Because this legislation did not come out of nowhere. There were investigations about batteries at home before they fianlized this, and none of it involved smartphones. For example, there was a lot of talk about Dewalt, B&D, Ryobi and others each having a different batteries and a different type of chargers.

Smartphone battery issue was addressed separately and the whole spin on user replacable smartphone battery seems to come from forums like this and not EU. In fact, this proposal specifically allows water proof devices to be handled by a professional (an "independent" professional to be exact, which is very much inline with the previous proposal on smartphone battery replacement).

I also don't see anything supporting this interpretation in the actual regulation - quite to the contrary. It repeatedly refers to all batteries, and says nothing of any class of devices that are exempt.

> new regulatory framework for batteries will consider rules on recycled content and measures to improve the collection and recycling rates of all batteries

> It is necessary to create a harmonised regulatory framework for dealing with the entire life cycle of batteries that are placed on the market in the Union.

> It is also necessary to update Union law on the management of waste batteries and to take measures to protect the environment and human health by preventing or reducing the adverse impacts of the generation and management of waste,

https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-2-2023-INIT...

It also states:

"Products placed on the market [...] in applications that the end-user is not intended to split up or open [...] should be subject to requirements applicable to batteries."

This sounds to me like as long as they have a recycling program for cellphones, the entire phone can be considered the "battery" and no user replaceablilty is necessary.

The full paragraph is:

>Products placed on the market as battery packs, which are batteries or groups of cells that are connected or encapsulated within an outer casing to form a complete unit ready for use by end-users or in applications that the end-user is not intended to split up or open and which conform to the definition of batteries, or battery cells that conform to the definition of batteries, should be subject to requirements applicable to batteries.

I don't think phones can be considered being placed on the market as battery packs

So basically, the trick to avoid the legislation is to make your device water proof.

You'd have to go further than that. The actual law says:

>specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable

An iPhone is specifically designed to cope with primarily outdoor use. It rains outdoors. Outdoors is "an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water".

iPhones have been quite waterproof for years.

Hedge trimmers haven’t been.

>light means of transport or other vehicles

Never mind phones, what about EVs or cars in general? Currently to replace a Tesla battery you need to lift the car, undo a 30 bolts, use another lift or do some lift juggling to drop the battery, etc. How on earth do you design an EV with the same battery capacity if the battery must be removable without tools or expertise? Hell, my petrol ford fiesta has a battery which fails this requirement (needs spanners to undo the connectors and the hold-down and needs the expertise of knowing which batteries are appropriate, how to safely disconnect it, how to remove it).

Assuming they are regular, not security, bolts, Teslas are in the clear. It's no specialty tools or expertise. Working on a car assumes you have the tools and expertise to put a car on a lift, rotate N standard bolts to remove them, and move heavy objects. And you can read the documentation to know how to do it.

It's specifically to prevent Tesla from saying "well, you need to have Tesla-bolt driver, the only way to remove our 30-bolts. And we only sell those to authorized Tesla-trained mechanics who took our course because if you mess up a secret process it won't work".

EV batteries are exempt, as are batteries which are "specifically designed to supply electric power for starting, lighting, or ignition and that can also be used for auxiliary or backup purposes in vehicles, other means of transport or machinery"

I believe Teslas have a lead acid battery specifically for the listed purposes. But I can't quite remember. Should watch some more Rich Rebuilds I guess.

Pretty much all EVs currently on sale have a 12 volt auxiliary battery. Many are lead acid, because they work.

Tesla have transitioned their auxiliary batteries from lead acid to lithium. Their OEM battery is 6.9 Ah, because memes.

I see no reason in principle that this is an intractable problem. A problem, sure, but one which is solvable given the right incentives, which is what this law is for.

I think phone batteries are included, but I don't think that there is an appetite for aggressive behaviour in that manner.

This is an ewaste policy, look at the objectives. Collection of waste, recovery of lithium, new batteries need to be made from recycled batteries.

Home replacement of batteries won't accomplish any of those goals. I would say that it would encourage more batteries to go in the bin. Apple and Samsung already provide fairly cheap services to replace those batteries and once removed the batteries can be recycled, this is going to impact other phone providers who don't offer anything, EV manufacturers who don't recycle or provide simple replacement programs, electric bikes that have batteries built into the frame so cant be replaced at all.

Compared to all that Apple is a fairly good citizen.

eWaste also includes all the stuff not including the battery. Making batteries replaceable increases the lifespan of all that other stuff.

Of course they may not be supported by software in the case of phones and tablets, but (a) that's a separate issue and (b) not all tech with non-replaceable batteries are phones and tablets. It's an increasingly common pattern in wireless headphones, powered toothbrushes, hair clippers, etc.

That was really my point, there are clauses but the main point of the entire thing appears to be to stop things having non-replaceable batteries.

Phones are a bit annoying, but they can have their batteries replaced. There are much lower hanging fruit, such as all the phones that can't have the batteries replaced at all, or the toothbrushes, etc.

But EU mandates that toothbrushes need to have replaceable batteries isn't click-bate enough compared to Apple conspiracies.

The cyber resilience act which is worked on in parallel would require software updates (not necessarily new features) for a "reasonable" amount of time (I recall about 5 years for phones).

Are you suggesting that Apple & Samsung might sell phones in Europe that are technically in violation of this law? Or are you just saying that it was unnecessary for them to be included, but acknowledging that they will design their devices to be compliant?