Thursday, September 23rd 2021
EU Commission Pushing Forward with Unified Electronics Charger Standard and Unbundling of Chargers
What can only be called a long running drama, the EU has once again put its foot down when it comes to chargers for various consumer electronics devices, although it's mostly about smartphones and regular old mobile phones these days. The whole thing took off some time in 2009, although back then, it was a voluntary effort and according to today's press release by the EU Commission, we're down from 30 to three "competing" standards (micro USB, lightning and USB-C), but apparently that is still not good enough.
As such, the EU Commission has now decided that USB-C is the answer to their prayers and it'll now be an enforced standard for a wide range of devices if they're to be allowed to be sold in the EU. We doubt this will go down well with many device manufacturers, Apple being the obvious one here, even though the company has been slowly transitioning to USB-C on its tablets, none of its phones are using USB-C today. The following device categories are affected: smartphones, tablets, cameras, headphones, portable speakers and handheld video game consoles.
It's unclear as to why the device port has to be USB-C, although a move to USB-C cables for everything does make things simpler, but as long as the charger itself uses USB-C, it's hard to understand why the device end must use USB-C. There's nothing inherently wrong with USB-C, but the USB-C standard is a bit of a mess, even for charging and the EU Commission has a very "loose" proposal here where they're pushing for the USB Power Delivery standard to be the only charging standard allowed over USB-C.
Even USB PD isn't a uniform standard and there are at least four major revisions with multiple minor versions. If we assume the EU Commission goes for USB PD 3.1, then we're looking at a pretty future proof standard that can deliver up to 240 W at 48 V, but this would require different cables than what we're using today. However, if USB PD 3.0 is chosen, then anything that needs more than 100 W at 20 V isn't going to work. Admittedly no smartphone in the world is going to need to be charged at 240 W, but the issue with setting standards like this, is that they tend to filter down, or more likely filter out in this case, to other markets and devices, which means that setting the bar too low, isn't good.
It makes even more sense to go for the most advanced standard when the EU Commission also wants to unbundle the chargers, as it means that your USB PD charger can be used to power many other devices that might have different power requirements from your smartphone or tablet. This appears to be one of the goals here, judging by the amount of different devices the EU Commission already set its sight on, but they might even have limited themselves a bit here, since most laptops can and should be charged over USB-C as well. In fact, Apple is pretty much the pioneer here, which also makes their obsession with keeping the lightning connector on their phones a bit counterintuitive.
Where we're not following the EU Commission's logic is where they claim that as many as 38 percent of consumers are said to have experienced problems with their charges due to incompatibility problems. If anything this seems to suggest that most consumers haven't paid attention to what kind of device they own. On the other hand it also seems crazy that consumers in the EU have spent €2.4 billion per year on buying chargers for their electronics, since they apparently don't always come with chargers. Again, this suggests that consumers aren't paying attention to what they're buying and maybe clearer labelling would solve these problems.
Furthermore, the EU Commission claims that some 11,000 tonnes of e-waste is produced annually from chargers and power adapters that are being thrown away, since they're not compatible with newer devices. This problem could be solved to a degree by moving to USB-C, but as mentioned above, the USB PD standard has also evolved over time, so if you have a USB PD 1.0 charger, it might not be compatible with your new USB PD 3.0 device, as at some point the Voltages changed. One thing that is certain is that there's no such thing as future proof electronics, as it's impossible to predict future requirements, but as technology develops and improves, we sometimes move to entirely different standards that are vastly superior to what came before.
In as much as a common charging standard sounds great, we're not going to see universal chargers, regardless of what the EU Commission is hoping for. This comes down to one simple thing, cost. You can get a 30 W USB PD charger for as little as €10 (sticking with the EU here), which is going to be more than good enough for charging most of the devices in the EU Commission's list, but it's unlikely it'll be powerful enough to charge your laptop or even more demanding smartphones and tablets. A "cheap" 100 W USB PD charger on the other hand will set you back at least €40, although they can often charge multiple devices at once and wouldn't have a problem powering a laptop.
The only thing that is certain is that consumers won't be getting that €5 or €10 the currently bundled charger is worth back from the device makers, since we've already seen some companies that have removed the charger from the box, but seemingly didn't lower the price of their devices with an equivalent amount. This doesn't even take into consideration the reduced weight and volume per unit, which would reduce shipping costs for the device manufacturer.
At the end of the day, this is a tricky subject and although the EU does have some very valid points, it would seem that simply requiring that all chargers use a USB-C port and adhere to the USB PD standard would've been enough, it looks like we're going to see a lot more devices use USB-C ports for charging. This isn't a bad thing as such, but it does feel a bit forced, even though there are some underlying reasons behind it. It's not a done deal yet and things may still change before it becomes a legal requirement.
Photo by By Ilya Plekhanov - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46517325
Source:
The EU Commission
As such, the EU Commission has now decided that USB-C is the answer to their prayers and it'll now be an enforced standard for a wide range of devices if they're to be allowed to be sold in the EU. We doubt this will go down well with many device manufacturers, Apple being the obvious one here, even though the company has been slowly transitioning to USB-C on its tablets, none of its phones are using USB-C today. The following device categories are affected: smartphones, tablets, cameras, headphones, portable speakers and handheld video game consoles.
Even USB PD isn't a uniform standard and there are at least four major revisions with multiple minor versions. If we assume the EU Commission goes for USB PD 3.1, then we're looking at a pretty future proof standard that can deliver up to 240 W at 48 V, but this would require different cables than what we're using today. However, if USB PD 3.0 is chosen, then anything that needs more than 100 W at 20 V isn't going to work. Admittedly no smartphone in the world is going to need to be charged at 240 W, but the issue with setting standards like this, is that they tend to filter down, or more likely filter out in this case, to other markets and devices, which means that setting the bar too low, isn't good.
It makes even more sense to go for the most advanced standard when the EU Commission also wants to unbundle the chargers, as it means that your USB PD charger can be used to power many other devices that might have different power requirements from your smartphone or tablet. This appears to be one of the goals here, judging by the amount of different devices the EU Commission already set its sight on, but they might even have limited themselves a bit here, since most laptops can and should be charged over USB-C as well. In fact, Apple is pretty much the pioneer here, which also makes their obsession with keeping the lightning connector on their phones a bit counterintuitive.
Where we're not following the EU Commission's logic is where they claim that as many as 38 percent of consumers are said to have experienced problems with their charges due to incompatibility problems. If anything this seems to suggest that most consumers haven't paid attention to what kind of device they own. On the other hand it also seems crazy that consumers in the EU have spent €2.4 billion per year on buying chargers for their electronics, since they apparently don't always come with chargers. Again, this suggests that consumers aren't paying attention to what they're buying and maybe clearer labelling would solve these problems.
Furthermore, the EU Commission claims that some 11,000 tonnes of e-waste is produced annually from chargers and power adapters that are being thrown away, since they're not compatible with newer devices. This problem could be solved to a degree by moving to USB-C, but as mentioned above, the USB PD standard has also evolved over time, so if you have a USB PD 1.0 charger, it might not be compatible with your new USB PD 3.0 device, as at some point the Voltages changed. One thing that is certain is that there's no such thing as future proof electronics, as it's impossible to predict future requirements, but as technology develops and improves, we sometimes move to entirely different standards that are vastly superior to what came before.
In as much as a common charging standard sounds great, we're not going to see universal chargers, regardless of what the EU Commission is hoping for. This comes down to one simple thing, cost. You can get a 30 W USB PD charger for as little as €10 (sticking with the EU here), which is going to be more than good enough for charging most of the devices in the EU Commission's list, but it's unlikely it'll be powerful enough to charge your laptop or even more demanding smartphones and tablets. A "cheap" 100 W USB PD charger on the other hand will set you back at least €40, although they can often charge multiple devices at once and wouldn't have a problem powering a laptop.
The only thing that is certain is that consumers won't be getting that €5 or €10 the currently bundled charger is worth back from the device makers, since we've already seen some companies that have removed the charger from the box, but seemingly didn't lower the price of their devices with an equivalent amount. This doesn't even take into consideration the reduced weight and volume per unit, which would reduce shipping costs for the device manufacturer.
At the end of the day, this is a tricky subject and although the EU does have some very valid points, it would seem that simply requiring that all chargers use a USB-C port and adhere to the USB PD standard would've been enough, it looks like we're going to see a lot more devices use USB-C ports for charging. This isn't a bad thing as such, but it does feel a bit forced, even though there are some underlying reasons behind it. It's not a done deal yet and things may still change before it becomes a legal requirement.
Photo by By Ilya Plekhanov - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46517325
100 Comments on EU Commission Pushing Forward with Unified Electronics Charger Standard and Unbundling of Chargers
I just want to point out that I'm not the only one with USB-C related issues, as the article below started in 2018 and three years later is still going strong, just with a different set of evolving issues. It also contains a graph that shows that not all devices will charge at the speed you'd expect, despite the charger being able to deliver enough power over USB PD. Sometimes an 18W charger can be a faster option than a 40W charger and sometimes the supplied 40W charger doesn't even deliver 25W, although this is for obvious reasons of how fast charging works, but I'm sure some consumers are going to be complaining about this too.
www.androidauthority.com/state-of-usb-c-870996/
That graph with the different fast charging modes is IMO quite misleading, as the framing of the article is "USB-C is confusing", while what it demonstrates is that "proprietary charging standards are confusing". The two are not identical in any way, and using one as proof of the other is logically problematic. Blame/responsibility needs to be directed where it belongs - and with proprietary USB-C extensions, that is firmly with the manufacturer, and neither the connector, its standard, nor the body responsible for that standard. And as you agreed, implementing PD support as a minimum ought to ensure that even proprietary chargers work at a decent rate for other devices. The PPS extension seems to throw a wrench in the works here, and hopefully (if it actually delivers tangible benefits) it gets adopted more broadly. But if not, that is still better than the alternative - 500mA or 1A charging. If your phone charges at 15W instead of 25W, that is a lot better than it charging at 5W or 10W. Is that perfect? Of course not. But it's still an improvement.
And sure, you can argue that adopting 3.0 as law when 3.1 is out is a bit late, but even with a grace period that's a pretty hard push for updating product lines for a bunch of manufacturers. Being too aggressive in this can potentially lead to more waste, as well as driving up prices (and potentially a misguided push for end users to buy new, 3.1-compliant chargers). And there's nothing holding OEMs or device makers back from implementing 3.1 or even newer standards when they arrive within this framework.
It's very surprising that a 500mA spec is still allowed though, as there's nothing stopping a charger from providing less power than its maximum output, so what some devices will request ought to be irrelevant, no? Mandating 1A or even 2A minimum outputs seems like a sensible solution to me. Sure, a good 500mA design will be more efficient when charging a 500mA max device, but at those amperages the loss will be negligible anyway. But it's imperative that PD-compatible devices are smart enough to let users know if they aren't receiving a sufficient charge - and IMO they ought to be able to do so even when connected to something utterly dumb like an in-car USB-A connector. At least phones and laptops could do this trivially - and anything else with a modicum of communication between the charge controller and the OS, really. I wouldn't expect your headphones to do so, but then I wouldn't expect them to charge that much slower either.
At this point though, competent implementations are more important than better standards, and this initiative does have the potential to lead towards this, even if imperfectly.
Just took a quick glance at the AA article, yeah the different charging behaviours, fixing that might be a good thing.
I dont see why phone chargers would act any differently.
The article was more to show that I'm not the only one that has reacted on how complex USB-C is and that there are too many conflict points where even techy people like us are sometimes going to scratch our heads and wonder why it doesn't work.Same as above, if you haven't read up on things, you might make flawed assumptions and that's going to cause frustration. But yes, the blame lies with the device makers, as they're trying to be ahead of the curve and try to produce solutions to problems most people don't have. I don't think I ever blamed the USB-IF for this mess, but they really need to improve their naming schemes, as they suck.3.1 would simply mean that we have a standard with longer future proofing, in as much as that is possible. It's more of an extension of 3.0 than anything else and you obviously don't have to support the entire Voltage range, just like you don't have to do that with any of the previous version.Well, as above, it's a fallback for "dumb" and old devices, but it's not suitable for any modern device.Hehe, yeah, some of that involves costs as well and you know as well as I do, that if you can save a penny, someone will do it...
Sometimes that penny means that the device or cable is no longer following the spec, something I'm sure many of us have experienced at times.It shouldn't really happen, as the base set of Voltages was already decided upon for USB PD before USB-C existed, which is a good thing.
However, since USB is quite a flexible interface, I'm sure we'll see someone plugging in something odd that doesn't follow those specs and it won't charge.
You are correct about phone gaining single digits of life, thats always gonna happen if the charger has a low rating/max output, a 5 amp charger cannot charge/give more than 5 amps, but it will still work and thats the point everyone is making, aint it?
So yes, you're correct that a higher current can't be provided, a lower current can and this is the problem with USB in certain situations.
But it's not really working in all instances, that's the issue here as I explained. I have a 5V/500mA USB port in the car and it doesn't provide enough power to charge my phone.
I actually got rid of a bunch of old chargers a little while ago, since they don't charge anything we have any more and they were all old USB phone chargers.
There's really no need to smuggle thing, as in reality, very few shipments of electronics and electrical goods have the certification paperwork thoroughly checked at the time of importation. It tends to be stricter for things with radio transmitters, but technically, at least to the US, you just need to have an FCC ID that correlates to your company name and you're good to go. The more you know...
And this is why USB-C is a mess...
Even for something like video output, there are a few different ways it can be done.
The one missing in the link is DisplayLink, but it requires a driver to be installed, which the options in the link shouldn't.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Alternate_Mode_partner_specifications
I would accent. That USB-C ain't such a mess as many say.
Don't bring the optional lines and display here... it is OPTIONAL and utilized as manufacturer pleases. Some do Display, some use them as analog headphone output so pick you poison, it is optional.
And yet there are so many articles like this one, which is also seemingly not helping.
www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/how-does-fast-charging-work/
Basically while flashing phones speed hovers around 50-80MB/s via USB3, that's the average mobile NAND write speed.
So... it ain't that bad, if you stick to normal and mature phone manufacturers. If you cheap out you get what you have paid for, as usual so no surprises here.