[rarecoil]

> The actual metal and plastic is worth hardly anything, so destroying it isn't a big loss. Even the manufacturing cost is near zero because after launch day of a specific model, the marginal cost to produce one more phone is pretty much zero because production lines are rarely still at capacity.

A big loss economically, maybe, but in terms of energy/carbon losses, to say it's more efficient to just crush the thing and make a new one seems false. You've pushed from number 1 on the Reuse->Reduce->Recycle->Recover->Landfill to steps 3 and 4, and then created a new iPhone in its place.

Throughout its life, a single iPhone 11 Pro Max is 86 kg CO2e [1]. The XS Max that existed and is crushed to "preserve brand value" is 77 kg CO2e [2] in footprint. Just in manufacturing costs alone, you are creating more CO2e creating the new one than the XS Max did, and taking the XS Max out-of-life early. We are not taking into account you now get to recycle the XS Max or just dump it in landfill.

Destruction of an existing item for "brand value" is not the correct environmental answer.

[1] https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/iphone/iPhone...

[2] https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/iphone/iPhone...

[ClumsyPilot]

I am with you on the ethics side, but he is correct, impact is immaterial, and your numbers confirm it the typical impact of a person, a year, is measured in tons of CO2, 90 kg amounts to like a few days of heating or a festive dinner, or filling up your car tank.

However, if they are not recycled and the materials end up in plastic pollution, heavy metal poisoning, or other damage, that's a whole different story.

[emayljames]

No, I'd say the real elephant in the room is that the vast majority of pollution is caused by industry. Example: the US military is the worlds largest polluter.