This is non-news. Every year Greenpeace puts Nintendo on the list because it doesn't publish its chemical policy. It's not that Nintendo isn't "green," they're just not giving information out to people like Greenpeace, which they have every right not to do.

And this is the carbon copy of what Nintendo responds every year: "... has established Green Procurement Standards for the manufacture of their consoles. These standards require that each component of Nintendo’s systems must not contain hazardous materials, and that Nintendo has strict regulations in place to prevent the standards from being broken."

Besides, when was the last time you threw a Nintendo console away? Those things never break.

Darren Harper said, "Every year Greenpeace puts Nintendo on the list because it doesn't publish its chemical policy."

You're right, and this should be stated in the article. On the other hand, I think that fact alone makes it news. It's been many years now and Nintendo still hasn't released those numbers. They don't have to, but at the same time what do they have to lose?

At this stage, with millions upon millions of DS and Wii units sold (and this number growing at an incredible rate), these sorts of stats matter.

Yet another reason to commend Nintendo, as far as I'm concerned. They have absolutely no incentive to disclose any information to the peon pressure group. The sky is not falling.

What are you talking about? My hat is green and is made by Nintendo!

I think part of why Nintendo may choose not to publish to Greenpeace, may be the fact that Greenpeace isn't a regulating body of any kind and really they set their own rules and standards. They post these lists as a means to sometimes get publicity so why should a company release what they may deem to be private information to a group that really has no pull? I might be off the mark though.

All the real scientists were pushed out of Greenpeace a long time ago by the Fanatical Socialists that overtook the organization in the early 90's. Co-Founder Patrick Moore left Greenpeace for this very reason.

If Greenpeace was an organization that not only criticize the corporate world but also gave insight to solutions as to how they can reduce their carbon footprint, maybe more companies would jump on board and release their number to the organization. But as it is now they only seem interested in being critical and not in being helpful.

A global company of Nintendo's size has certain responsibilities imho. The larger you get, the bigger impact on the world you have. Like someone else said; what have they got to loose by making those stats public?
On a side-note: the fact that Greenpeace isn't a government organ is probably what makes them more worthwhile listening to.

And as far as I know, Greenpeace always offers solutions to the people they critizise. It's what differs them from most organizations of their kind - they don't just rant, they try to improve.

I would be surprised if Nintendo finished last if they published their chemical data. The Wii "consumes just 17 watts of energy, compared to the PS3’s 171 watts and his 360 Elite’s 194 watts" (1). It's far more efficient even in vampire mode while checking the network for weather and whatnot (2).

1: Wired article "Wii the ‘Greenest’ of the Big Three Consoles" by Susan Arendt, August 30, 2007

2: Energy Circle: Vampire Power Check: Comparing the Energy Use of Xbox and Wii: http://www.energycircle.com/blog/2009/12/29/vampire-power-check-comparing-energy
-use-xbox-and-wii

You know what, good for Nintendo. Who the hell is Greenpeace! It's becoming clear that groups like this are more interested in social agendas than any real science based solutions. If your gullible enough to be led around by the nose that's your problem, leave the rest of us alone. And that's just my humble opinion.

If you care about consumer advocacy, you should probably also want to know everything that you can about what Nintendo puts in it's products, regardless of your feelings about Greenpeace.