Gallery: Apple’s New iPhone 4 is Ultra Thin, Light – But is it Green?


The moment that smartphone geeks have been waiting for is finally here: Apple has just unveiled the fourth generation iPhone at today’s WWDC conference in San Francisco. At a diminutive 9.3 mm thick, the svelte new device is 25% thinner than the 3GS, significantly lighter, and it boasts a long-lasting battery that boosts call time up to 7 hours — but is it green?

Read the rest of this entry »


or your inhabitat account below


  1. Apple Refuses to Partic... August 26, 2010 at 4:01 pm

    […] consumer interest in greener gadgets on the rise, Apple has refused to include the iPhone in a far-reaching green ranking system for mobile phones in the UK. The rankings convert […]

  2. Is Apple Involved in He... July 1, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    […] you buy the iPhone 4, you’re buying not just from Apple — but from the Taiwanese company Foxconn, who […]

  3. Just in Time for the iP... June 24, 2010 at 11:09 am

    […] you one of those iPhone 4 crazed, sleepy-eyed people in line at the Apple store this morning? Well if you were, we’ve […]

  4. froogleshmoo June 9, 2010 at 5:28 pm

    …but will is blend?

  5. eastvillager June 8, 2010 at 3:38 pm

    “It’s unlikely that most people will use the handset instead of larger resource-heavy e-readers or printed books”
    this will make me upgrade to one. I use the original iphone for reading books — I download free Kindle classics from Amazon and read them on the subway (you always have your phone with you every time you get on the subway, right? but do you always have a book with you? not unless you pack it) and it’s made my commute to and from work every day in NYC much more fun.

  6. June 8, 2010 at 7:14 am

    Warren, I fear thats mostly Apple doing greenwashing. Most of these (mercury, pvc) are forbidden in most of Europe, so if they want to sell their phone in Europe, they have no choice but to produce it pvc and mercury free. Also note “the strictest global energy effiency standards” without naming the standard or providing a real percentage of effiency. I would be surprised if the recharger is even 80% efficient, which would still be lowish.

  7. Haute Verte Couture June 7, 2010 at 8:45 pm

    Nice post! I agree that the energy consumption is something of a small but good step on the way, and look forward to checking out the Reclaim model that you mention, thanks for bringing that up!

    I also wrote a post this morning on the iPhone and it\’s place in Eco Fashion. I\’d be delighted to hear your thoughts on this front as well!
    Haute Verte Couture

  8. elb June 7, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    I’d like to see “is it green” articles with more substance and less speculation. In particular, in this article, a couple of points strike me as unlikely. For example:

    “The iPhone 4 has […] a larger battery that provides 7 hours of 3G talk, 6 hours of 3G browsing, 10 hours of WiFi browsing, 10 hours of video, and 40 hours of music. That larger battery means users don’t need to plug the phone in as much, which in turn means less overall power use.”

    Now, these things aren’t all apples and oranges, and nor are they accurate. First of all, a larger battery doesn’t mean less power use — it means more power storage in the phone. Whether the iPhone 4 draws more or less power than its predecessors for doing the same tasks is only part of the equation of how long the battery lasts. With a battery sufficiently larger in capacity, a less efficient device may last longer. Second, plugging in less often doesn’t mean drawing less power! Again, it depends on how much power is drawn for how long; my wife only uses her hair dryer for a few minutes a few times a week, but my alarm clock is plugged in 24/7. Despite this, the hair dryer draws hundreds of times more energy in a month than the alarm clock. Rechargeable portable devices are beholden to the same accounting.

    A second example: “Another practical and green benefit of the new iPhone: it’s 9.3mm thick — 25% thinner than the iPhone 3GS. A thinner phone means fewer resources go into making the product.” It is incontrovertibly true that the iPhone 4 is thinner than the 3GS. However, whether this means that there are fewer resources expended in making it depends on the materials going into it, the difficulty of their working, and the density of those materials within the device. Air space in a device uses far less resources than [non-semiconductor] silicon, which uses far less resources than aluminum — and so on.

    Determining whether a gadget is “green” or not is a process which requires more than a little bit of off-the-cuff analysis of a press release by a writer. I think it is very important that consumers become more aware of the ecological, energy, and labor impact of the products they purchase, but this awareness needs to be founded in hard facts. Whether the iPhone 4 is of more or less ecological impact than the 3GS or even older iterations remains an open issue, and no one should make decisions based on an article such as this one.

    What is absolutely true is that an iPhone of any type is far less efficient and sustainable than a well-engineered so-called “dumb”-phone. However, an iPhone is also much more efficient and sustainable than a dumb-phone PLUS an MP3 player PLUS a personal organizer and/or handheld game system. The point being, it’s important to look not only at the device itself, but the user’s needs (or perceived needs — nobody “needs” an iPhone) and the behavior modification that the device entails. Buying a single fancy phone of larger ecological impact every few years is probably better than rotating through a cadre of half a dozen portable devices of different purpose in that same time period.

    Note that I don’t meant to single out this article, this author, or this product. I think the entire line of features would benefit from more careful materials, energy, and use-case analysis. That could take it from mildly interesting pseudoscience to a tool that could help people green their lifestyles and purchasing habits.

  9. chabuku June 7, 2010 at 5:15 pm

    Way to jump on the iPhone bandwagon, what does the iPhone really have to do with being green?

  10. WarrenRempel June 7, 2010 at 5:15 pm

    It seems to be green – check out the specs on their web page:

    PVC-free handset
    PVC-free headphones
    PVC-free USB cable
    Bromine-free printed circuit boards
    Mercury-free LCD display
    Arsenic-free display glass
    Majority of packaging made from post-consumer recycled fiberboard and biobased materials
    Power adapter outperforms strictest global energy efficiency standards

get the free Inhabitat newsletter

Submit this form
popular today
all time
most commented
more popular stories >
more popular stories >
more popular stories >
Federated Media Publishing - Home