Greenpeace says game consoles just aren't green
GREENPEACE’S LATEST REPORT, on the "green-ness" of game consoles, reckons that all three major gaming units, Nintendo’s Wii, Sony’s PlayStation 3 Elite, and Microsoft’s Xbox 360 still have a way to go before being eco-friendly.
The report, entitled Playing Dirty noted that although manufacturers had really made efforts to cut down on the amounts of toxic gunk and hazardous bits in their consoles, there were still enough in there to be cause for concern.
Unpleasant stuff like aspolyvinyl chloride (PVC), phthalates, beryllium and bromine used in brominated flame retardants (BFRs), were just some of the usual suspects found by GreenPeace’s boffins.
Because game consoles are not legally classified as “toys”, manufacturers are apparently able to get away with using chemicals and materials which would get products which are classified as toys banned from sale in the EU market.
But Greenpeace wasn’t exactly issuing the companies with a “Game Over”, praising Nintendo for cutting out beryllium (which can cause contact dermatitis and lung cancer) altogether and limiting PVC and phthalates. It also said that Sony’s decision to make the PS3 “bromine-free” was a good one and that the Xbox 360 using fewer brominated materials in its housing materials was also a step forward.
The environ-mental group noted that because the game console market was such a massive one, with over 60 million consoles sold to date, it was essential that manufacturers tried to make the machines as green and clean as possible.
Greenpeace also urged companies to think more profoundly about e-waste issues and what effects an ecologically unfriendly console would have on the environment if unceremoniously dumped in the junkyard of some poor developing country.
The study likewise called on all console manufacturers to re-examine their need for cramming so much bromine into circuit boards and plastic casings. L ong-term bromine exposure can damage learning and memory functions, as well as interfere with thyroid and oestrogen hormone systems.
Phthalates in the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation3 were also singled out for avoidance if possible, with one particular type, DEHP, known to interfere with sexual development in humans, especially males. µ
Share this:
Business Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
"Phthalates in the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation3 were also singled out for avoidance if possible, with one particular type, DEHP, known to interfere with sexual development in humans, especially males."

Oh sure, blame it on the Phthalates. It has nothing to do with sitting in front of the console for hours and weekends on end playing video games.
One thing Greenpeace didnt seem to comment on was the fact that the Wii sucks a mindboggling, extreme, flabbergasting 17-22W when running its most games.
Yes it is slightly upgraded cube hardware, but Nintendo should be applauded when compared to the 360 and the PS3
they annoy me

eco terrorists, thinking we can save the world by eating seeds and attacking whalers.

I'd rather eat a whale than a seed and live my life as pollutingly as possible, because it's more fun
do they think we care what they say.
Has anything really been green since the invention of fire?
Greenpeace can kiss my hairy arse. So can Tha idiot Al Gore and his religon of manmade global warming too. It's not true, one volcano throws more crap into the air than all of man does for years. The southern polar cap has been expanding for over a decade too but they don't tell you that.
"Greenpeace also urged companies to think more profoundly about e-waste issues and what effects an ecologically unfriendly console would have on the environment if unceremoniously dumped in the junkyard of some poor developing country."

Ahh yes, never thought of that. If the ethiopeans throw out their PS3's when they buy the next gen consoles imagine what effect it will have on their house. Oh I mean the dump. Wait....
Isn't it about time someone did a report on Greenpeace itself. How much energy to they use to promote themselves or to investigate others. How much fuel, electricity, water, or waste is produced when creating these reports?
It is unjust to suggest - 'environ-mental' that Greenpeace is mentally unstable. Greenpeace is not unstable, nor is it especially given to what has become known as 'direct action'. Greenpeace has done a lot of good in the world.
If you want to know what ewaste looks like, just do a Google image search for it. It’s not pretty, and the chemicals that leech off ewaste is getting into the drinking supplies of millions of people, poisoning them and causing birth defects. 

The manufacturers don’t care about the pollution, so I’m pleased that Greenpeace does.
Greenpeace is extreme, I would agree with that.

However, they are informing people about toxins and poisons. In this report Greenpeace is not telling people to live off seeds...etc. In this case they are trying to help you avoid developing cancer. 

Where do you think chemicals in landfills go? They don't disappear, they go in your American drinking water.
Go out and get a job, you bunch of penniless hippies, then you can afford all the polluting consoles you want.
I wish Greenpeace would concentrate more on writing balanced and actually useful reports like this, than fomenting hysteria over nuclear power and reprocessing (which are actually useful to decrease CO2).