposal difficult to impossible. They felt this would hurt recycling efforts for the phone’s batteries. Many supermarkets and communities across the U.S. have phone collection bins which they use to collect and recycle the materials in used phone batteries.
Also, the iPhone was found to contain bromine additives, which could be hazardous if burned or exposed to water. Its polyvinyl chloride PVC plastic contains large amounts of chlorine, which is thought to be possibly carcinogenic and harmful to health if ingested. The PVC plastic used is banned for use in children’s toys in Europe, but is widely used in the U.S.
Greenpeace’s findings were based on experimental deconstruction and chemical testing at its laboratory facilities in Exeter, U.K.
Apple is not making early progress toward its 2008 commitment to phase out all uses of these materials, even in entirely new product lines. If Apple really wants to reinvent the phone, it needs to design out all hazardous substances and materials from its handsets and peripherals,” said Greenpeace in a statement.
Following the announcement, Steve Jobs poked fun at the report, in a note on Apple’s website stating:
” I hope you are as delighted as I was when I first learned how far along Apple actually is in removing toxic chemicals from its products and recycling its older products.”
The Greenpeace report acknowledges that, “Although it is unclear whether headphones from an iPod or iPhone could ever be classified as components of toys or childcare articles, it is clear that the presence of high levels of phthalates in such materials could contribute to overall levels of exposure to such chemicals for the user, including children.”
The Center for Environmental Health executive director Michael Green is championing the suit and blasted Apple. “There is no reason to have these potentially hazardous chemicals in iPhones. We expect Apple to reformulate their products to make them safer from cradle to grave, so they don’t pose a threat to consumers, workers or the environment. In general what we try to do is encourage the manufacturers through a negotiated settlement to reduce the use of these chemicals. That would be our goal with Apple.”
The CEHCA suit intends to force Apple to put toxic hazard warning labels on its iPods and iPhones. California’s Proposition 65 requires products that can expose customers to reproductive toxins or carcinogens to contain warning labels. There are exemptions if federal law overrides the state’s authority, or if the manufacturer can present conclusive evidence that lifetime exposure to the product is not harmful.
