Greenpeace analyzed Apple's iPhone in great detail at its Research Laboratories in the UK and found out the device contains hazardous chemicals which have been already eliminated by other phonemakers. Greenpeace watched Apple in particular because due to their successful Green my Apple campaign Steve Jobs, the boss of Apple, claimed in May: "Apple is ahead of, or will soon be ahead of, most of its competitors" on environmental issues.

However, the iPhone appears by no means as the spearhead of the promised "green" changes. It contains toxic brominated compounds and hazardous PVC. Toxic brominated compounds are usually the result of the use of brominated flame retardants (BFRs), which are added, quite obviously, to make things less flammable.

"Steve Jobs has missed the call on making the iPhone his first step towards greening Apple's products," said Zeina Alhajj, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner. "It seems that Apple is far from leading the way for a green electronics industry as competitors, like Nokia, already sell mobile phones free of PVC".

Greenpeace's lab found that two of the phthalate plasticizers found at high levels in the PVC headphone cable are classified in Europe as 'toxic to reproduction, category 2' because of their alleged interference with sexual development in mammals. By comparison, Nokia is totally PVC free, while Motorola and Sony Ericsson have already products on the market with BFR free components.

Of 18 internal and external parts in the iPhone, half of them are said to contain brominated material, including the antenna. There were also positive results yielded by Greenpeace's lab tests: the iPhone contains no cadmium, no mercury, while lead and chromium were detected in a small proportion of samples and at relatively low concentrations.

Following these results, the Center for Environmental Health on Monday said that it is suing Apple based on the report by Greenpeace. They allege that under California’s Proposition 65 law, all products that can expose consumers to phthalates or other chemicals that are reproductive toxins or carcinogens must carry a warning label.

"There is no reason to have these potentially hazardous chemicals in iPhones" said Michael Green, Executive Director of Center for Environmental Health, as quoted by MacWorld. "We expect Apple to reformulate their products to make them safer from cradle to grave, so they don’t pose a threat to consumers, workers or the environment."

The latest developments in the case:

Apple defended itself while implicitly acknowledging Greenpeace's findings:

"Like all Apple products worldwide, iPhone complies with RoHS [Restriction of Hazardous Substances], the world's toughest restrictions on toxic substances in electronics," an Apple spokesperson, told Macworld. "As we have said, Apple will voluntarily eliminate the use of PVC and BFRs by the end of 2008."

Also, Apple has received a 60-day legal notice from the US Center for Environmental Health to "encourage the manufacturers through a negotiated settlement to reduce the use of these chemicals".