Apple brags about its environmental progress, but the truth is it still has work to do

Beyond unveiling a new iPad and smaller iPhone, Apple took the opportunity on Monday to showcase something else: its environmental initiatives. 

For the first time at an Apple product launch event, Apple highlighted its sustainable forestry agenda to protect 35,000 acres in the eastern U.S. and 1 million acres of forest in China.

It also announced for the first time that the company is 93 percent reliant on renewable sources of energy worldwide, marking progress toward its goal of being a 100 percent renewable energy company. It has reached its target to run on 100 percent renewable energy in 23 countries, including the U.S., though it's short of that goal company-wide. 

And perhaps the most significant environmental announcement Apple made was the rollout of Liam, the 29-armed research robot that tears down defunct iPhones for recycling. 

Apple has made admirable progress, yes. But there are obstacles along the way, like the energy footprint at its manufacturing facilities and the perception in some corners that the company encourages planned obsolescence of its products.

When it comes to true environmental stewardship, Apple has a considerable ways to go. 

Apple still has work to do

That the company acknowledges this is an indication of the direction Apple is going in, according to Gary Cook, a senior IT analyst at Greenpeace, who is unrelated to the Apple CEO.

“This is becoming something they want to lead on," Cook said, adding that Apple sees it as a way to build brand loyalty. 

However, the big test is still to come: greening Apple's manufacturing facilities. According to Apple, 72 percent of its carbon footprint is in manufacturing, much of which takes place in China.

During fiscal year 2014, the company reported total greenhouse gas emissions of 34.2 million metric tons. Out of that, 24.8 million metric tons came from manufacturing, while just 0.4 million came from the company's other facilities, such as its offices and stores. 

Much of the electricity currently produced in China comes from coal, which is the most carbon-intensive fuel. Moving away from that as soon as possible is an important goal for any company that's serious about reducing the pace and magnitude of global warming. 

In April and October of 2015, Apple announced solar power expansion plans for China, including new projects that will eventually include a total of 2 gigawatts worth of solar power installations at Apple's Chinese factories. The company claims that, by 2020, this would reduce manmade greenhouse gas emissions by about 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the main global warming pollutant.

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

Apple is partnering with its Chinese suppliers to help boost the deployment of solar power. This includes Foxconn, which was once a public relations nightmare for Apple after being the target of media investigations and then audits to assess worker abuses and pollution from those factories.

Foxconn plans to build 400 megawatts of solar power by 2018, which would generate enough energy to power the factory where the final production of the iPhone takes place. 

Can Apple really be environmentally responsible?

But that gets to a central conundrum in Apple's quest to become the most environmentally responsible company in Silicon Valley and beyond. 

By constantly rolling out new products, Apple is contributing to a consumerism that may be difficult to ever neutralize from a carbon standpoint. 

By constantly rolling out new products and encouraging consumers to trade in their not-so-old phones for new, upgraded ones, Apple is contributing to a consumerism that may be difficult to ever neutralize from a carbon standpoint. 

A new phone can be built in a solar-powered factory, but it is still shipped by a plane powered by fossil fuels, and charged in many electric grids that are powered by coal or natural gas, especially in developing countries. 

And the customer may use the phone for a shorter period of time than they might have used it otherwise. Apple events like the one on Monday can convince many people that they have to be early adopters and get the latest and greatest gadget on the market. 

Ultimately, Wall Street judges Apple by how many products it sells, not how many it successfully recycles. 

However, in order for the company to truly walk the walk on sustainability, it will eventually need to increase the amount of reused material in its products. 

Most products Apple and its competitors currently sell contain nearly completely new materials, according to Greenpeace's Cook. 

For example, Apple increased its overall carbon footprint from 2013 to 2014 because it sold more products. The company did, however, tout that the emissions intensity, or emissions per revenue generated, has dropped annually since 2008. 

I have a stack of old phones, iPads and laptops sitting on an office shelf. Many of these were in perfectly good condition when they were abandoned at the first sign of slowness and replaced with faster, better-looking Apple products. 

Apple increased its overall carbon footprint from 2013 to 2014 because it sold more products.

I suspect I'm not alone in this, and in fact, many people may simply have tossed their old equipment in the garbage, contributing to electronic waste. 

This relates to the "planned obsolescence" theory, which holds that Apple is somehow deliberately limiting the useful life of its products in an effort to encourage consumers to buy the next generation. 

Apple doesn't see this as a real issue to contend with, given that the company makes high-quality, relatively high-cost products. 

Even Greenpeace's Cook said that is a perceived issue, though Apple is making "expensive products, they’re not burner products."

At the same time, companies ultimately need to make a transition to a more closed-loop system that values recycled components, instead of just the number of phones or iPads sold. 

"Selling more and more products on a short-term basis is not something that Apple or any other company can do and legitimately claim to be sustainable," he said.

It's laudable that as of 2015, Apple boasted recycling programs in 99 percent of the countries where it sells its products. The company's 2015 environmental stewardship report states the company has "diverted more than 508 million pounds of electronic waste from landfills since 2008." 

"We believe we must be accountable for every Apple product at every stage of its use," the company states in that report.

Apple may rightly be applauded for the progress it has achieved and the example it has set for its peers, as more and more companies, from Facebook to Google, move toward renewable energy sources to power their facilities. 

However, the perception that planned obsolescence is part of the company's strategy will continue to be a thorn in the company's side, unless Liam truly has a game-changing recycling trick up one of its 29 sleeves.