Today's New York Times has an
interesting story on the rise of cell phones made from green
materials.
Both Nokia and Motorola are now making phones made from recycled components and sold in new packaging optimized for recycling.
Barcelona, Spain is hosting this week's Mobile World Congress a major event for the cell phone industry. The article focuses on the fact manufacturers plan on using the show to release new cell phone models that are both green and affordable.
“People aren’t going to care about environmentally friendly mobile phones until the green products cost less than the regular ones,” said Tom Byrd, an industry analyst with CCS Insight in Solihull, England.
“It’s good that manufacturers are talking about this because it will raise demand down the road and prices will come down, but it will be two to five years before we see this as a mass market phenomenon.”
Motorola will be displaying its MOTO W233 Renew, which was released this month in the United States. The W233 is made using plastic from recycled water bottles and can itself be entirely recycled. The phone costs $9.99 with a two-year contract and for now can be bought only through T-Mobile. The phone is also sold in packaging made of 100 percent recycled paper and includes a prepaid shipping envelope for buyers to send in their old mobile phone for recycling.
In addition, Motorola will pay to offset the carbon emissions created to manufacture and distribute the W233, as well as to recycle it at the end of its life. The payment will also cover the first two years of use. Motorola says the W233 is the first carbon-neutral phone.
Late last year, Sony Ericsson presented a concept phone called GreenHeart, made with recycled biodegradable components. The charger draws a fraction of the power of most chargers when it is plugged into an outlet, but not connected to a phone.
Sustainable is Good has reported on green developments in cell phones in the past including a push from Nokia to reduce packaging and use renewable materials in its 3110 Evolve phone.
via New York Times
Comments