Chamber of Commerce CEO responds to Apple’s exit | iLounge News

2014 iPad iPhone iPod Buyers' Guide from iLounge.com

News

Chamber of Commerce CEO responds to Apple’s exit

Author's pic

By Charles Starrett

Contributing Editor
Published: Wednesday, October 7, 2009
News Categories: Apple

In a letter written to Apple CEO Steve Jobs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue has responded to Apple’s decision to resign its membership over the Chamber’s stance on climate change regulation. Specifically, the Chamber is opposed to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. “It is unfortunate that your company didn’t take the time to understand the Chamber’s position on climate and forfeited the opportunity to advance a 21st century approach to climate change,” Donohue wrote. “While we do support legislation to address climate change, we oppose legislation such as the Waxman-Markey bill that numerous studies show will cause Americans to lose their jobs and shift greenhouse gas emissions overseas, negating potential climate benefits.” He also said that the Chamber is focused on innovation and technology as tools to combat climate change, adding, “it is a shame that Apple will not be part of our efforts.”

« Pick 2009’s top developers in iLounge’s Readers’ Choice Awards!

Tapulous releases Tap Tap Revenge 3 »

Related Stories

Comments

1

Right on the money! Nice rebuttal for a hypocritical move by apple.

Posted by Xing on October 7, 2009 at 3:30 PM (PDT)

2

Also some children in Idaho today, had a snow day (must be global warming) 

Why did they have to change the name from global warming to climate change?  Better ask algore about that.

smile

Posted by Xing on October 7, 2009 at 3:34 PM (PDT)

3

Apple, don’t transfer your carbon footprint to china?  I suppose its easier when its not on your front door step.

Posted by Chas on October 7, 2009 at 4:11 PM (PDT)

4

They changed the name of global warming because idiots never bothered to read the theory so they kept misunderstanding it. They made it easier to get for the uninformed.

In short: The globe warms. Like turning up the temperature on a pot of water. It adds more energy to the system. Summers get hotter, winters get colder, droughts get drier, storms get stronger. Everything gets pushed to the extremes. Which is exactly what has happened.

Don’t critise Apple for actually doing the right thing for once…

Posted by Andy on October 7, 2009 at 11:40 PM (PDT)

5

That’s why global sea ice has a net change of 0. We had one of the coolest summers on records this year in most of the earth. Thirty years ago the same experts were calling for cooling & a new ice age. We’ve only been keeping temp records for about 150 years. infering temps from core ice samples are not accurate.

The same weather experts that can’t accurately predict the weather next week are supposed to know what’s gonna happen years from now? Gimme a break,

Hurricanes/typhoons have always existed no worse now, just an increase in population density.  Wild fires & mud slides in California happens every year etc..

Sorry the climate is not static, never has been

Posted by xing on October 8, 2009 at 3:26 AM (PDT)

6

Guys, guys, you’re ruining Apple’s grandstanding. I mean seriously, they clearly need one more hemp-shoe wearing hipster in Starbucks with a Macbook touting Apple’s greatness.

Posted by Bobby on October 8, 2009 at 3:49 AM (PDT)

7

Global warming is what happens between ice ages.

Posted by Charles Farley on October 8, 2009 at 3:53 AM (PDT)

8

I love Apple…but wow, they joined the Environmentalist Whacko fringe with this one. I’m all for reducing hazardous chemicals from their products, but yeesh.

There’s this big ball of gas undergoing nuclear fusion on a daily basis that has WAY more effect on this planet than we ever could, short of a nuclear winter. I wish our friends at Apple hadn’t been brainwashed by Al Gore’s silly disaster movie…

Posted by Daniel S. on October 8, 2009 at 7:07 AM (PDT)

9

No, stories like this just bring out the idiots who don’t understand basic science and can’t read data trends better than my 5 y.o.

At any rate, Apple already has accounted for the carbon footprint from keeping their manufacturing overseas. There’s no hypocrisy, just a bunch of morons who like to label any attempt at reducing man’s impact on climate change as, depending on context: grandstanding, hypocritical, environmental conspiracy, ineffective, or damaging to the economy.

If attempts at being more responsible in the long term are automatically dismissed for short term job impact, as the US COC is doing, then nothing is ever going to happen. As a country that holds so-called capitalist principles as a matter of blind faith, we’ve been more than happy to sacrifice jobs and prosperity for all but a few since day one as long as those at the top kept getting richer. It’s only when those at the top might see some impact to their profit margins that suddenly saving domestic jobs becomes important to these idiots.

Posted by Code Monkey in Midstate New York on October 8, 2009 at 7:22 AM (PDT)

10

Plenty of hypocrisy, Steve Jobs personal jet has more carbon footprint than most people make in thier lifetime.  He offsets it with cash to make himself feel better - instead of flying commercial.

For every stat or scientist that supports this hogwash there are just as many on the other side. Notice how quickly the argument goes from facts to personal attacks (calling everyone morons) because we don’t agree with your preprogrammed tv presented world view.

Apple outsources all production, so they can pass the buck on compliance.

Posted by Xing on October 8, 2009 at 8:01 AM (PDT)

11

Hey Code Monkey our environment is cleaner now than it was 40 yrs ago & its getting cleaner all the time. Just b/c Apple make their mess in China it doesn’t make them responsible it just make them hypocrites. If they were really concerned for the environment they would make their products in the U.S. where our standards are far higher than anywhere in the world. Of course that would cut into their profit margin & at the end of the day that’s all they really care about so please quit the sanctimonious preaching.

Posted by Bobby on October 8, 2009 at 8:11 AM (PDT)

12

As for ice, tell that to the polar bears.

Look at Sydney, or New Orleans. If you think the climate in Califoria hasn’t changed, you haven’t lived your life here. LA did not use to be a fire created desert. Size and intensity have grown. San Francisco was not a permanent drought zone before.

Which same experts were calling for an ice age in 1979 and have now changed their view? Name them or admit you are just making stuff up.

Where do you get this stuff? Seeing as 97%+ of the scientific community validates global warming, that would put the ratio at 97-3, not 1-1 as you claim.

So you are saying Apple should support pollution, and not take steps to offset it? Come on, get real here.

No one ever said the climate was static, except the polluters. Everyone says it is getting worse…

As for the “the sun does more” argument, sure. A bomb will do more to kill you, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t worry about the knife. That is illogical.

Posted by Andy on October 8, 2009 at 11:22 AM (PDT)

13

Newsweek Magazine’s “global cooling” article 1975

Time Magazine’s 1974; the coming ice age: 

In fact here’s a quote from the article

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The University of Wisconsin’s Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists suggest.


 Of course at the time (just as now) people thought that they were at the peak of scientific knowledge and that they had a firm grasp on the science, which proved to be complete bunk… 

Posted by Xing on October 8, 2009 at 2:27 PM (PDT)

14

here’s a little more facts, it seems like you may be making up your claims or just believing what the tv tells you. Your making this 2 ez andy smile

Hurricane Katrina may be the most memorable storm in New Orleans history, but its trajectory across the Pelican State was far from unique.  Louisiana was hit by 49 of the 273 hurricanes that made landfall on the American Atlantic Coast between 1851 and 2004.  In addition, eighteen of the ninety-two major hurricanes with Saffir-Simpson ratings of category 3 or above have struck the state (U.S. mainland hurricane strikes by state, 1851-2004).  On average, one major storm crosses within 100 nautical miles of New Orleans every decade (King, 2006).

Hurricane Katrina may be the most memorable storm in New Orleans history, but its trajectory across the Pelican State was far from unique.  Louisiana was hit by 49 of the 273 hurricanes that made landfall on the American Atlantic Coast between 1851 and 2004.  In addition, eighteen of the ninety-two major hurricanes with Saffir-Simpson ratings of category 3 or above have struck the state (U.S. mainland hurricane strikes by state, 1851-2004).  On average, one major storm crosses within 100 nautical miles of New Orleans every decade (King, 2006).
sounds your making your stuff up Andy or just believing anything your told

Hurricane Katrina may be the most memorable storm in New Orleans history, but its trajectory across the Pelican State was far from unique.  Louisiana was hit by 49 of the 273 hurricanes that made landfall on the American Atlantic Coast between 1851 and 2004.  In addition, eighteen of the ninety-two major hurricanes with Saffir-Simpson ratings of category 3 or above have struck the state (U.S. mainland hurricane strikes by state, 1851-2004).  On average, one major storm crosses within 100 nautical miles of New Orleans every decade (King, 2006).

Posted by Xing on October 8, 2009 at 3:16 PM (PDT)

15

Sorry paste messed up smile

Posted by Xing on October 8, 2009 at 3:19 PM (PDT)

16

Southern California has more wildfires with greater intensity because the environmental community there won’t let the parks service clear brush that has built up.  They want the land to “natural” but when you have that excess brush you provide more material to burn.

Posted by Bobby on October 8, 2009 at 3:48 PM (PDT)

17

Also prior to man’s intervention to pump water from northern cal & water from the man made lake, lake mead, southern cal was a desert in it’s natural state.

Posted by Xing on October 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM (PDT)

18

Let’s see Xing, apparently you don’t read English well. The nuances are escaping you.

I said name a climate change scientist who has changed his mind, since you said they had. You gave me the name of one of the first Global Warming Deniers (who are about as credible as Holocaust Deniers), who most certainly did not change his mind before he died.

Katrina trajectory wasn’t unique, but it’s intensity certainly was, which is what I said. More energy in the system, greater intensity.

Come on, global average temperatures have been at an all time high in the past few years. Do you expect everyone to believe that is a coincidence when it was what was predicted?

As to California, you clearly don’t know what you are talking about AND can’t read. I said “Fire Created” desert. There were trees there 20 years ago.

And, to Bobby, the now constant drought, caused by global warming, is what has made the vegetation there MORE vulnerable to burning. It dries it out, making it MORE flamible. It has caused wildfires blanketing the western states, not just LA. Have you studied forestry?

Posted by Andy on October 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM (PDT)

19

Sorry to correct you again Einstein but cal been moving water a lot longer than twenty years. 

Water has always been precious in the semiarid West, and the vast system of dams, aqueducts and pumps constructed over the past century. 

Farmers in California’s Imperial Valley, for example, grow a billion dollars worth of hay, melons, lettuce and other crops every year in a desert basin that receives less than 3 inches of rain annually.

For 100 years, the region has been engaged in a sort of hydrological Ponzi scheme. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, established in 1902 and charged with studying potential water projects in Western states containing federal lands, became the pre-eminent enabler of that practice 

Here’s a little hurricane info fir ya

Katrina was a cat 3. The biggest hurricane for the US was in 1930’s. Katrina’s not even the deadliest or most costly, perhaps the worst handled .

On average, two major hurricane (cat 3-5) strike every three years; in all categories, about five hurricanes make landfall every three years. 

On average, a hurricane cat 4 or higher only strikes once every six years.

And your reference to Nazi’s is just unbelievable - your weak 

 

Posted by Xing on October 9, 2009 at 5:35 AM (PDT)

20

Once again, you are dodging the issue. Can’t your Chinese translation software handle nuance?

I never said California hasn’t been using water. I grew up here, I know. I said large areas of Califoria (especially in the south) were forested 20 years ago, and are now a “fire created desert”. I also explained how the ecology of fire actually works, which you failed to notice.

You logic fails here, why would southern California taking more water cause there to be more fires there? Perhaps you should try reading and writing rather than cutting and pasting.

As for Katrina, get off it. Global warming added more heat to the system. That made MORE evaporation, which added more water to the storm. More water, means more flooding, more levies blown.

Exactly as predicted. When I was in NO, 2 years before Katirna, they were predicting exactly what happened.

Really, you need to get offline and experience truth in person once in a while.

And, back to the Chamber of Commerce. Now they just tried to block a bill that would block defense contracts to companies that facilitate rape against their own employees. I think Apple is well rid of such amoral trash. And, of course, all the senators who voted the CoC’s way were also Global Warming Deniers.

Posted by Andy on October 9, 2009 at 9:52 AM (PDT)

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.

Email:

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Shop for Accessories: Cases, speakers, chargers, etc.