Adam Kos By 2030, Apple, including its supply chain, will be carbon neutral. Yes, it's great for the planet, even an ordinary mortal will appreciate it, not only for himself, but also for the future generations that will be here after us. But Apple's path to a green world is questionable, to say the least.
In no way do I want to criticize the direction Apple is taking. The article itself is not meant to be a criticism either, it just wants to point out a few illogicalities associated with it. Society has been pursuing greener tomorrows for some time now, and this is certainly not a current cry for empty goals. The question is more about which way she chooses to do it, and that if she wanted to, it could actually go better, or more effectively.
It could be interest you
Paper and plastic
When Apple introduced the iPhone 12 to us, it removed the power adapter (and headphones) from their packaging. According to him, everyone has it at home anyway, and thanks to saving space in the packaging, even the box itself could be reduced in size, so more can fit on a pallet, which is then loaded into fewer cars and planes, which then pollute the air less. Sure, it makes sense. Except that the newly packaged cable had Lightning on one side and USB-C on the other. And before that, we only received classic USB adapters with iPhones. So most of them bought it anyway (including the author of the article). In order to completely switch to USB-C, he replaced Lightning with it, but not that. At least until the EU explicitly orders him to do so.
This year we got rid of the plastic packaging of the box, instead we have two strips on the bottom to tear and open the package. OK, there's probably no need to look for a problem here. Every plastic reduction = good plastic reduction. However, Apple also states that the virgin wood fibers in its packaging come from responsibly managed forests. But packaging alone will not save the world.
It could be interest you
Benjamin Levicek Recycling is not a panacea
My first MacBook from 2011 was a run-of-the-mill machine for the time. And when he ran out of breath, he could at least replace the DVD drive with an SSD drive, simply replace the batteries and other components. You won't change anything today. If your Apple computer stops keeping up with your pace, you need to replace it entirely. See the contrast? So instead of improving one machine with less impact on the planet, you have to replace it entirely. Sure, you don't have to immediately throw the old one in the container, but even so, it lacks the logic of sustainability.
Even if you "send" the old machine for recycling, 60% electronic waste ends up in landfills, and even if the product is recycled, most of the energy and material resources used to produce it simply cannot be recovered. Here, however, it is at least to Apple's credit that the aluminum chassis for its computers is made of 100% recycled aluminum. The company also mentions that all of its magnets use recycled rare earth elements. The new MacBook Pros are also free of a wide range of harmful substances.
Where is the problem?
Take these Airpods. There is also a correspondingly small battery in such a small device. Sooner or later, depending on how much or how little you use them, it will begin to lose its capacity. And is the AirPods battery replaceable? It isn't. So you are not satisfied with their durability? Throw them away (recycle of course) and buy new ones. Is this the way? But where.
If Apple wants to be environmentally friendly, let them sell iPhones without cables, brochures, stickers (I simply don't understand why they are still part of the package), or tools to remove the SIM tray, when a wooden toothpick would be enough instead. But let it design its devices with repairability in mind and not force us to buy them more often than is really necessary. Well, yes, but then he wouldn't have such profits. So there will be a dog buried in this one. Ecology, yes, but only from here to there.
I don't believe that Apple would start producing iPhones with USB C because the EU orders it to do so. It will turn out that there will be no connector at all and it will only charge via MagSafe. It already has the technology for that, which can be seen on the new laptops that can handle perhaps up to 85 W. So the EU regulations will be happily bypassed and money from users will be drawn further for new chargers separately...
There are clouds of similar companies - scammers in the world. An ideal case is IKEA. You buy a shoe box, in 3 years the plastic part will fall apart for 10 CZK in each shoe. What about a company with ecological gibberish in every advertisement? There are no spare parts, recycle the shoebox (understand throw away) and buy a new one… Same with the lights… Use for two years then throw away (sorry recycle). It's a shame…