crunchgear.com — Green Peace has announced the results of its first global exam on green electronics and the score card is somewhat surprising. As you can see above, companies like Nokia and Dell are inching toward the green, while others like Apple, Motorola and Lenovo are ranked way into the red,.
Aug 27, 2006 View in Crawl 4
spartan777Aug 28, 2006
why would we care about what these fundamentalists say?
blindirishmanAug 28, 2006
Greenpeace is a terrorist organization
Closed AccountAug 28, 2006
the only 2 of those goals which are in way sane is encourage sustainable trade and pease and disarmament.you cant' stop climate change - thats fact of nature.defend the oceans? what does that involve? protect ancient forests.. trees grow back.say no the genetic engineering? and deny our selfs the means to feed our population while minimising our impact on the environment? these people don't know what the hell they want.end the nuclear age. and deny ourselfs THE most practical and non polluting form of power out there?Eliminate toxic chemicals. guess they better get rid of all those plants and animals that are toxic hey.greenpeace is just a bunch of worthless do gooders who attempt to blind the public with emotive propaganda and feel good tocken acts. they only want to save the cute and cuddly animals and ignore the big picture.
hansamuraiAug 28, 2006
No digg because it's a blog link.
terminalpariahAug 28, 2006
@timmarhy, re: genetically engineered foods1. We already produce enough food globally for every person to have 2500 calories' worth per day.2. GMOs are heavily patent-encumbered. A nation that invests in GM food will likely have to export most of its harvest to afford the cost of the seeds. The patents are also used to prevent farmers from saving seeds, forcing them to rely on the GMO producer.3. Like the RIAA and MPAA, producers of GMOs derive a lot of income from lawsuits and settlements. If a GM seed blows from a customer's field to another farmer's field, they will sue that farmer for patent infringement. Not many farmers can afford to go up against a company like Monsanto, so they end up settling.World hunger is mostly a problem of distribution. Unfortunately GMOs receive a lot of pseudoscientific criticism, but they really are not helping the hungry.
nogoodnamesleftAug 28, 2006
Well, the guy who left Greenpeace was referring to what it had become in the mid-1980s. I've heard people complain that today's Greenpeace (i.e. 20 years(!) later on) has become too corporate and controlling, and that those in charge now are not the types who would *ever* have put their lives on the line like Greenpeace activists used to do.Whether this is good or bad is up to you, but it's pretty meaningless to take a statement about the way an organisation was 20 years ago and apply it to things today, unless you can show that it still applies.
nogoodnamesleftAug 28, 2006
"and deny ourselfs THE most practical and non polluting form of power out there?"Uh...... *no*.I'm pretty sure that "renewable" energy is far less polluting, it's just not mature enough to provide all our energy needs yet. That's why I like the idea of nuclear in the short term; but let's *not* kid ourselves that it's going to be cheap, and how non-polluting it is depends on how much we're prepared to spend on safety and disposal.
elviescaAug 28, 2006
@spankaccount:activistcash.com is a site sponsored by the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). Check this link:<a class="user" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom</a>Some of the supporters of this organization are: Coca-Cola, Monsanto, Cargill, Phillip Morris Tobacco, Tyson foods, etc.. What is the freedom they want for consumers? freedom to smoke cigarettes, drive drunk (if you checked activistcash.com, they are against Mothers Against Drunk Driving too), eating non-healthy food, etc.. All that Corporations sell you and don't want you to know that is bad for your health. From the site "...The group (CCF) actively opposes smoking bans and lowering the legal blood-alcohol level, while targeting studies on the dangers of red meat consumption, overfishing and pesticides. Each year they give out the "nanny awards" to groups who, according to them, try to tell consumers how to live their lives. Anyone who criticizes tobacco, alcohol, fatty foods or soda pop is likely to come under attack from CCF..."By the way, they also oppose labeling foods with nutritional information..just can't believe these guys.You may also want to read this:<a class="user" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=A_visit_to_the_ActivistCash.com_web_site">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=A_visit_to_the_ActivistCash.com_web_site</a>
macgyver2210Aug 28, 2006
We're talking about uber-green hippies, not amish people. Greenpeace uses tons of technology.Also, my papers are hemp, thank you very much...
metalcastrAug 29, 2006
I do my part. Whenever I solder something together I use Tin-Silver solder instead of lead based solder. Tin is (according to my research) non-toxic too.
travelsonicAug 30, 2006
Allright, the CCF is backed by those peope, but I say...Who f**kng cares, and why should we?Unliike most of their type, THEY CITE THEIR SOURCES and USE PUBLICALLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION to make their point.
grace20Mar 7, 2009
We are lucky that greenpeace will do effort for better living qualities. Although not all greenpeace members are angels, but generally they try to make a balance for a better environment.