@tak--agreed they seem to just asume that any change is a good change----

i look at teh tire reefs they tried to build in the ocean--yeah great way to get rid of old tires....fast forwarda few years---now they cant get them out of the water fast enough

stof said: Right. And their policy section has no environmental policies. Seems like a pretty good reason to state that they don't take environmental factors into their policies. And has Nintendo responded to that yet in any way? Have they said "we only scored low because of these reasons, this is what we're actually doing"? or "in light of this report, this is what we have planned"? Shouldn't companies be striving to reduce their impact? Shouldn't Nintendo have tried to show Greenpeace everything they could about what they're doing to reduce harmful chemicals and waste? It just seems really weird that everyone is jumping to Nintendo's defense over something that doesn't actually effect the games at all. Greenpeace didn't give Mario Galaxy a 7, they just pointed out that the company doesn't seem to have any interest in reducing their environmental impact. Kind of makes sense for an environmental agency to do don't you think?

Stof, you are completely ignorant of this situation. First of all, you are defending Greenpeace, who is hardly a legitimate environmental protection organization. Second, Nintendo did respond to Greenpeace's claims.

Nintendo is surprised by the content of the Greenpeace report.

Nintendo takes great care to comply with all relevant regulations on avoiding the use of dangerous materials, recycling of materials etc.

For example, all Nintendo products supplied worldwide are designed to comply with relevant global standards.

In order to certify that Nintendo products comply with standards for hazardous chemical substances, Nintendo has established the Green Procurement Standards, which require our component suppliers certify that any parts including hazardous chemical substances should not be delivered, and Nintendo fully controls its products in the company.

Nintendo is always actively looking at ways to continue to increase its environmental stewardship and holds this as a corporate priority worldwide.

http://gonintendo.com/?p=31399

Greenpeace's response to this is below:

Nintendo: We were surprised by the content of the Greenpeace report, given that we take great care to comply with all relevant regulations on avoiding the use of dangerous materials, recycling, etc

We did give Nintendo the chance several times to address issues before the report was published. Therefore Nintendo should not have been surprised by the report having received it in advance.

We contacted the company by letter to their US, European and Japanese headquarters informing them of our guide, the criteria and that they could contact us with any questions, information or requests several months ago.

No response was received from Nintendo despite reminders. Before the ranking was published Nintendo received their ranking to correct or question anything we may have missed. No response was received.

Nintendo: For example, all Nintendo products supplied worldwide are designed to comply with relevant global standards.

The Greenpeace ranking criteria score companies on what they are doing beyond what is required by legislation. This is not a law enforcemen ranking Guide - we are looking for environmental excellence.

We expect all a company's products to be compliant with the EU's RoH (Restriction of Hazardous Substances in electronic products) Directive globally - as a minimum.

Nintendo: In order to certify that Nintendo products comply with standards for hazardous chemical substances, Nintendo has established the Green Procurement Standards, which require our component suppliers to certify that any parts they deliver do not include hazardous chemical substances, and ensure that Nintendo fully controls its products internally.

Green procurement standards are a start. However other companies publish their chemical policy to allow independent assessment by customers. If Nintendo has this policy it should include all chemicals of concern and be public about it to their suppliers and customers alike. Many other electronics companies have published their chemicals policy.

Nintendo: We are always actively looking at ways to continue to increase our environmental stewardship and hold this as a corporate priority worldwide.

Well we have made two simple suggestions already:

Commit to phase out the worst toxic chemicals

Implement a global recycling policy (Nintendo has actually done this.  It's in fact right on their website)

Nintendo has yet to do either of these, unlike many other electronics companies.

http://weblog.greenpeace.org/makingwaves/archives/2007/12/nintendo_response.html

What it boils down to is a ridiculous George Bush style "if you aren't with us you are against us" mentality. Just because they refuse to supply an iligitimate organization with their company's production information doesn't mean they are anti-environmental. Why should anyone support Greenpeace? They are extremeists at best and terrorists at worst. There are lots of valid environmental protection organizations out there, and you know what they are doing? Focusing on actual important issues.

 

Mnementh said: cdude1034 said: Hey, I'm not saying I have a cause. And I'm not already devoting my time and money into a cause. These people are though. FYI, I'm not a big game player, I just like numbers :) I haven't even finished half of the games in my profile. Edit: I also do volunteer work, like helping kids to read and servicing the people at the Thanksgiving/Christmas dinners for those with greater need in my community.  *g* I only want to show, that it is their thing to decide, in which theme they invest time and enthusiasm. The argument that they should invest their energy in more important task is bad, because it's a very important task for them. And you don't have to defend yourself, it's OK to play games, I do it too.

You're right, it wasn't a very good argument. I was in a hurry and wanted to show my disdain for Greenpeace.

Anyway, if that was the point you were trying to make, why not say that to begin with and save me the trouble of defending myself?

did mario actually 'crap' a mushroom? how odd...

cdude1034 said: stof said: Oh come on people. First, it's a pretty funny video, and secondly, why shouldn't they be able to point out the environmental detriment posed by the materials used in consoles? Sure it's not the biggest hazard facing out planet, but that doesn't mean they can't point it out. Apple recently announced a series of changes to their manufacturing methods after meeting with environmental groups. So if Greenpeace can actually get any of the console manufacturers to change what they put into their consoles, why wouldn't that be a great thing? There are bigger problems in the world than putting certain materials in consoles. How about instead of saving a few trees, you feed some hungry kids in Africa, or Asia, or America for that matter! If they devoted their resources and energy into something a little more productive than disrupting the sale of gasoline then the world would be a much better place. There are more reasons why I hate Greenpeace, but they escape me at the moment. Don't worry though, if this thread continues, I'll be back for more.

Not to nit pick, but  

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

However, they are somewhat related. The human race is consuming certain key resources far faster than we're replenishing them. They are doing something productive (though I think misguided in their approach) in that they're trying to make the world more livable and create the conditions for a world in the future that is more livable.  

Greenpeace's standards are higher than what the EPA currently has set, but EPA standards slowly increase over time. Greenpeace is just one of those prods that gets companies to think about current standards and regulations. It's a trend that's been happening since the 70s.  I never thought my year studying environmental law would come into play when talking about video games

I wshed they fight against Greenpeace.

stof said: Oh come on people. First, it's a pretty funny video, and secondly, why shouldn't they be able to point out the environmental detriment posed by the materials used in consoles?

Because the materials are used in EVERY electronics device? Including greenpeace's servers.

 

:o