Histoires vraies d'entreprises durables

This is a personal account of green consumer disappointment and a parable on corporate actions that can kill credibility outright. I've been an apple user (computer that is) for over 10 years now. We were all on Macs when I started working for Adbusters in '97. Maybe that's when the branding of Apple with creativity and social awareness began for me as well. If you had asked me then, which system was more eco-friendly: Mac or Windows PCs, I would have gone with Apple, without really knowing why. They were the underdog then, the alternative to the corporate monolith that Windows-run systems represented. So, naturally, they were the machine of choice for many activists I knew at the time.

Then Greenpeace began seriously digging into the environmental practices chez Mac and opened up a real can of worms. Their 'Green my Apple' campaign in 06 and 07 was very effective precisely because it targetted that warm fuzzy feeling eco-minded users had for the brand, the feeling that gave Apples a green glow that the products really didn't deserve. Apparently, the campaign got to Apple, as Steve Jobs announced soon after their intention to address some of the concerns raised, including the removal of some toxic elements from the production process.

Recently, Apple seems to have gone even further, releasing an 'eco' line of notebook computers, which boast some decent eco qualities in regards to the avoidance of toxic elements, reduced packaging and end of life recyclability. Even Greenpeace has noticed, giving Apple a much improved ranking in its annual Guide to Greener Electronics. For the last few months, before my repair experience, I was starting to feel that Apple was clueing in to the whole green thing step by step.

And then, last Friday, I had a direct experience with Apple's corporate policies that made it clear to me that this is a company that is very, very far from being environmentally responsible. In our office, we were running a 2004 Emac, a larger version of the popular Imacs made for educational use. It was getting on in years but still had a lot of useful programs and storage space. While trying to add a second hard drive, we damaged the very sensitive on/off switch, making it impossible to run the thing. Off I went to a local Mac repair shop to get a new switch installed.

The repair department's reaction to my request was unambiguous: Because they were officially licenced by Apple, they were forbidden by the company to touch models deemed 'obsolete' under penalty of losing their licences. We're talking about a 5 year old computer here, that can no longer even be looked at by an Apple technician. In short, it is made trash by Apple's decree. The repair guy told me further that Apple systematically stops making parts for older models when they move on to newer models. To my thinking, this electronic waste generating policy is nothing short of evil, in environmental terms. Especially in light of the rapid rate at which Apple rolls out new models, each very different from the last.

This experience made me remember the grumbling about the short-lived Ipod batteries a few years ago and has solidified my impression that Apple is just basically a non-eco brand. If Apple were one of my clients (they're not, obviously) I would tell them that before they roll out more eco laptops, they need to step back and look at the larger picture of their products' life cycles. Otherwise, any efforts made on the surface are bound to seem insufficient, and, what is worse, insincere. This taste in the mouth takes a long time to get rid of. Less effort would be required to stock parts and provide paid support for just a few more years...