Apple Adds Energy and Battery Labels to iPhone and iPad Pages in EU

[MacRumors]

To comply with a new regulation that takes effect today, Apple has added an energy efficiency label to its iPhone and iPad pages in EU countries. Apple is also required to start including a printed version of the label with the devices sold there.

The label grades a given iPhone or iPad model's energy efficiency from a high of A to a low of G, based on the EU's testing parameters. However, Apple said that certain aspects of the testing methods outlined by the European Commission are "ambiguous," so it chose to be conservative with its scores until testing is standardized.

In a 44-page document detailing its testing methodology for the labels, Apple said its current iPhone models qualified for the highest energy efficiency grade of A, but the company voluntarily downgraded these scores to a B as a cautionary measure:

As an additional cautionary measure, Apple went one step further and downgraded some of its scores to factor in test method ambiguities and variance. For example, Energy Efficiency Index scores for iPhone models on the EU market in June 2025 all qualified for the highest "A" grade, but Apple chose to voluntarily derate scores to a "B" grade to minimize the probability that a third-party tester interpreting the regulation differently would achieve a lower grade. We also downgraded scores for the Repeated Free Fall Reliability Class for the same reason.

The label also provides details about a given iPhone or iPad model's battery life per full charge cycle, repairability grade, impact resistance, ingress protection rating for water and dust resistance, and how many full charge cycles the battery is rated for. Likewise, this information is based on Apple's interpretation of the EU's testing parameters.

On the web, the label can be viewed by clicking or tapping on the colorful little tag icon on various iPhone and iPad pages on Apple's localized websites for EU countries. It is shown on both Apple's main product marketing pages for all iPhone and iPad models that are currently sold in the EU, and on the purchase page for those devices.

The label is accompanied by a product information sheet (PDF) that provides a comprehensive overview of even more details, such as the device's battery capacity in mAh, screen scratch resistance based on the Mohs hardness scale, the minimum guaranteed timeframe for availability of security updates, and much more.

On the European Commission's website, there is a database that lets you view energy label information for smartphones and tablets sold in the EU.

More details about the label are available on the European Commission's website.

EU countries include Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden. The labels are also shown in Norway and Switzerland.

Article Link: Apple Adds Energy and Battery Labels to iPhone and iPad Pages in EU

 

[gh0stpr0t0c0lburner]

The main reason to voluntarily downgrade to a B is to ensure they have a target they can hit every year—they don't want stories because the next iPhone gets downgraded, for example.

 

[jz0309]

Apple is also required to start including a printed version of the label with the devices sold there.

Now that’s a very environmentally solution, well done EU!

 

[orbital~debris]

I love these labels, and the way they make it possible for people across the EU to compare like-for-like on different products.

Even if some people ignore them, it simultaneously allows others to make purchase choices which are less problematic for our shared environment, and have less of a negative impact on Earth.

 

[Hamsterhjulet]

Sometimes EU is just dumb. What’s the point of printing a physical copy of the label? I’ve always wondered what that’s going to help. I do live in the EU.

 

[gh0stpr0t0c0lburner]

The label is accompanied by a product information sheet (PDF) that provides a comprehensive overview of even more details, such as the device's battery capacity in mAh, screen scratch resistance based on the Mohs hardness scale, the minimum guaranteed timeframe for availability of security updates, and much more.

Many people here complain bitterly about the EU...but requiring companies to list all this stuff is actually fantastic.

 

[Jumpthesnark]

If Apple's stated rationale is true, then why are the EU's testing standards so "ambiguous?" And have other companies expressed the same concern about testing standards variability?

 

[gh0stpr0t0c0lburner]

Sometimes EU is just dumb. What’s the point of printing a physical copy of the label?

Access. For all that we love to believe we live in the future, the only way to make sure something is 100% accessible is to take it out of the virtual and print it. People pooh poohing it for environmental reasons are being obstinate—this is not the piece of paper that will destroy the earth. That is more likely to be billions of smartphones.

 

[rlewisphilly]

Now that’s a very environmentally solution, well done EU!

Don't you now feel safer, thanks to the government...and it's paperwork?

 

[jz0309]

Don’t understand the purpose of this, the Eau treats smartphones as a “utility” needed to function in normal life, so what’s the point of rating charging efficiency if it’s needed to survive?
Is anybody going to make a purchasing decision based on that rating?
Just another example of unnecessary regulation to me, bureaucracy at its best.

 

[jz0309]

Access. For all that we love to believe we live in the future, the only way to make sure something is 100% accessible is to take it out of the virtual and print it. People pooh poohing it for environmental reasons are being obstinate—this is not the piece of paper that will destroy the earth. That is more likely to be billions of smartphones.

In the spirit of the DMA it should be displayed on the device prior to configuring it, and if it’s a low rating people should pay a fine …

 

[DunedinD]

Oof, the iPad (Pro M4) gets the lowest rating. I have noticed mine’s battery health started dropping a few months ago, and is now at 93%. iPhone 16 Pro Max is a few months younger, yet last I checked its health a week ago it was 100%.

 

[Ctrlos]

Bloody EU being helpful and telling us how much energy our products use. Apple should build it's AI data centre in France and melt the Alps as revenge for this clear state overreach.

 

[gh0stpr0t0c0lburner]

Don’t understand the purpose of this, the Eau treats smartphones as a “utility” needed to function in normal life, so what’s the point of rating charging efficiency if it’s needed to survive?

It encourages manufacturers to work on its efficiency. We have seen this in many, many different fields of products.

 

[axantas]

Now that’s a very environmentally solution, well done EU!

a booklet of 40 pages - never read by anyone.
I know these. I immediately throw them away - paper recycling though…

 

[jz0309]

It encourages manufacturers to work on its efficiency. We have seen this in many, many different fields of products.

Can you provide some examples then?

 

[CapitalIdea]

The main reason to voluntarily downgrade to a B is to ensure they have a target they can hit every year—they don't want stories because the next iPhone gets downgraded, for example.

Or they don't want to give the EU yet another chance to retroactively fine them in case the final standards don't match the A-tier.

 

[User 6502]

Sometimes EU is just dumb. What’s the point of printing a physical copy of the label? I’ve always wondered what that’s going to help. I do live into the EU.

If it’s buried in the os in some hidden menu nobody is going to take notice. A piece of paper is definitely more noticeable. The iPhone already comes with other printed regulatory stuff, so this is not a big deal.

 

[klasma]

Sometimes EU is just dumb. What’s the point of printing a physical copy of the label? I’ve always wondered what that’s going to help. I do live into the EU.

The purpose is for immediate offline information when/before buying a product. From the framework regulation 2017/1369:

“Where a supplier places a product on the market, each unit of the product should be accompanied by a label in paper form complying with the requirements of the relevant delegated act. The relevant delegated act should set out the most effective way of displaying the labels, taking into account the implications for customers, suppliers and dealers, and could provide that the label is printed on the packaging of the product. The dealer should display the label supplied together with the unit of the product in the position required by the relevant delegated act. The label displayed should be clearly visible and identifiable as the label belonging to the product in question, without the customer having to read the brand name and model number on the label, and should attract the attention of the customer browsing through the product displayed.”

 

[User 6502]

a booklet of 40 pages - never read by anyone.
I know these. I immediately throw them away - paper recycling though…

They don’t have to include the booklet of 40 pages. Just the result which is a single page.

 

[klasma]

If Apple's stated rationale is true, then why are the EU's testing standards so "ambiguous?" And have other companies expressed the same concern about testing standards variability?

If you look at annex IV of the regulation, it’s actually quite detailed. But in my experience even the most technical standards often have remaining ambiguities.

 

[Veinticinco]

Bloody EU being helpful and telling us how much energy our products use. Apple should build it's AI data centre in France and melt the Alps as revenge for this clear state overreach.

Apple's AI power wouldn't even melt the ice cubes in a champagne bucket.

Aside from the obvious parallel legal requirement (with very good reason) in many European countries when selling property, I only take note of these 'product' energy labels very briefly when buying a new large domestic appliance every 5 years or so (washer/dryer for example) that seem to highlight new convenience features.

Not sure I see the regulatory point for a smartphone (or other similar tech like headphones etc.) , a sector where there's an inherent drive towards energy efficiency (and lower build costs to maximise profit) without compromising performance.

 

[klasma]

Is anybody going to make a purchasing decision based on that rating?

In a physical store in the EU, these labels are prominently featured on each device that requires them, and similarly displayed on product pages in online stores. People do make purchasing decisions based on that. Traditionally that’s more for household appliances and devices like TVs and PC monitors, but if you have two smartphones side by side where one has A and the other C, then that will influence the buying decision, and hence incentivizes manufacturers to achieve better ratings.

 

[jz0309]

In a physical store in the EU, these labels are prominently featured on each device that requires them, and similarly displayed on product pages in online stores. People do make purchasing decisions based on that. Traditionally that’s more for household appliances and devices like TVs and PC monitors, but if you have two smartphones side by side where one has A and the other C, then that will influence the buying decision, and hence incentivizes manufacturers to achieve better ratings.

I doubt it, does this label show the difference in charging cost between an A and a C? Cause in actual cost difference over a year it’s probably less than 5 Euros if even that. And I am lead to believe that modem performance, 120Hz screens etc are the real differentiators and buying decisions…

If the EU really wants to highlight efficiency, they should start a campaign against wireless charging as that is the most inefficient charging method, only beaten by “reverse charging” (eg charge watch or AirPods on the back of the phone) which so many posters here in MR

Repeating myself: bureaucracy at its best

 

[Ic3Ang3l]

If I understand that right, the battery endurance is rated as 37 hours. The S25 Ultra for example is rated as 27 hours. Thats insane.