"Our guide focuses on toxic chemicals and takeback policy because of the rapid growth in quantities of toxic e-waste being dumped in developing countries like China and India. While Nintendo's Wii console appears to be more energy efficient compared to the Microsoft Xbox and Sony Playstation, energy use is not yet covered in the ranking."
There is the mention of energy efficiency, also stating it wasn't part of it.
The survey was mostly about the use of hazardous materials used for electronics, mainly PVCs.... Nintendo did not disclose any information to Greenpeace, so they shouldn't have scored them at all, or done their own research if they were that bothered.
Many things were not taken into account for the survey in regards to how "green" a product is.... Greenpeace had a 1 track mind onto PVCs and whether the company themselves take machines back for recycling.... things like energy efficiency and the fact that most consoles (unlike PCs, TVs, phones etc) don't in fact get thrown on the dump anyway....especially reliable ones like Wii and PS3 (and GC and Xbox, N64, Dreamcast)
Greenpeace are like a child.... don't give them what they want on a plate and they throw a tantrum, especially if they have to do work to get what they want (like scoring Nokia down so much because their recycling policy was not upheld in some countries)
