Log in / Register
  • Thermal Vias are Ineffective. Here’s Why.

    Thermal Vias are Ineffective. Here’s Why.

    Adding thermal vias can take up valuable board space with little benefit.
      READ MORE...

  • Connecting the Industry, from Boards to Assemblies

    Connecting the Industry, from Boards to Assemblies

    HDP is embarking on new rounds of evaluations of laminates and lead-free solders.
      READ MORE...

  • Exploring the Impact of AI

    Exploring the Impact of AI

    A special panel discusses the growth of AI tools and its possible effects on the industry.
      READ MORE...

  • A Journey in Rigid-Flex Design

    A Journey in Rigid-Flex Design

    Overcoming the challenges of rigid-flex designs can be incredibly rewarding.
      READ MORE...

  • Creating the Ultra Library

    Creating the Ultra Library

    Building and maintaining what's said to be the world's largest CAD database requires strong relationships.
      READ MORE...

Homepage Slideshow

Electronics Companies Stumble Over New Greenpeace Requirements

Published: 07 July 2008
 by Staff
AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS – Sixteen of the 18 electronics companies evaluated in the June 25th edition of the Greenpeace's Guide to Greener Electronics, failed to score above the midrange (5/10) on the Greenpeace, green scale. Both Sony Ericsson and Sony narrowly made the grade with 5.1 ratings.

The latest additions to the energy criteria that require demonstrated political support for global mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and measurable reductions from companies that reduce both the direct and indirect climate carbon footprint have pushed more electronics companies below the midrange. 
 
“Electronics giants pay attention to environmental performance on certain issues, while ignoring others that are just as important. Philips, for example, scores well on chemicals and energy criteria, but scores a zero on e-waste since it has no global take-back polices," said Iza Kruszewska, Greenpeace International Toxics Campaigner. "Philips would score higher if it took responsibility for its own branded e-waste and established equitable global take-back schemes.”

Greenpeace focuses on the removal of toxic substances from products. Removal increases the safe recycling options. Greenpeace has not however adjusted its older positions on potentially hazardous substances to match the current science, such as the case with some types of brominated flame retardants (BFR) that have been demonstrated safe for use after exhaustive environmental impact studies. 


Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedInPrint Article