GUIDE to GREENER ELECTRONICS – 2017 COMPANY REPORT CARD | 2 Methodology
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Guide to Greener Electronics 2017 COMPANY REPORT CARD Contents || Methodology . 3 || Overall Grades . 6 +| Renewable Energy & Climate Change . 7 +|Sustainable Design & Resource Reduction . 8 +|Hazardous Chemical Elimination: Products & Supply Chain . 9 || Company Report Cards . 10 +| Acer . 10 +| Amazon . 13 +|Apple . 16 +| Asus . 20 +| Dell . 23 +| Fairphone . 26 +|Google . 29 +| HP . 32 +| Huawei . 36 +| Lenovo . 39 AUTHORS +| LG . 42 Gary Cook +| Microsoft . 45 Elizabeth Jardim +| Oppo . 48 +| Samsung . 50 WITH RESEARCH BY +|Sony . 53 Eric Lau +| Vivo . 56 An Lee +| Xiaomi . 58 Insung Lee Ruiqi (Angel) Ye Iza Kruszewska Madeleine Cobbing DESIGNED BY Alyssa Hardbower PUBLISHED October 17, 2017 Greenpeace Inc. 702 H Street, NW, STE 300, Washington, D.C. 20001 GREENPEACE GUIDE TO GREENER ELECTRONICS – 2017 COMPANY REPORT CARD | 2 Methodology TO EVALUATE COMPANIES in the Guide, Greenpeace sustainability, as opposed to purchase of unbundled uses publicly available information from each company, renewable energy credits or carbon offsets . including corporate communications and CSR reports, public ||A clean energy siting policy to prioritize access to submissions to stakeholders and reporting bodies, as well as renewable energy for its own operations, informing media coverage . Of the 17 companies included, Greenpeace the selection of suppliers who themselves are pursuing engaged with 14 directly in preparing our assessments . renewable energy as a source of electricity and Companies we did not meet with were Oppo, Vivo and discriminating against coal and nuclear power to meet Xiaomi, who declined to share or discuss information on their infrastructure electricity demand . environmental performance . For the 19th version of the Guide, overall grades awarded PERFORMANCE to each company are derived by an equal weighting of the Companies are assessed on the strength of their measurable impact area grades (⅓ each) . Impact area grades are derived progress in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions and by the following weighting of criteria: Transparency (30%), use of renewable energy to power their own operations and Commitment (30%), Performance (30%), and Advocacy (10%) . their supply chain . In reporting their renewable procurement, For companies where no positive or negative advocacy is companies should follow the required and recommended identified in the 18 months prior to the publication of the disclosures established in the recently adopted Scope 2 Guide, impact area grades will be derived by equal weighting Guidance of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, which established of Transparency, Commitment, and Performance . clear reporting requirements for reporting market-based purchasing of renewable electricity . High-scoring companies Renewable Energy & Climate Change also demonstrate: ||Efforts directly made by them or by their suppliers to TRANSPARENCY meet electricity demand with the direct installation of Companies are evaluated on the scope and level of detail made renewable energy, and reduction of emissions through publicly available on the greenhouse gas emissions and energy higher efficiency . consumption of their own operations, as well as that of their ||Efforts directly made by them or their suppliers to meet product supply chain . Public information includes information their electricity demand through the deployment of from a company’s website, annual reports, submissions to additional renewable energy capacity through long-term regulatory agencies or information clearinghouses such as Power Purchase Agreements or in partnership with local or CDP . In addition to detailed reporting of its scope 1, 2, and 3 community renewable energy developers or utilities . (products, goods and services), energy, and greenhouse gas footprint, high-scoring companies will have published their ||Efforts to select suppliers on the basis of their ability to suppliers, their respective tiers and what they are supplying, manufacture and assemble the company’s devices with and an indication of how much they have contributed to the facilities powered by renewable energy . brand’s energy footprint . ||Support or incentives offered to suppliers who are able to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels by transitioning their COMMITMENT operations to renewable energy Companies are assessed on the strength of their commitment to powering their own operations and product supply chain with ADVOCACY renewable energy . High-scoring companies will demonstrate: Companies are evaluated on actions taken to advocate for ||Adoption of a long-term goal of 100% renewable ambitious policies at all levels of government that encourage energy, covering both its own operations and its wide-scale renewable energy generation and use . High- product supply chain; scoring companies also demonstrate: ||Adoption of near-term greenhouse gas targets or ||Top level advocacy with the national/regional measurable renewable energy goals; policymakers for policies that result in greater access to renewable energy or greater amounts of renewable energy ||Renewable energy procurement guidelines that prioritize connected to the grid . high-impact methods of powering with renewables that demonstrate additionality, proximity to demand, and ||Proactive advocacy with utilities for more access or for grid-wide investment in renewable energy . GREENPEACE GUIDE TO GREENER ELECTRONICS – 2017 COMPANY REPORT CARD | 3 ||Proactive advocacy with companies in their supply chain to ||Device design and development of supply chain to deliver transition the supplier’s operations to renewable energy . multiple materials from secondary or closed-loop sources . Companies that are confirmed to have lobbied against ||Deployment of product takeback system across all renewable energy or climate policies in the past 18 months, markets of sales . either directly or through their membership in an industry association, will be appropriately penalized . PERFORMANCE (EXTENDING PRODUCT LIFESPANS) Companies are assessed on whether their policies, product Sustainable Design design, and customer support are oriented toward extending the useful life of their devices, thus slowing consumption of and Resource Reduction energy, resources, and other impacts in the supply chain . High-performing companies will show evidence of: TRANSPARENCY Companies are assessed on the scope and level of detail ||Product design of their personal computing devices that made publicly available on the amount and source of material enables the public to repair and maintain their device for a resources used to manufacture their major product lines longer useful life . of personal electronic devices . Public information includes ||Publishing repair information and making spare parts information from a company’s website, annual reports, product accessible to customers in all sales markets . lifecycle analyses, public research assessments and submissions ||Product design and offering of components that allow to regulatory agencies such as the SEC (for conflict mineral users to upgrade their device to enable longer useful life . sourcing information) . High-scoring companies will include: ||Offering refurbished products for sale in both developing ||Details on overall material use and the use of material from and mature markets . secondary sources . ||Disclosure of smelter list for conflict minerals, including ADVOCACY information on due diligence efforts and certification Companies are evaluated on actions taken to advocate for compliance . ambitious policies at all levels of government that directly or ||Reporting on amount of material recovered through indirectly support the reduction of virgin material resources company takeback programs and its ultimate disposition, in the electronic sector . High-scoring companies will have: including utilization of closed-loop material flows . ||Engaged in top-level advocacy with the national/regional policymakers for “right to repair” policies that increase the COMMITMENT public’s right to access repair information and spare parts Companies are assessed on the strength of their commitment for devices . both to transition their lines of personal computing devices to ||Support for certification or ecolabel standards that closed-loop and secondary sources of materials and to extend incentivize device product design that enables devices product lifespan and material recovery at end of life . High- to be repaired . scoring company commitments will include: Companies that are confirmed to have lobbied against repair ||Long-term commitment to secure 100% or high percentage or recycling legislation or standards in the past 18 months, of material flows from closed-loop or secondary sources . either directly or through their membership in an industry ||Near-term secondary materials targets for high-impact association, will be appropriately penalized . or priority materials Hazardous Chemical Elimination: PERFORMANCE (CIRCULAR PRODUCTION) Companies are assessed on their progress and corresponding Products and Supply Chain plan to reduce consumption of virgin resources through the TRANSPARENCY development of secondary material or closed-loop supply Companies are assessed on their publication of their efforts chains, including disposition of their products at end of life, as to reduce hazardous chemicals in both personal electronic well as level of due diligence of efforts to secure minerals from devices and also manufacturing process chemicals within sources that are not contributing to human rights abuses, supplier