Buy European

I was thinking at first that this would lead to even more aggressive "app optimization" where it would refuse to notify alarms you've explicitly set due to battery life concerns.

But instead there's a better way, which I hope manufacturers will take. Perhaps smartphone chips can stop chasing absolute peak performance and instead focus on good performance at a reasonable power budget.

Of course the biggest problem is bloated software but idk how we can fix that.

I think the big value of these labels are not the energy class (like for bigger appliances) it’s the fields under the energy class. Repeatability, (official declaration of) battery duration, simple to spot resistance to dust/water, etc

I was about to comment how this number doesn't make sense, but reading the article they mention the power savings for phones specifically is actually 2.2TWh per year, which might be realistic. The rest of the 14 TWh comes from landline phones (2.2TWh) and energy used to produce phones that would be saved (8.1 TWh) from the lifetime extension measures, that aren't even related to the power efficiency of phones and won't take place in the EU.

However, even these numbers are overinflated when you take into account they're using a PEF factor of 1.9, meaning they multiply the actual power usage by 1.9 to adjust for stuff like power transfer losses (only 5-10%) and the inefficiency of generating power from e.g. fossil fuels (because e.g. petroleum might only convert 40% of its potential energy to electricity), but when people typically talk about power usage they're talking about the actual amount of electricity that needs to be generated, not this abstract representation of it, meaning that e.g. phone electricity savings are actually only 1.1TWh-1.2TWh.

Would be funny to know how the supposed 14TWh savings compare to the cost required to introduce/maintain these labels. And by costs I mean overall costs with everything related to it.

1.6MW is absolutely tiny for a nuclear reactor and most produce at least 200MW with a lot of them going up to a GW and not to say 14TWh isn’t a huge amount of energy just that the comparison to a nuclear power plant is off

The data seems to be weird/lacking so far, a lot of phones have "10" as "battery endurance in cycles", and some have the "Battery user-replaceable" even though it clearly isn't (e.g. glued on back glass)

PS: sorry I'm an idiot, I misunderstood what "battery endurance in cycles" meant (it seems to actually be "hundreds of cycles"). Also "battery user-replaceable" phones don't have a glued-on back indeed, I was looking at a wrong model.

This is sick! In 5-7 years when I'm looking for a new phone this will come in really handy :)

What do they actually mean by "model identifier"? Serial number? IMEI?

I think it might be a way to keep phone manufacturers happy so they don't block the bill.

If most of the phones get a C or a D you can be sure that most phone manufacturers will lobby against the bill. So it's probably easier to pass a bill with meaningful criteria but most of them get a B or a A and in a few years adjust the levels required.

Law was in effect from yesterday, but that doesn't mean stores have to wait for that day to implement it.

Minuscule? A modern phone has a battery around a third or half that of a laptop (5000mAh x 3.7V = 18.5Wh). They also start having processors similarly capable. Gaming and other intense tasks can consume surprising amounts of energy. They put more and more emphasis on cooling, some phones including a fan. If we continue this way it starts to become expensive...

I genuinely can't figure this out. I found an iPhone label with 1000x, which seems obvious. So what the hell is XY00? Everything else in the image is an example value.

Edit: right reading through this thread it seems its 100x the value, so XY represents a number, e.g. 15, then it would be 1500 cycles. The iPhone label I found must be from an earlier test or something. I like the rest but this seems unclear.