Apple Opposes Proposed Repeal of Clean Power Plan in United States - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Apple Opposes Proposed Repeal of Clean Power Plan in United States

Apple has formally objected the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed repeal of the Clean Power Plan in the United States.

apple park environment
In a letter submitted to the agency today, Apple said repealing the policy would subject the company and its manufacturing partners to increased investment uncertainty in relation to clean energy, according to Reuters.

"Repealing the Clean Power Plan will subject consumers like Apple and our large manufacturing partners to increased investment uncertainty," the California-based company said in a filing to the agency.

Apple, which says it runs its U.S. operations fully on renewable energy such as wind and solar power, added that repeal of the plan would also threaten development and investments that have already been made in renewable power.

The EPA proposed to repeal the Clean Power Plan in October 2017 after U.S. President Donald Trump mandated a review of the Obama-era environmental policy, which would have required U.S. power plants to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Apple is the first company to publicly comment on the proposed repeal, which has yet to proceed due to legal challenges, according to the report. The policy's elimination is said to remain a priority of the EPA's administrator Scott Pruitt.

Apple's environmental website notes that 100 percent of the electricity the company uses to power its data centers, and 96 percent used by its facilities worldwide, comes from renewable energy sources like solar, hydro, and wind power. Many of Apple's suppliers have also committed to using 100 percent renewable energy.

Apple's environmental chief Lisa Jackson served as the EPA's administrator between 2009 and 2013 as part of the Obama administration.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Popular Stories

macOS 27 on MacBook Pro

Apple Says macOS 27 Won't Be Compatible With These Macs

Wednesday June 3, 2026 8:29 am PDT by
During WWDC 2025, Apple revealed that macOS 26 Tahoe would be the final major macOS version for Intel-based Macs. macOS 27 will be compatible with Apple silicon Macs only, meaning that you will need a Mac with an M-series chip or a MacBook Neo with an A18 Pro chip in order to install the software update. Apple will unveil macOS 27 during its WWDC 2026 keynote this Monday, June 8, and the...
MacBook Neo on Yellow Feature

MacBook Neo is So Popular That Apple Reportedly Doubled Production

Wednesday June 3, 2026 9:24 am PDT by
On an earnings call in late April, Apple's CEO Tim Cook said that customer response to the MacBook Neo was "off the charts," and the popularity of the laptop has reportedly led the company to significantly boost production. Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo this week said he believes that MacBook Neo shipments to Apple were doubled from an initial target of 5 million units to 10...
iphone 18 pro blue%402x

iPhone 18 Pro: Dark Cherry, Light Blue, and Dark Gray Chassis Leaked [Update]

Thursday June 4, 2026 5:18 am PDT by
Update: Since publication, new information has come to light suggesting the images have been AI-manipulated and are not in fact iPhone 18 Pro chassis parts. The original article follows. The color options Apple is reportedly planning for the upcoming iPhone 18 Pro and ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ Max have appeared online today in the form of images of chassis parts of unknown authenticity....

Top Rated Comments

107 months ago
Totally irrelevant what Apple thinks about this. This rule is applicable to power plants, not ivory tower companies like Apple. I very much doubt Apple really spends time understanding this rule or its impacts. And if they do, those resources should be spent thinking about Apple products or perhaps environmental rules that actually are relevant to them. This is very obviously an opportunistic statement by Timmy and company.
Sad state of affairs when the US government gives up trying to protect the environment such that a corporation feels the need to step in.
Score: 87 Votes (Like | Disagree)
jonnyb Avatar
107 months ago
Is there any Obama-era policy that Trump hasn’t reflexively reversed?
Score: 46 Votes (Like | Disagree)
WatchFromAfar Avatar
107 months ago
If Apple is committed to renewable energy repealing this bill shouldn't alter their stance on the issue, no-ones saying you can't get 100% of your electricity from renewable sources. The only thing Apple will moan about is small companies that could never afford to put practices in place to meet the clean energy bill now don't have to, they can operate their businesses and provide competition whereas before only the rich would be allowed to play.
Score: 36 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Pbrutto Avatar
107 months ago
It still entertains me to no end that we as a people debate if we should protect the environment. WHO CARES about climate change.....even if it isn't real, why trash the place we live? Who are we to trash this place for future generations in the name of making things easy for us now or saving money now? I appreciate that Apple tries to push us forward in this area and I am glad a company with as much money as they have takes up the fight. Lets be honest, big business with money is the only force that can defend the planet. We can protest all we want, but it is companies like Apple that can help influence change. If we all voted with our money, now that might help.....
Score: 35 Votes (Like | Disagree)
107 months ago
Totally irrelevant what Apple thinks about this. This rule is applicable to power plants, not ivory tower companies like Apple. I very much doubt Apple really spends time understanding this rule or its impacts. And if they do, those resources should be spent thinking about Apple products or perhaps environmental rules that actually are relevant to them. This is very obviously an opportunistic statement by Timmy and company.

Total bunk and nonsensical language: "Repealing the Clean Power Plan will subject consumers like Apple and our large manufacturing partners to increased investment uncertainty," the California-based company said in a filing to the agency.Apple, which says it runs its U.S. operations fully on renewable energy such as wind and solar power, added that repeal of the plan would also threaten development and investments that have already been made in renewable power."
Score: 34 Votes (Like | Disagree)
macduke Avatar
107 months ago
So a 32% reduction over 25 years is too much? Really? Honestly?? Only evil men would consider profits above the well-being of their offspring and fellow man.
Score: 30 Votes (Like | Disagree)