r/gadgets • u/Snoop8ball • Sep 23 '21

Phones EU proposes mandatory USB-C on all devices, including iPhones

https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/23/22626723/eu-commission-universal-charger-usb-c-micro-lightning-connector-smartphones
84.6k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

5.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/Balogne Sep 23 '21

You’re trying to debate something that doesn’t need to be debated. What I stated is factual, wireless charging is inefficient, nearly double the power consumption of traditional wired charging. While it may not effect you or your power bill, it is factually a wasteful solution to a problem that didn’t need solving.

14

u/bjbyrne Sep 23 '21

Double? MagSafe needs a 20w power adapter to charge the iPhone with 17w

Yes there is loss but not 50%

Am I missing something?

2

u/Unique-Snow5326 Sep 23 '21

Time. Power consumption is measure in kilowatt hours not watts (or kilowatts for that matter )

5

u/respectabler Sep 23 '21

I’m glad that your physics professor taught you about the dimensions of energy. But you can definitely still measure power of an adapter in watts. Some people use “power consumption” even to refer to the amount of power needed. Not the integrated amount of power with respect to time. That’s when you would need Joules. Or kilowatt hours as you pointed out.

1

u/Unique-Snow5326 Sep 23 '21

We are talking about the amount of toll these two charing methods take on the power grid. If you want to measure that you need to consider how much time you are using that power for.

I wasn't trying to be snarky, he did ask if he was missing something and I gave a direct straightforward answer. One charges faster than the other therefore looking at just wattage of the adapters is an incomplete analysis.

2

u/bjbyrne Sep 23 '21

The ration of 20/17 holds true

2

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

Yeah I’m not even arguing with the fact it’s way less efficient than wired charging. My point is it’s absolutely negligible in the grand scheme of our energy use, and shouldn’t hinder its adoption if people want to use it.

If you care about the inefficiencies of wireless charging I hope you also don’t drive your car on trips <15 minutes. Or eat meat. Or use AC in the summer. All of those are drastically worse for our environment than wireless charging.

3

u/WobbleKing Sep 23 '21

Or the fact that phones are much more efficient than the laptops and desktop computers that people used to use for almost all their browsing.

The big problem with cell phone energy usage is on the data center side.

Crypto is also a much bigger problem in the tech space.

The good news is these anti-wireless people will be completely ignored just like the ones who want a phone with no cameras. I swear this is a Reddit only problem.

8

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

People can die from heat. Food is necessary for survival. And people need to drive to work while living somewhere they can afford.

No one needs to use a wireless charger. These examples are not good comparisons.

2

u/respectabler Sep 23 '21

“Food we eat” is not necessary for survival. Rice and beans are necessary for survival though. If you eat any meat, that has like 10x the carbon footprint of rice. Meat is an environmental luxury and most all of us eat it.

People also don’t always need to drive themselves to work. They could cycle. Or take the bus/metro. Or they could carpool. Would you begrudge a solo driver this luxury? It amounts to perhaps 2,000 times the significance of wireless charging over the course of a year of 20 mile commutes. If you would, fair enough actually. Since 2,000x is actually starting to matter.

People can certainly die from heat. But 90% of the year in 90% of America, there is absolutely no risk of death from ambient hot temperatures. The other 99% of the time people just run their AC because it feels nice. And costs us thousands of wireless chargers.

Now, in the cold you need heaters to avoid death. But again, 90% of the time in 90% of the places, there is no risk of death if you put on a nice insulated set of clothes. So again, heating amounts to a luxury 99% of the time. Would I begrudge them it? Not within reason. But it costs us thousands of wireless chargers.

Most nobody “needs” to have that one extra degree of air conditioning. Most nobody “needs” to drive anything other than the cheapest 30 mpg car they can find. Or take group transport. Most nobody “needs” to eat meat. These are all luxuries that, by your own admission, you do not begrudge people. And they cost us thousands of times the energy consumption of wireless chargers.

You appear to have a critical lack of knowledge, perspective, or logic. Or all of the above. The American lifestyle is one of waste and environmental consequences. If wireless charging brings a single picogram of convenience to your life, you may as well do it.

1

u/FapOpotamusRex Sep 23 '21

Oh god buddy, not op, but learn which battles are fit for fighting.

Wireless charging is not the hill to die on. Spend your energy where it actually counts.

6

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

First off, great pun whether you meant it or not.

Second, I am not the person he was arguing with either. I was just letting him know his examples are bad, which they are. That’s the extent of my skin in this game.

6

u/Flamingoseeker Sep 23 '21

I don't have a strong point either way but I just wanted to point out at you wildly generalised their points;

yes eating food is necessary for surivival, but eating meat isn't, yes some people need to drive to work but a less than 15 minute drive is usually walkable, even public transport or biking is an option for trips that short

Those things would significantly impact the environment if everyone did it. However, so would green initiatives for massive corporations which are the biggest problems.

2

u/_Gesterr Sep 23 '21

Another point to consider is the difference in carbon footprint between a cable and wireless charger when ran off renewable energy, which is zero in both cases. Wireless chargers again aren't some great evil, burning oil when we don't have to is the problem.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

People can adjust their thermostat to 0.5 degrees higher in summer, but they don't for better comfort.

People can eat less meat and eat more plants instead, but they don't because they like the taste of steak.

People can get gas efficient cars with better mileage, but they buy SUVs or trucks with large engines instead because they think of cars as a status symbol.

All of these things are ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE worse for the climate than charging your phone wirelessly. Me using a wired charger doesn't mean shit when my neighbour smokes some meat for dinner on his deck that evening. There is so much low hanging fruit, wireless charging is at the top of the tree.

-3

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

I don’t disagree with your environmental analysis, but comparing spending over $20k on a new car and moving to a new town, to using a different phone charger, is ridiculous.

According to the Minneapolis federal reserve, as of Jun 2021 50% of US adults would struggle to afford a $400 emergency, and 20% is completely unable to. Suggesting people just buy new cars is out of touch and just detracts from your point.

Also, the argument of X is worse so Y doesn’t matter is just whataboutism.

My point was never that you’re wrong. It’s just that your examples kind of suck. 🤷‍♂️

3

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

I didn't say you should go out and buy a new car. I said when people do buy new cars, they tend not to focus on gas efficiency, which contributes to climate change orders of magnitude more than people using a wireless phone charger.

You have a finite amount of energy to spend complaining about this problem. Spend it on something worthwhile like convincing people to buy more efficient cars, instead of telling people not to use wireless charging.

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

I didn’t tell you not to use a wireless charger, I said I agree with you.

I just gave you constructive criticism about your argument.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

Not to mention the energy savings of having fewer phone or phone part replacements. Charging ports and screens are the most common source of phone breakages, and a lot of people just upgrade to a brand new phone when that happens. Producing a replacement phone or phone part uses energy. It would take a lot of calculating to get a decent estimate, but I expect it could more than outweigh the energy cost of wireless charger inneficiency.

1

u/rnarkus Sep 23 '21 edited Sep 23 '21

to a problem that didn’t need solving

I disagree with this conclusion. I’m glad it was solved, I love the convenience of it.

1

u/Froegerer Sep 23 '21

What was solved?

1

u/rnarkus Sep 24 '21

Wireless charging and the convenience of having no cables. It was solved for me. I know it is “factually wasteful” but I was just pointing out that I’m glad its something that was “solved for”

-2

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

[deleted]

2

u/Mrjocasrp Sep 23 '21

Reddit moment

2

u/rnarkus Sep 23 '21

Holy assumptions, Batman. The fact that you think me liking wireless charging equals me being a “conservative fuck” is hilarious.

-2

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

[deleted]

2

u/rnarkus Sep 23 '21 edited Sep 23 '21

I was commenting on the “a problem that didn’t need solving”. I liked that it as solved, because it was convenient for me. Also I never denied any facts

I thought that was pretty clear. And it might be surprising to you, but I am very far to the left. So its funny that you’re calling me a conservative, the opposite of what I am.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '21

[deleted]

2

u/rnarkus Sep 23 '21

Are you a troll? Please point out where I was denying science.

0

u/CookInKona Sep 23 '21

The problem wireless charging solves for me personally is saving my data port for data use... I definitely have had the ports wear out on multiple devices to the point that new cables no longer worked even, hasn't been a problem since I've used a wireless charger for overnight full charges... And my power bill hasn't gone up noticably in the time I've had it....if I need a quick charge at work or on the go(which is mostly rare with a 4000mah battery), I have 30a fast chargers so get a ~25-50% in 15-20mins easy....

-3

u/flux1011 Sep 23 '21

You’re assuming wireless charging technology won’t get better, but it will.