The readers of Reader's Digest have chosen Canon brand cameras confidence, among other things for his "commitment to the environment." Almost simultaneously, I find the blog of Bruno Abarca of mass destruction Canon cameras and lenses , a hammer blow. Do you really know the readers of Reader's Digest which is a commitment to the environment of the manufacturers? Do you know anyone?

Canon is proud of the results of the survey "Most Trusted Brands" by Reader's Digest , and no wonder, is a study year in 16 countries in Europe (which is Spain) which are placed first place in the category of cameras for the eighth consecutive year, also achieved first place in 13 countries. As they say, brands are valued for their "quality, image, economic value, commitment to the environment and ethical standards, and I can understand that values the first three parameters, but does anyone know what are the ethical standards and commitment to the environment of Canon? I am a client of his, and I have no idea and something makes me suspect that for most consumers, the situation is the same.

For example, I recently saw pictures of a Canon material destruction of all kinds to be taken with caution. Caution because the photos do not give any clue about whether the destruction is making the Canon, or if it is, for example, stolen property and seized by the police and the judge has ordered destroyed. In any case, would be a great environmental irresponsibility.

If images from Canon, it would be defective devices will not want to reach the market. Surely this method is cheaper to repair or disassemble them and use their components, but is it more organic?

If the premises of any judicial office or a store, it would be unlawful for any reason, it is decided to destroy. But the question remains, is this the greenest option?

Just the glass is a material whose manufacture requires huge amounts of energy and produces a lot of waste, we can get an idea watching the manufacturing process objectives in the Canon website. And just the glass is also a 100% recyclable material , which is not degraded in each recycling and that recycling will save tons of fuel and produces far less waste.

However, it seems that the intention of this process of destruction is recycling, if so, even if you use a hammer to take less, they would be separating materials on a conveyor belt, instead of stacking all types of products and materials the ground to hit them without mercy. No doubt the fate of all these materials will be the landfill.

And I only mentioned the glass, that one must add the cardboard, plastics, and metals of all kinds. Could it be that even the batteries, rich in heavy metals, are in the stack.

In any case, I think the manufacturer (and I have no doubt that other brands will happen exactly the same) if you have some responsibility. Direct if their employees are holding the hammer, or indirect, partial in the second case, then, could we not agree with the authorities any formula to be recycled material?