So, Greenpeace takes it upon themselves to graffiti the top of HP’s headquarters with the words “hazardous products” in order to protest the use of toxic materials in their computers, saying that:

“There is no reason for HP to continue using these toxic products. It’s technically feasible and consumers want it too. Apple has proven they can honor their green commitments by unveiling new computer lines that are virtually free of PVC and completely BFR-free. HP originally made this green commitment in 2007, excluding their server and printer lines. Its delay shifts compliance up to two years from 2009 until 2011.”

Afterwards, HP responds with a statement telling the world what they are doing “right” in the world of EcoTech:

“This commitment includes reducing the use of BFR/PVC in our products until these materials are eliminated entirely. HP has introduced several new computing products this year that use less BFR/PVC than previous generations. This September HP will release a BFR/PVC free notebook. By fall 2010 all new commercial PC products released will be BFR/PVC free. By the end of 2011 all new PC products released will be free of BFR/PVCs. ”

Say what you will about Greenpeace, they sure know how to make the news and get their message out. HP, for their part, do seem to be changing the way they manufacture their products – but they don’t seem to be doing it as fast as other companies like Apple are. What do you think? Do you think that actions like this graffiti by Greenpeace help to encourage companies to work harder at “going green”, or do you think it turns people off to the movement? We all want good eco products for sure; but is the right way to go about making change? Or is it the best way?