Pro & Contra: Are the energy label for iPhone & Co. helpful?

Since June 20, smartphones and tablets have had to wear an ecodesign label in the EU. There is information about energy efficiency, battery life, battery life, case resistance, repairability and water resistance. But corporations like Apple are particularly criticism. Does the EU label for electronics products help?

PER

Even if the EU measurement requirements are still raising doubts, the compulsion to create an ecodesign label brings the Apple customer clear advantages. For example, the number of charging cycles expected must be specified on the sticker. Iphones and iPads also have to create at least 800 charging cycles and then offer 80 percent of the starting capacity.

The specification of the term per battery charge now makes it easier to compare devices from different manufacturers, which Apple should benefit with its energy -saving processors. Finally, the IP protection class for water and dust resistance can be found prominently on the packaging and no longer just small printed in the technical data.

I also consider the repair class to be very important on the label, which hopefully ends the gluing and nailing of the devices. At the same time, spare parts must also be delivered to the manufacturer’s workshops for five years. And Apple shouldn’t have anything against the stability of the case, the group even makes advertising with the robustness of the iPhone. Personally, a solid, durable and repairable device is more important to me than screwless elegance. The EU’s new label clearly contributes to sustainability and that’s a good thing. (Jes)

Contra

I am disappointed with the ecodesign label. Some things seem too simplified for me, such as indication of energy efficiency. If the iPad Pro 13 “is thrown into a pot with OLEDs and 7-inch tablets with LEDs, it is quite unhappy. It would be fair if you compare devices of the same size.

Apple criticizes unclear in the test procedures; For example, the surface in the case test, different information on the loudspeaker measurement or the alignment of the 4G antenna. That sounds like splitting hair, but it cannot be dismissed: there are gaps in the preliminary measurement methods. Because the EU specifies the test sequence, but the label is based on manufacturer information. And that offers space for interpretation. Apple voluntarily downgraded the energy efficiency in the iPhone 16 to B. Samsung, on the other hand, specifies top grade A for the Galaxy S25. Comparability is flute when the manufacturers lay out tests in both directions.

The repair class does not seem to me to be finished either: France had already designed a detailed index with the L’Entice de Réparabilité in 2021. In addition to dismantling, documentation and spare parts availability, the spare parts price also included the evaluation. Because high repair costs prevent repairs, but they do not play a role in the ecodesign label. The EU has to tighten the requirements, otherwise nobody takes the label seriously. (HZE)

Who is right? Discuss!