Sections

Find out how to kick start your games industry career

Get Your Free Ticket Today

Nintendo still most eco-unfriendly electronics company - Greenpeace

Company scores minimal points for eco policies in annual report

Greenpeace has once again highlighted Nintendo as the most environmentally unfriendly of all its annually surveyed electronics companies.

This year's Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics study scored the company just 1.4 out of 10 for its chemical, e-waste and energy policies, the lowest of the 18 companies included.

The Japanese manufacturer scored zero on e-waste and on its commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions due to a second year of increases, despite its pledge to cut them.

It did pick up some plus points for its chemical policies - for having PVC-free internal wiring in its consoles, banning phthalates and monitoring the use of other harmful chemicals.

The company has said it will eventually eliminate its use of PVC, however hasn't set a timeline for its phase-out.

Points were also gained for the low power Nintendo DSi AC adaptor and for disclosing CO2 emissions from its own operations, but they weren't enough to lift the company from last place, where it has remained for several years.

Microsoft fared little better in the guide, with a score of 2.4 points, which put it just one place above Nintendo at the bottom.

Of the three console makers, it was Sony that revealed itself as the most green, gaining one place to 7th in the chart with a score of 5.1.

Points were awarded for Sony's 17 per cent reduction in greenhouse gases from 2000-2008, with renewable energy now accounting for eight per cent of that purchased globally by the company, and it was also praised for its use of recycled plastics in its products.

Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Toshiba led the chart, while Apple was applauded for its rapid response to completely eliminating chemicals from its computer systems.

"It's time for a little less conversation and a lot more action on removing toxic chemicals," said Greenpeace campaigner Casey Harrell. "Apple, Sony Ericsson and Nokia are winning this game and HP is catching up, but the lack of action from other companies is ensuring that customers and the environment are still losing out."

Find out how to kick start your games industry career

Get Your Free Ticket Today

More stories

Xbox Game Pass growth slows as Microsoft misses target

Subscription service only grew by 37% during fiscal year, compared to target of 48% and previous year of 86%

By James Batchelor

Phil Spencer says Xbox is not done acquiring game studios

Head of Microsoft's console business says there will be more additions, but there's no quota or timeline involved

By Jeffrey Rousseau

Latest comments (3)

Jim Webb Executive Editor/Community Director, E-mpire Ltd. Co.11 years ago
I don't like how they score these companies. Greenpeace looks at a long list of variables but not every company reports all those variables. For those you do not report to Greenpeace, you get an automatic for it.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrea Montanari11 years ago
If Nintendo doesn't report to Greenpeace it shows poor commitment to the environment!
But I am not surprised at all; the level of expertness in this company is kinda low! I even had the chance to see sleeping employees during working hours, manager-thieves recycling company HW for money and managers sharing games/IP through the Internet.
It's a sort of virus, an unstoppable epidemic disease that no one wants to fight.
Gosh, I miss the good old Nintendo. :'(
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Jim Webb Executive Editor/Community Director, E-mpire Ltd. Co.11 years ago
No, it just shows they don't want to spend the time required to generate the huge report that Greenpeace wants. All their government required environmental reports come back just fine but Greenpeace won't accept those same documents.

I'm not saying they are environmental saints but Greenpeace refuses to accept environmental documents other than their own and scores them anyone a 0 when they don't do any extra work to provide them with the detailed study they want.

I'd be rather upset if a globally renowned watchdog group demanded I provide them with a huge report of my company and then get vilified with a score of 0 because they wouldn't accept the documentation I already file for my government.

In a sense, it's legal slander.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply

Sign in to contribute

Need an account? Register now.