The fish Posted March 18, 2008 Posted March 18, 2008 ack in November we added Nintendo to our Green Guide to Electronics. Despite several requests for information Nintendo provided none and was the first brand to score 0. The next edition of the guide is released today and Nintendo only gets 0.3 due to an indication that it does have a chemicals management policy. We covered the reasons why Nintendo got zero last time around. Since then we have not received any response from Nintendo aside from one person from its UK PR department. Nintendo has been sending out a pretty lame response to emails on the subject, which tells you mainly about office recycling. Nintendo has added to its one meager FAQ on the environment some information on product recycling. There is now one phone number for US customers where eventually an operator refers you to the EPA for recycling options. That doesn't compare very well to other electronics makers. Sony for example offers much better recycling services. Nintendo remains the odd one out of the 18 companies in the Guide, without any public time lines to eliminate the worst toxic chemicals or a global recycling policy for the millions of products it sells every year. If Nintendo has better policies why not make them public like the other 17 companies in the Guide? From Greenpeace. Greenpeace stick with their "Guilty until proven innocent" policy on scoring companies... Greenpeace have given companies ratings once again. Sony get a score of 7.3' date=' Microsoft get 4.7 whereas Nintendo get a score increase of 0.3...giving them a full score of 0.3. Nintendo aren't doing anything wrong. It's just Greenpeace's way of doing things - if a company doesn't respond to Greenpeace they simply get a low score. They seem to do little research of their own. The main "problems" seem to be a lack of public policy on toxic elimination and recycling. A quick browse of Nintendo.com gives us two important things. First is a public policy on what Nintendo are doing to reduce toxic products. Note that Microsoft's improved score was partly due to phasing out the use of PVC. "As is stated in the manuals of the Wii console and DS Lite, neither product contains latex, lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyl (PBB), or polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE). Additionally, we have been phasing out the use of PVC in our packaging, using a safer, recyclable plastic instead." And what do Nintendo have to say about recycling their products? Well, lets see: "Because old Nintendo products are still in high demand on the used market, we rarely receive requests for the recycling of older Nintendo products; however, for customers who are interested in recycling their products, we offer referrals to local recycling options, as well as a take-back program if local options are not available." So, it seems that Nintendo are getting punished because they tell people to sell/pass on their products as opposed to recycling them. Which is odd considering that passing the product on to someone else is more environmentally friendly than recycling it. Even if people persist on recycling their products Nintendo will give us information on how to recycle them and they even offer to do it themselves. Greenpeace don't seem to want to reconsider the way they mark companies. Nintendo don't have many products that become obsolete or unwanted when they become "outdated" by newer technology, so why do they need to waste money on a big recycling policy? [/quote'] From the N-E front page. Nice of 'em, eh? Seeing as Greenpeace are morons, I posted this (long) comment in response on the original article: "I'm sorry, but even as an amateur reporter working for a games website, I find this a little, well, insulting. Greenpeace have clearly not done their homework - a simple look inside a Wii or DS box (both of which I have close at hand under my bed), and I can tell you that my fairly mediocre local recycling point will deal with everything in them. As almost any gamer or electronics dealer will tell you, Nintendo products are always in massive demand on the second-hand market, meaning that there is rarely need to dispose of them, and when there is, as you state in the article, they offer a take-back program. They comply with every bit of legislation I can get my hands on, and yet, to Greenpeace, this is all entirely irrelevant if they don't email them back. It's either a superiority complex or just being petty. Or just plain lazy, who can tell? It should also be pointed out that Sony's policy is somewhat obviously written as a marketing piece, and if you're impressed by their large figures, don't be - Sony make almost any electronic entertainment component I can think of, if as much of their stuff wasn't being recycled as it was, then we would have a serious issue on our hands. For the record, my job means I'm officially "console neutral" and personally, I like my 360. This isn't insulting as a gamer, it's insulting as a journalist, and, well, as a rational human being."
mcj metroid Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 and greenpeace continue to convince me even more not to give a shit about them:)
blender Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 i think it is good that these reports and league tables are written. I'm not sure what japanese corporate culture is regarding the enviroment. I find wiiconnect24 particularly offensive for the enviroment. Partucularly when all the current services except email notification dont actually require the connection but will only work with it on.
Rummy Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Before somebody comes in here and bashes you/corrects you about how bad WiiConnect24 is, can you tell me just how bad it is, compared to some other things in your household? Second, can you do the same compared to the other consoles? Third, if it's such a big issue for you, just don't have it on, it isn't forced upon any user iirc. Greenpeace sound like cocks though, but I cba to argue about it, they're clearly lazy cocks, N-E managed to find some info and present it, why can't lamepeace?
blender Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Before somebody comes in here and bashes you/corrects you about how bad WiiConnect24 is, can you tell me just how bad it is, compared to some other things in your household? Second, can you do the same compared to the other consoles? Third, if it's such a big issue for you, just don't have it on, it isn't forced upon any user iirc. Greenpeace sound like cocks though, but I cba to argue about it, they're clearly lazy cocks, N-E managed to find some info and present it, why can't lamepeace? I'm not comparing it to anything... i'm just saying its a waste of energy and all the current uses for it are pointless and bad for the enviroment. When you know you are going to sell 20million+ units, enviromental concerns should be scrutinised for all aspects ....including those listed by the op. God bless green peace! I think nintendo didnt want to disclose that the wii is made from recycled gamecubes. This would give them a high greenpeace score but would not help their marketing allusion
Rummy Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 Haha, points for the second part even though I know you were being a troll, but it was quite amusing. The first part however, was clearly considered, and you clearly know it was in how well you tried to dodge my question. I never said you WERE comparing it, I asked you TO compare it.
Zechs Merquise Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 What a load of bollocks, greenpeace are obviously tits. They haven't enven investigated Nintendo properly and running a system based on guilty until proven innocent is madness, it should be the other way around. How can all companies be guilty of grossly damaging the environment unless they prove otherwise? It really does show up the mentality of those running organisations like greenpeace.
Patch Posted March 19, 2008 Posted March 19, 2008 US: Do you possess nuclear weapons? Iran: ... US: Red alert! Iran has a 99.7% probability of possessing nuclear weapons! Do you intend to use them? Iran: ... US: It's war! All stations GO GO GO! On that site, I was going to send an email to Nintendo congratulating them, but Greenpeace must have second guessed me - the link isn't working.
Shaggy Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Its not that Iran have nuclear weapon sits its about them have the possibility to make them. As far as I can remember we are on Iran as about this to. Might want to do some more research on the subject before you put anything out. Anyway isn't the Wii the one that uses less Electricity? Oh I forgot that isn't so important Green-pees. But batteries in the Wii remote, I would give that one tooo them.
Olympic Gamer Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 From what I can tell about the Wii (I do not own one) is that no matter what your settings are for the Wii, you can not cut the power completely without removing the power cable. Thats pretty stupid in my opinion, it just goes straight to Stand by, and on standy by like most electrical appliances, its still using electricity. I try to do all I can not to waste electricity. My TV uses up quite alot of electricity (Most televisions still use the same amount of electricity whether their on or stand by, I think that was found in 2004, so things might of changed), but when I purchase a Wii, am I going to need to remove the power cable because theres no switch on the console to properly turn it off? And just incase I get a smart comeback such as "Its only a little bit more on the bill", every little makes a difference. I'l still use the electricity I need, I just want to cut down on whats wasted, which if every one did, we'd be alot better off.
Cube Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 From what I can tell about the Wii (I do not own one) is that no matter what your settings are for the Wii, you can not cut the power completely without removing the power cable. Thats pretty stupid in my opinion, it just goes straight to Stand by, and on standy by like most electrical appliances, its still using electricity. Just like most electrical appliances. Including all three consoles.
Shaggy Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 From what I can tell about the Wii (I do not own one) is that no matter what your settings are for the Wii, you can not cut the power completely without removing the power cable. Thats pretty stupid in my opinion, it just goes straight to Stand by, and on standy by like most electrical appliances, its still using electricity. Your completely right about that, but its the amount that device uses while it is on and in standby. Thats where the Wii is superior to the Xbox and Playstation 3.
Fandango Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Your completely right about that, but its the amount that device uses while it is on and in standby.Thats where the Wii is superior to the Xbox and Playstation 3. Where did you learn that? No offense meant or anything, just curious.
Shaggy Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 It has been all over the net before and after the release of the Wii. And commonsense tells you, less Chips, less Power, less usage. Wii In-Use: 17W Xbox 360 In-Use: 165W Playstation 3 40GB In-Use: 280W Playstation 3 60GB In-Use: 380W CameCube In-Use: 21W Playstation 2 In-Use: 50W Xbox In-Use: 70W Home - Games Consoles Power Consumption
BlueStar Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 I agree Connect24 is evil, didn't use my wii for ages with it left on and it screwed my graphics chip. Hope Rainbow Warrior boards NOE and kicks their ass.
Rummy Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Where did you learn that? No offense meant or anything, just curious. Aha! I remember bookmarking this way back in the days that the wii had just come out, off a link on these forums, I never really used that bookmark...until today! http://kotaku.com/gaming/wii/wiis-uses-about-onetenth-power-of-360-216051.php I once had a much better page breaking it down, but I guess I couldn't find it again, it was all done with proper multimeters. EDIT: I see someone posted in the gap whilst I was finding that. So nevermind. But, compare the figures(possibly changed now since changes in 360 design) and running an Xbox game for an hour is roughly the same as running a Wii game for 10!
Fandango Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 It has been all over the net before and after the release of the Wii.And commonsense tells you, less Chips, less Power, less usage. Wii In-Use: 17W Xbox 360 In-Use: 165W Playstation 3 40GB In-Use: 280W Playstation 3 60GB In-Use: 380W CameCube In-Use: 21W Playstation 2 In-Use: 50W Xbox In-Use: 70W Home - Games Consoles Power Consumption Wow, thats a huge difference, didn't think the PS3 used up so much power! (Sorry for semi-accusing you btw, but I get really annoyed by people who make up statistics and information )
Shaggy Posted March 31, 2008 Posted March 31, 2008 No stress. All my info are on facts. Yeah PS3 is sure a Power horse. I can't believe that in standby and room temperature it will mess the graphics chip up.
Recommended Posts