I checked into Dell, but there standards aren't much better. The only thing I could find was that Dell will recycle any of their old items. This is a great difference, but in a recycling area not in the chemicals that are in use.

Apple takes back iPods for free.
Dell just started taking back their computers without a new purchase. What other companies do that? Every other company I'm familiar with only does free take-back with a new purchase. It would be great if they'd take old models back without purchase, but that doesn't seem to be the industry standard, so how is Apple lagging behind?

Well, to summarize:

Apple now lags behind Dell in terms of the free recycling program. This is very important because the older Apple computers contain a lot of toxic materials (heavy metals and fire retardant chemicals).

Apple also lags behind in terms of removing toxins from their new products. They are almost compliant with RoHS directives, but not quite.

Apple also represents themselves as a very modern, forward thinking company, and they should really have that attitude in their environmental policies.

The directive is RoHS: Restriction of Hazardous Substances.

I think that many companies are selling off non-RoHS product outside of Europe and might later, when it is all gone, switch their worldwide product line over. Maybe, maybe not. Might depend on market pressure, production cost, etc.

We at greenmachineshop take all computers back with the purchase of a new one. However we think that local programs should be used when available, to save fuel costs, emissions and packaging.
We also take our own computers back, when they are retired.

Only 11% of all computer trash is recycled properly.

RoHS does not cover all toxins and carcinogenic substances. No regulation for TBBPA, carcinogenic and toxic substances used during production, does not cover 'dirty' manufacturing processes in countries with practically no regulations on clean manufacturing, treatment and disposal of hazardous waste from the manufacturing process, etc.

Not all computer components are available in clean & green, but cases, motherboards and keyboards are. RoHS is much cleaner than regular product, but not as clean and green as possible.

More info is on our website: www.greenmachineshop.com

Indeed other companies have questionable components. But Apple isn't even close to being ahead of the curve on this.

As pointed out above, RoHS is a good start in the right direction, phasing out the obvious nasties with powerful disincentives (up to an 18% tariff). We should keep in mind that not all parties agree on what is unacceptably toxic: e.g. that the intrinsic hazard poses undue risk due to documented exposures. If we asked TH readers to list everything they felt was too toxic to be in a computer, or that it required a product take back program, I have a hunch the list of "toxics" would be very long and impossible to implement. J

Not long ago much was made of how Dell actually was accomplishing the recycling in terms of labor practices. Without going into the details here, I would just like to point out that a full life cycle review of environmental burdens and labor practice is needed before anyone claims company X is better than company Y interms of product design or recycling.

The whole electronics industry needs an efficiency overhaul.

High profile companies like Apple are a unique position to
take a leadership role in this area, and be responsible for the life-cycle of their products, start to finish.

Greenpeace has been campaigning to get the big electronics companies to commit to remove the worst toxics from their products and move beyond the European RoHS regulation and sign up to the precautionary principle. This pressured HP to change policy in March 2006 and Dell has followed with their commitment on toxic chemicals and recycling in June:

http://www.greenpeace.org/techcompanyrank

Apple has refused to commit to remove toxics from its products beyond legal requirements and despite making some good noises on recycling (only following pressure from computertakeback's campaign) it still recycles far less than its rivals HP and Dell. Apple also still lobbies against laws that would make it responsible for its own end of life products.

For a company that likes to claim it's a leader, Apple is actually acting more like a very reluctant follower on environmental issues. Or maybe it does 'think different' and Steve Jobs doesn't really care about the environment?

http://www.greenpeace.org/electronics

Hey Justin, I'm glad to see that you wrote about this. Earlier this week I posted a blog about reducing e-waste in the developing world and Dell's new recycle program. You can check it out here:
http://www.nextbillion.net/blogs/2006/07/05/does-the-100-laptop-come-with-a-recycling-program

Oh, and props out to Apple for re-introducing toxic heavy metal Chromium, and energy-intensive Aluminum as a must-have product features again.

a friend of mine who works for Apple address my queries to her with this link:

http://www.apple.com/environment/

what do you guys think?