Recently, environmental group Greenpeace issued an analysis of the iPhone claiming it contains potentially dangerous chemicals. It seems that Greenpeace should research some facts, or back off.
According to the Bromine Science and Environmental Forum (BSEF), all reported substances not only are approved for use, but provide performance and safety functions in many electronic products. One group in particular, brominated flame retardants (BFRs), provide a high level of fire safety. Maybe the group isn't aware of batteries bursting into flame? Instead of coming from a basic understanding of the chemicals involved, the report Greenpeace issued is based on speculation.
The BSEF response:
"The Greenpeace report is incorrect in its assertions about the potential for releases to the environment. Furthermore, as a result of the EU's WEEE Directive, printed circuit boards such as those used in the iPhone are separated out before being recycled or recovered, in large part because they contain significant amounts of precious metals. Regulations similar to WEEE are being implemented in numerous other places around the world. Finally, Greenpeace offers no constructive alternative for providing fire safety in electronic equipment and fails to note that BFRs are among the most tested and well-known flame retardants currently available."
Wow, it feels like I'm on the wrong side of the fence here. Usually, environmental groups 'R' us--after all, I live in California. However, groups like Greenpeace should be more careful in getting the facts before issuing their "findings." What do you think?