Why consoles?

The games consoles market is one of the fastest growing in consumer electronics with over 60 million sold and 14 percent growth last year. These consoles contain toxic chemicals and can contribute to the massive growth of electronic waste that's often dumped, causing widespread environmental pollution and health problems for unprotected workers.

We have been pushing the major electronics makers to:

  • clean up their products by eliminating hazardous substances;
  • takeback and recycle their products responsibly once they become obsolete.

Toxic chemicals

Toxic chemicals in electronics are a big problem. More and more tech gadgets are produced and disposed of every year. This means more toxic pollution when they are produced and when they are thrown away.

That's the bad news. The good news is that alternatives do exist. While some of the worst toxic chemicals like brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) are widely used in electronics, the most progressive companies are already replacing these chemicals with safer alternatives.

Surprisingly, none of the games console companies make a console free of the worst toxic chemicals. This is in contrast to PC makers, who are already selling some models without toxic chemicals like BFRs and PVC. We want to see a games console completely free of these toxic chemicals on the market.

Many PC and mobile phone companies have recently made the jump to hyperspace in removing toxic chemicals and improving recycling. But our investigations reveal that console makers are stuck on Level One when it comes to tackling the e-waste challenge.

We've checked how the environmental performances of Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo measure up on toxics, recycling and energy use. None of these three seems even close to making a greener console.

Sony:

Has a policy for eliminating the worst toxic chemicals by 2010 but it doesn't yet cover the PlayStation. Sony is dropping toxic chemicals from its Vaio computer so surely it can do the same for the PlayStation? Sony has the best takeback and recycling programmes compared to Microsoft and Nintendo but still needs to offer free global takeback. PlayStation is the biggest energy hog of all the consoles. Compare | Full details on toxics and recycling (pdf).

Microsoft:

Has a policy for eliminating the worst toxic chemicals but only by 2011. Has no voluntary takeback policy. Xbox also uses far more energy than the Wii. Compare | Full details on toxics and recycling (pdf).

Nintendo:

Currently bottom of the barrel with no public toxics elimination plan or takeback and recycling policy. However, the Wii is the most energy efficient of the consoles. Compare | Full details on toxics and recycling (pdf).

Greener Electronics

This site is just a part of our campaign for greener electronics. Every quarter we publish a guide to how the major PC, mobile phone, TV and game console companies measure up against criteria on toxic chemicals and recycling. In the past we've protested against HP's use of toxic chemicals, helped push Apple towards a greener future and penalised companies like Sony, LG, Motorola and Nokia when their actions have not lived up to their green words.

Extra cost?

PC makers are already removing toxic chemicals in some applications without raising the prices consumers pay. Sony has publicly stated that it intends to make money from reusing and recycling its old products. These measures should not mean consoles would become any more expensive.

Lets Play

You hold the controller. You are the people these companies listen to - their customers. Here you can check how your favourite game console measures up and urge the company that made it to move to the next level of the green challenge.

Need more info - check the questions and answers page.