That’s my point. In the future you won’t see glued down batteries anymore, just like you won’t have company-owned repairshop monopolies. That’s already addressed. It will simply require some time until all members have put those new rules into national law. So why would they include reapirability in a new label system coming into effect much later.
Why is the energy usage so big and the repairability score so small?
These should be switched. Energy usage of the smartphone is less relevant, as it is a mobile device, so it is already designed to be energy efficient.
You are correct in general but the issue with repairability is already addressed separately(*) so it doesn’t make sense to make it a big point here.
(*)See: Right to repair, the accessability of spare parts for end consumers in particular.
I would expect a repair score to be about how easy it is to repair, can the battery be easily changed, is it glued down, etc.
That’s my point. In the future you won’t see glued down batteries anymore, just like you won’t have company-owned repairshop monopolies. That’s already addressed. It will simply require some time until all members have put those new rules into national law. So why would they include reapirability in a new label system coming into effect much later.