Gaming giants fail toxic exam

Posted by jossc - 27 November 2007 at 6:57pm - Comments

Green Elecronocs Guide Autumn 2007

With Christmas getting ever closer we've some unfestive bad news for gaming giants Nintendo, makers of the popular Wii, Gamecube and Game Boy consoles. They've achieved a spectacular zero score in the latest edition of our quarterly Greener Electronics Guide - the first time such a feat has ever been accomplished.

The guide ranks companies on the toxic content of their products and their willingness to take back and recycle them once they become redundant. This is the first time that we've included gaming consoles, giving Nintendo the chance to leap straight into last place - an opportunity they grasped with both hands!

Although Nintendo were the only company to achieve total hopelesness, they faced stiff competition from other luminaries of the electronics world, notably Microsoft and Philips, who put in almost equally abject performances.

Did you know?
The average lifespan of computers in developed countries has dropped from six years in 1997 to just two years in 2005.

At the other end of the scale Sony Ericsson snatched first place from Nokia, while Samsung improved to a creditable third place. You can find a full breakdown of the results and how they were obtained on the Greenpeace International website.

The Greener Electronics Guide is our way of getting the electronics industry to face up to the problem of e-waste. We want manufacturers to get rid of harmful chemicals in their products, as well as putting an end to the stories of unprotected child labourers scavenging mountains of cast-off gadgets created by society's gizmo-loving ways.

If you want to ensure that the gifts you give this festive season don't hang around polluting the Earth long after they've outlived their usefulness, why not consult the guide for pointers in the right direction?

Article tagged as: electronics, green electronics guide, microsoft, nintendo, sony ericsson, toxics

Comments Commenting is now closed

Such a shame that within hours of this hitting the mass media it's already been proven the report is not be worth the recycled bog roll it's written.

By shaun_purdy1234 - 28 November 2007 at 2:21pm

Do you mean criticisms such as this? If so, I refer you to m' learned friend Martin from our international office:

To pick up on the two points above our report requires Nintendo not just to have policies, but to make them public so their customers know what they are buying and so people can check that they are being followed. Not only did we do plenty of research, we also contacted Nintendo in advance of the reports publication, but so far there's no sign that they want us, you or anyone else to know what they're doing about toxic chemicals in their products.

So the easiest way for Nintendo to remove that zero next to their name is to come out and tell us what they're doing and what they plan to do.

web editor
gpuk

By jamie - 28 November 2007 at 3:13pm

Some things Nintendo is already doing:

In our offices:
– We recycle the paper we use company-wide.
– We limit our use of colored paper, since it’s not easily recycled.
– We purchase recycled paper towels, report covers, message pads, and writing pads.
– We currently recycle more than 70% of the waste that is generated at our headquarters.
– We actively promote the recycling of aluminum cans and glass in our corporate cafeterias.

In our products:
– We use at least 80% recycled paper in all of our shipping packaging.
– We no longer use Styrofoam in our game pak or Game Boy packaging.
– All of our instruction manuals are printed on recycled paper.
– We no longer use plastic Game Pak covers.
– Our clamshell packaging is recyclable and most recycling centers accept it.
– We require that manufacturers not use any banned substances (such as lead, mercury, etc.) in components, nor use them in the manufacturing process for any components used inside of our products. This requirement also extends to suppliers of packaging, marketing materials, and other items used in the marketing and distribution of our products.

By Nintendo_Rules - 8 December 2007 at 11:44am

By the way, the next edition of the guide will include energy consumption as a criterion - and we expect to see Nintendo perform well in that.

On your last point - that you require manufacturers not to use any banned substances (lead, mercury, etc.). As you say, these substances are already banned, under the European Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RHoS) Directive. Obviously, we'd expect companies to adhere to existing laws.

This ranking isn't about getting manufacturers to adhere to laws that already exist - it's about getting leading companies like Nintendo to take a stand and ban hazardous chemicals that are still in use, like PVC and BFRs.

Cheers,

Bex
gpuk

By bex - 10 December 2007 at 7:38pm

System - Power consumption

Sony PS3 - 200 Watts peak
Xbox 360 - 185 Watts peak
PC - 209 Watts
The Nintendo Wii - Just 18.4 Watts

Also Nintendo are renound for there reliability there are still many nintendo consoles in full working order over 20 years old! So they dont have to be sent to landfill etc as you just pass them down to your sons nephews grandkids etc...

I may be a bit biasd as im a hughe fan of Ninty but the figures cannot be denied can they? 1 Playstation or Xbox uses upto 10 times the power of Wii. Long live Nintendo keep up the good work!

By moonwolf - 12 December 2007 at 6:04am

Thought some of you might be interested in our response to what Nintendo have been saying about the ranking, on our Making Waves blog.

Cheers,

Bex
gpuk

By bex - 12 December 2007 at 12:22pm

Such a shame that within hours of this hitting the mass media it's already been proven the report is not be worth the recycled bog roll it's written.

By shaun_purdy1234 - 28 November 2007 at 2:21pm

Do you mean criticisms such as this? If so, I refer you to m' learned friend Martin from our international office: To pick up on the two points above our report requires Nintendo not just to have policies, but to make them public so their customers know what they are buying and so people can check that they are being followed. Not only did we do plenty of research, we also contacted Nintendo in advance of the reports publication, but so far there's no sign that they want us, you or anyone else to know what they're doing about toxic chemicals in their products. So the easiest way for Nintendo to remove that zero next to their name is to come out and tell us what they're doing and what they plan to do. web editor gpuk

By jamie - 28 November 2007 at 3:13pm

Nintendo is very concerned with doing our part to help preserve the environment. We’re always researching new products and procedures to make our products and operations as environmental-friendly as possible. Some things Nintendo is already doing: In our offices: – We recycle the paper we use company-wide. – We limit our use of colored paper, since it’s not easily recycled. – We purchase recycled paper towels, report covers, message pads, and writing pads. – We currently recycle more than 70% of the waste that is generated at our headquarters. – We actively promote the recycling of aluminum cans and glass in our corporate cafeterias. In our products: – We use at least 80% recycled paper in all of our shipping packaging. – We no longer use Styrofoam in our game pak or Game Boy packaging. – All of our instruction manuals are printed on recycled paper. – We no longer use plastic Game Pak covers. – Our clamshell packaging is recyclable and most recycling centers accept it. – We require that manufacturers not use any banned substances (such as lead, mercury, etc.) in components, nor use them in the manufacturing process for any components used inside of our products. This requirement also extends to suppliers of packaging, marketing materials, and other items used in the marketing and distribution of our products.

By Nintendo_Rules - 8 December 2007 at 11:44am

This ranking is specifically about toxics in technology. It looks at hazardous substances and product takeback/product recycling. It doesn't rank companies on labour standards, paper recycling, energy use or any other issues - but we do recognise that these are important. There's more about the criteria and Nintendo's ranking in this pdf. By the way, the next edition of the guide will include energy consumption as a criterion - and we expect to see Nintendo perform well in that. On your last point - that you require manufacturers not to use any banned substances (lead, mercury, etc.). As you say, these substances are already banned, under the European Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RHoS) Directive. Obviously, we'd expect companies to adhere to existing laws. This ranking isn't about getting manufacturers to adhere to laws that already exist - it's about getting leading companies like Nintendo to take a stand and ban hazardous chemicals that are still in use, like PVC and BFRs. Cheers, Bex gpuk

By bex - 10 December 2007 at 7:38pm

I believe Nintendo will do astoundingly well in any energy tests its the most energy efficiant of the current crop of games consoles by far and this is no accident Nintendo went to painstaking lengths to make this a low power machine, Check out its power rating below compared to the competition. System - Power consumption Sony PS3 - 200 Watts peak Xbox 360 - 185 Watts peak PC - 209 Watts The Nintendo Wii - Just 18.4 Watts Also Nintendo are renound for there reliability there are still many nintendo consoles in full working order over 20 years old! So they dont have to be sent to landfill etc as you just pass them down to your sons nephews grandkids etc... I may be a bit biasd as im a hughe fan of Ninty but the figures cannot be denied can they? 1 Playstation or Xbox uses upto 10 times the power of Wii. Long live Nintendo keep up the good work!

By moonwolf - 12 December 2007 at 6:04am

Thought some of you might be interested in our response to what Nintendo have been saying about the ranking, on our Making Waves blog. Cheers, Bex gpuk

By bex - 12 December 2007 at 12:22pm