Greenpeace targets games industry

[Shrygue]

via Games Industry (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=31487)


The environmental activist group Greenpeace International has launched a new video featuring iconic game characters as part of its campaign against e-waste.

The 90-second video has Microsoft's Master Chief, Nintendo's Mario and Sony's Kratos competing for the prize of a "greener" games console.

Greenpeace's latest campaign is aimed directly at the big three game console manufacturers - Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft - who it accuses of failing to "reduce the toxic burden of their products."

The group recently criticised Nintendo and Microsoft publicly for their policies and practices on toxic chemicals and takeback.


"Game console manufacturers are lagging way behind the makers of mobile phones and PCs who have been reducing the toxic load of the products over the past year," said Zenia Al Hajj, Greenpeace International's toxics campaigner.

"Game consoles contain many of the same components as PCs so manufacturers can do a lot more," she added.

Greenpeace is engaged in a campaign to persuade the electronics industry to eliminate hazardous chemicals across the board, believing that current environmental protection legislation does not go far enough.


"Nintendo is surprised by the content of the Greenpeace report," a Nintendo of America spokesperson told GamesIndustry.biz in response to the criticism.

"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."

[ICE]

Fun is a perceptional thing and clearly the public perception is that Wii games are more fun judging by sales.

[Starscream]

The headline doesn't match the article btw.

[JKKDARK]

This group is wrong, because the console sales don't say the same :p

[JPJunkie]

The headline doesn't match the article btw.

It doesn't make sense to me either :confused:

[Shrygue]

Okay, I'll swap the CVG article for the Games Industry one.


Edit: done, not much different but at least it has a better headline.

[armyStrong]

Gag me with styrofoam...I'm pretty sure if Kratos were real, the last thing he'd be worried about is toxic chemicals...

[wolfpack]

umm yea the topic i clicked on the side doesnt match with this...wtf

[Sp3ct0r]

lol @ hippies.

[Gold Line]

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/145283.html?playlist=featured

^heres the ad if you want to see it...

[Veskgar]

You can call me a hippie or a tree hugger but we only have this one planet. The Earth is getting more and more over populated and lets admit it, we humans can be pretty wasteful and inefficient. The environment is only getting more polluted, climate change such as warming is rapidly changing, and valuable nutritious food supplies like Tuna, Salmon, etc. are diminishing.

We as the most intelligent and capable species on the planet need to come together and start caring about the Earth and what it will be like 20, 50, & 100 years from now.

With that all said, corporations with the money and technology to make a difference, should lead the way to better efficiency in the way of energy consumption, renewable materials, etc.

[armyStrong]

We as the most intelligent and capable species on the planet need to come together and start caring about the Earth and what it will be like 20, 50, & 100 years from now.

I don't want to start an argument or anything, but I do want to say something on behalf of corporate America...

I hate it when people try to argue that we need to "start" caring for the planet...we "started" caring for the planet a long time ago. If you don't think that's the case, then I have some serious questions.

Why did I have to get an e-check for my car last month? Why did I have to install more efficient air filters into the businesses my job covered over the past few summers? Why do I have to dispose of asbestos in a way that won't damage the environment? Why does the government insist on stricter dumping policies for waste materials than it did even five years ago? Why did my university install energy-efficient light bulbs into all of it's dorm rooms and houses?

Are there still problems? Absolutely, but nothing in this world will ever be perfect...The government and big-business are not always the big-bad guys everyone wants to make them out to be.

If you think humans are wasteful and inefficient, try talking to a carbon dioxide-emitting volcano, a rotting pile of leaves, or a methane-releasing cow...my car passes emissions standards...I bet mother nature doesn't.

[bah]

If you think humans are wasteful and inefficient, try talking to a carbon dioxide-emitting volcano, a rotting pile of leaves, or a methane-releasing cow...my car passes emissions standards...I bet mother nature doesn't.

I don't think any of those things spend any real portion of their day concerned about the habitability of the planet for our kind tomorrow or any day forward, nor have the capability to change. People do. Even talking to them can be quite difficult.
They are also natural processes to this planet; the digging up, refining (massively concentrating) and chemical manipulation that create industrial materials/chemicals, then leaving them to questionable disposal is not.

Yes this was written on a PC and yes it was purchased knowing all these things, I cant see Greenpeace putting PR pressure on companies to do better as anything but a positive if I'm unable to 'live' without these things.

[armyStrong]

I do in fact understand that none of those things can communicate or string together thoughts :-P ...my point there is that just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good for the environment, and just because it's man-made doesn't mean it's out to destroy the environment.

[bah]

Yeah, I was just being a smartass :)

But nature doesn't 'care' if the planet is no longer habitable by human beings, human beings do. Some other species better able to adapt to the changes will survive and continue to evolve. The world will keep spinning.

So when a natural volcano eruption occurs, its pretty much out of our hands despite being negative. Just because a company has made some minor PR steps towards polluting less doesn't mean they couldn't/shouldn't do more.

Companies aren't out to be evil, they're out to make money. Medical insurance companies actively work to not cover things people need to be healthy or just live at all. That's acceptable in unaccountable capitalism.
So to are toxic chemicals that could be eliminated acceptable so long as they don't cause short term harm (during the devices life basically).
The companies aren't trying to destroy anything, they're trying to maximise profit and without oversight that often leads to really bad outcomes (Lead paint or glue that turns to GHB [the 'date rape' drug] when digested on kids toys, industrial chemicals in pet food killing pets to quote the most recent publicised cases).
These things didn't happen because the companies were trying to do bad, they were all results of the companies choosing a cheaper alternative to save on production costs without putting in the expensive work of making sure they were safe.

Free markets are the best system people have come up with, but they certainly need regulation and groups dedicated to protecting mostly non-monetized resources essential to human life like clean air, soil and water. Hell, even human life itself is often treated as a commodity for companies rather than the reason companies exist.

My point in short: I support Greenpeace's actions.

[The Hombrew Hunter]

Oh no! Our games are spewing toxic wastes and wasting electricity!

Here's something Greenpeace should think about. The server their sites are on are on 24/7!

THINK ABOUT THE ENERGY YOU'RE WASTING FROM THAT!

God. They're worrying about game consoles when there's a war being waged in another country? Something tells me the time and effort they put into the games thing can be put to better use, perhaps by helping save the seals or something. Of course, saving seals is ending Inuit lifestyles and tons of trees and land not used for oil drilling and the like.

Great job, guys. Whining about video games while thousands of trees and animals die in Canada.

EDIT:

I don't hate Greenpeace, but environmentalists as a whole sometimes have backfiring plans.

For example, the Canadian north, which was once protected from companies logging illegally by trappers reporting it to environmentalist groups, is no longer protected due to the ban on furs in Canada and Europe from environmentalists not wanting the cruel treatment of animals. The Inuits who trapped for furs for the Fur Trade now must take jobs in the Oil industry, and to do that, land must be flooded. This will kill tons of moose, deer, etc. and anything else living in that land. So they saved one type of animal (Baby seals) but are keeping others dying.

[/rant]

[quzar]

I had heard about this, but not Nintendo's reply. Once I did hear about this though, I was quite sure that Nintendo would be the one who either already meets all standards on the issue, or would be the first to champion the initiative.

Anybody else have the same notion?