News Article

Nintendo Hits Rock Bottom In Greenpeace Rankings

Posted by Adam Russell

Veteran video game company needs to clean up its act

Nintendo has scored just 1.4 out of a possible 10 for its chemical, e-waste and energy policies in Greenpeace’s annual Guide to Greener Electronics, the lowest score of the eighteen companies tested.

Despite last year pledging to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and e-waste, Nintendo has failed to score a single point in these categories.

It’s not all bad news however, and Greenpeace did award points for having PVC-free internal wiring in its consoles, banning phthalates, having a low-power AC adapter for the DSi, disclosing CO2 emissions and monitoring the use of other harmful chemicals.

Maybe Endless Ocean is more than just a game but in fact a training program for when the ice caps melt and the planet is flooded.


From the web

User Comments (66)



Raylax said:

Oh no, that's awf--- oh right, forgot, nobody cares what Greenpeace have to say on environmental issues. It's like listening to PETA on animal rights issues.
And, as I mentioned the last time Nintendo and their green credentials popped up (may have been on the forums), I don't see how they get lower than Sony whose console chews up about 3 times as much power.
But whatever, none of this makes any difference to me. If I want my Wii to be green, then I'll paint it so.



moomoo said:

Screw the baby seals.
Plus, like Raylax said, how did they get a lower score, when PS3 and Xbox 360 use up way more power? My dad got a device that says how much power is being used in the house. With just the Wii on, it was insane low, about as much energy as a few light bulbs. The Xbox 360 brought it up to 6 times as much energy being used.



bestbuck said:

Nintendo? who are they? lol. Some of these fanboys need to get there heads out of there Backsides



Ryuuga said:

Well, according to the text the problem here is not about how many energy Wii is using, but how Nintendo consoles are made. I wonder if Greenpeace is telling the truth, but I guess our world is more important than a videogame business company...



KarlThomson said:

The 'power' being used argument is pretty much moot since what happens if all the power to your house is made from renewable sources?

Its similar to the Toyota Prius argument, yes it uses less fuel (power in this case) but its 'greenness' is gone when you look at the manufacturing process.

Btw, I have no interest in Greenpeace whatsoever, I'm more interested in a proper argument .



ECM said:

Wow, I have to say I'm surprised (and encouraged) by the outpouring of scorn for PETA and Greenpeace on this thread already.



Adamant said:

This again?
No, Nintendo don't need to "clean up their act", Greenpeace needs to stop regarding "did not put any information on this specific point on their website" as "is probably neglecting said point in the worst way possible".

Seriously, try actually looking into the case before making yourself look like fools by reporting what Greenpeace wants people to believe, eh?



zemulii said:

I take it you're all environmental experts then? Some of you guys are just sad... "Oh no, something bad was said about Nintendo! Lets attack whoever said it because they must be wrong. Just because!"



Sean_Aaron said:

I used to have respect for Greenpeace, but lately they seem to pop-up mainly to piss on every single story about petroleum alternatives and stuff like this. No wonder the founders left!



Vendetta said:

I hate sanctimonious pricks like this. I can't name one person I know that thinks littering is ok. I can't name one person I know that would intentionally leave too many lights on. Same for turning up the heat while opening the windows. Or leaving the water running for no reason. And I can't name one person I know that wouldn't stop to help a wounded dog, or at least call authorities if he saw one. Or beat the living crap out of a person he saw abusing an animal (or again, call the authorities).

But here come Greenpeace and PETA to the rescue, sensationalizing the common sense of decency which most of us already possess in abundance. As if they were fighting some enormous, well-funded "pro-waste," or "pro-animal-cruelty" government lobby. Please.



vherub said:

the shame is the environment is an important issue, and there are always many more things consumers and companies can do. And verification for company claims are also important.
But it seems Greenpeace does more harm than good with these yearly reports.



Slapshot said:

@Vedetta..... well said my man. Screw Greenpeace, PETA, O. Admin, all the Climate Change/Warming whatever. Its all a load of crap and a base to push agenda. I dont know anybody to doesn't care about the enviroment. I care, but I also know that CO2 is NOT a pollutant and its the chemical makeup to nurture tree..... wich gives us Oxygen, wich gives LIFE! How stupid do these idiots think we are. Especially after Climate Gate. I think I shall now go turn on all my Nintendo systems for the day.



Boonehams said:

If you read the document, it's pretty clear that because Nintendo didn't make transparent mention of x on their website or yearly reports, then they are given the worst score possible in that category. Sorry, but data analysis doesn't work that way, Greenpeace. You dig deeper, ask representatives and wait until you get the information you require before assigning a grade. Otherwise, give them a N/A and let the public make up their mind since Nintendo refuses to give the "researchers" info.

For those supporting Greenpeace, consider this: The founders of Greenpeace left years ago because they said that the group has turned to corporation bashing and "pop environmentalism" and it is now run by people without any scientific backgrounds. Keep that in mind when you read these reports.



MiiMiiMii said:

@slapshot - ! my lord, some people really do have their heads very firmly buried in the sand!

I'm not a Greenpeace fan - but people really are in complete denial. Anyone that actually knows anything about Climate Gate knows that it was a smear attempt by a lobby that really does have a vested intrest.



MasterGraveheart said:

Guys, remember, if you ignore the morons, they'll just go away... wait, they have to be smart enough to know they're being ignored... cripes...



Raylax said:

@Zemulii: "I take it you're all environmental experts then? Some of you guys are just sad... "Oh no, something bad was said about Nintendo! Lets attack whoever said it because they must be wrong. Just because!"

You make an excellent point. However I feel it would be somewhat better if anyone here had actually said anything like that in the first place. Jumping the gun a little?



aaronsullivan said:

Honestly, there's nothing wrong with transitioning over to less harmful substances and more reusable and sustainable parts. Some progress in this will be necessary over time no matter what you believe about the state of our environment.

Greenpeace does target super popular companies on purpose to draw attention and while it's annoying and inaccurate and there are better ways, it does get results.

Apple was targeted a year or two back and they have not only made substantial changes --turned it into marketing advantage-- but led an initiative to carefully monitor the PRODUCTION side of things that is so often overlooked (even by Greenpeace.) That type of stuff is great.

Whatever you think about the climate change hype, better understanding and control of manufacturing is ultimately going to be much better for companies and us. Nintendo flailing against this is going to lose them money ultimately and shareholders are now carefully studying why Nintendo ended up on the bottom of this list.

No problem, though. Nintendo has CASH. Nintendo is nothing if not profitable and the electronic parts market is making it easier and easier to "go green" at a good price point as economies of scale are ramping up.



Sean_Aaron said:

@Boonehams: Exactly. I don't really care about whether or not climate change is a result of human causes; we should be looking to reduce our carbon footprint just to stop using up natural resources which aren't infinite. Anyone who thinks we can live our current lifestyles for another century is living in la la land.



Strofan7 said:

I saw a chart awhile back about comparing energy uses for consoles. Turns out if you leave the Wii on for an entire year it uses less energy than both the 360 and PS3 turned OFF but plugged in. Thats cool at least...

And that was before the PS3 slim came out.



mastersworddude said:

I find it hilarious how everyone is getting all mad over this. Whether or not the climate change is real, it would still be nice to live in a cleaner planet.



Percentful said:

It's pretty stupid how there are commercials for recycling, and yet they make you pay just to recycle. Way to encourage people, global warming freaks.
Anyways, about all this bad stuff about Nintendo and other companies:
I don't care. Considering that theory about the ice caps was found to be a fake with no proof of any sort, I really am not worried about the environment, though I do think it's not too much to ask to not litter, and to turn of appliances when they are not in use. I would recycle, if you didn't have to pay for it.



Vendetta said:

Apple... Heh, gotta laugh. Have you seen the gluttonous waste that goes into making just one of their monobody aluminum laptop casings? They've got people soooo fooled. Their stuff looks damn good though - second to none, even. I'll give 'em that!



Adam said:

For all the people comparing consoles, that is not all the companies are judged for. Corporate policies and other products are taken into account, too. Saying that the PS3 uses more energy than the Wii is pointless when Sony makes a ton of other products, and products are not all that's judged here. Look over the detailed pdf reports before jumping to conclusions about the reasons for scores. They explain themselves thoroughly. Whether you agree with the results or not is one thing, but it's good to know what you're talking about if you're going to rail against the organization.



jangonov said:

I have heard from multiple sources that nintendo simply does not give information like that to greenpeace, therefore on anything they don't submit, they assume it is the worst possible. I don't know how valid it is, but if this is true, I don't think greenpeace can say that a company does not do something, if the company simply wont say. It is like not turning in homework. Sure you may know the information taught, but without proof you get a low grade.



Firkraag said:

Way to contradict yourself.. As long as Nintendo refuse to provide any information, why should we trust that it's anything but the worst possible? I'm not saying it is, I'm just saying it might as well be until they prove otherwise.

Green Peace is a bunch of loud mouthed activists, but they do raise awareness and if Nintendo really is polluting way above average then they deserve to be under a telescope and should look to better themselves. It might not make a difference in our lifetimes, but we're not the last generation of humans to walk this earth.



Vendetta said:

Good advice, Adam.
e.g.: An additional e-waste criterion has been added and most of the existing criteria have been sharpened, with additional demands. The new e-waste criterion requires the brands to report on the use of recycled plastic content across all products and provide timelines for increasing content.

Again, I'm ALL FOR doing more with less. But it's this kind of language that exposes them and their ilk as nothing but thugs and blackmailers - at least to me.



jangonov said:

Oh, Im not saying I know anything of Nintendo's policies or their "green" rating, I am just saying that it is pointless for greenpeace to ridicule nintendo or any company if they don't give information. Until they start talking, or greenpeace says that they don't ACTUALLY know, I dont think it is right for anyone to say anything about the matter much less publish an article (greenpeace not nintendolife). Until all the information is there it is wrong to just assume anything.



Firkraag said:

If company's could get away from the bad press by ignoring to give out any information then I'm sure we'd only see 10's. Or are we to simply accept that they keep silent while polluting like none other?



Raylax said:

I especially like the fact that Greenpeace believes they can demand whatever information they like from whatever companies they like and that those companies will comply. Because, of course, all the companies on this thing haven't got far better things to be doing than writing lengthy reports on chemical usage and recycling for a shouty activist group with no legal powers and far more bark than bite.



bluegray said:

Kinda funny how some dorks think they know how things work.

While Greenpeace is out there trying to make a difference, all you guys can do is sit on your @$$3$ and play wii/ds and criticize the good intentions of other people.



SwerdMurd said:

I burn my trash and my diet consists solely of endangered species and human children. God bless freedom.



CH405K1N6 said:

Greenpeace is stupid and no one cares what they have to say, but PETA is just plain batsh*t crazy.



JakobG said:

Looks like they won't bring out the coming Legend of Zelda-Game in the collector's edition baby seal-leather case...



Bobpie said:

If they're so crazy about the power usage thing, then they're hypocrites, because they were publishing things on a website, and that uses power! shock

But seriously, they're over-reacting.



killer6370 said:

Who cares? someone please say Greenpeace go eat their vegetables and stop annoying us gamers,anyway its good if Climate changes so we get closer to the sea an can save oil,gas etc because we wont need aeroplanes ^^



Firkraag said:

It's sad that the majority of people around here would rather pollute more just because Greenpeace attacked their favorite gaming company. Nerd-rage more please.



Amorous_Badger said:

This whole comments thread is possibly the most hilarious display of fanboy whining I have ever seen 'STOP TELLING ME THAT MY NEEDLESS CONSUMER ELECTRONICS ARE WASTEFUL!'



Amorous_Badger said:




SmaMan said:

Looks like Nintendo didn't pay them enough. Heh! That's why the original founders of Greenpeace left, because the organization became too commercialized. Pretty much, they still care about green... money that is.



Slapshot said:

@SwerdMurd..... dude isnt life grand. I use my Gas Grill basically everyday and love my gass sucking trucks...... Im not drivin a Prius!



RowdyRodimus said:

Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft just need to buy more carbon credits after all, we know that works. The leader of the Green Cult, Al Gore said so...Not that he owns 10% of the company that handles that or anything.

Oh and to all the people upset at the ones who don't care about Greenpeace or the Cult of Global Warming, guess what? Your opinion doesn't mean a damn bit more than theirs.



nintendograbber said:

As a conservative republican, I think PETA and Greenpeace are stupid, ignorant organizations that should never have been created.



StarDust4Ever said:

Last I checked, GreenPeace was burning silos that contained genetically-engineered corn, and PETA representatives were giving animal rights protest speeches in the buff. Now that's neither "green" nor "ethical"

Just attach a Watt Meter to your Wii, PS3, or Xbox to see who's wasting more fossil fuels. I'm pretty sure the PS3 and Xbox 360 both double their carbon footprint within a relatively short amount of play time. Not to mention the horrid pile of e-waste created by those 52% or so "RED RING OF DEATH" Xbox 360 units. :

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...