Unlike most Android phones, which come with expandable memory, iPhones only have two primary options when it comes to storage—built-in hardware storage and cloud storage. With this, iPhone owners only ever get one chance to choose their preferred storage options, which is when you first purchase the device.
These days, many conscious consumers are asking what option is best for the environment. An iPhone’s built-in storage capacity can significantly affect the overall carbon emission in the manufacturing process of an iPhone, which can overcome the emissions from cloud storage, if you choose your services wisely.
Knowing this, here’s why you should consider getting a smaller built-in storage capacity for your next iPhone.
The Environmental Cost of Built-in Storage
Historically, the majority of lifetime carbon emissions from an iPhone come from the manufacturing process. In some cases, manufacturing contributes over 80% of an iPhone’s lifetime carbon emissions. For example, the lifetime carbon footprint of the 128GB iPhone 13 is 64kg CO2e, with 81% of its total expected lifetime carbon emissions coming from manufacturing.
On the other hand, the iPhone 13’s largest storage option of 512GB has a lifetime carbon footprint of 83kg CO2e. For Apple’s top of the line models, the iPhone 13 Pro Max’s carbon footprint ranges from 74kg CO2e for its 128GB version to a whopping 117kg CO2e for the 1TB model. In addition, the iPhone 13 Pro Max’s manufacturing process also takes up 80% of its lifetime carbon emissions.
According to Apple Insider, Chinese retailer JD was able to sell three million preorders of the iPhone 13 in the first two seconds of its release. While the claim did not disclose which models were sold, even assuming the lowest storage option at 128GB will create an estimated 192,000,000kg CO2e for this sale alone.
With this in mind, it’s obvious that the decision of storage capacity proportionally impacts a consumer’s overall carbon footprint. But, is cloud storage any better?
Apple’s Cloud Storage Practices
For most users, iCloud is used to manage data like photos, videos, passwords, subscriptions, and even family sharing accounts across devices. In many ways, iCloud is also the foundation of Apple’s ecosystem integrations like iMessage, AirDrop, and Handoff.
To support iCloud, Apple uses its data centers in tandem with third-party cloud storage services such as Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services. In fact, according to a report by The Information, Apple is Google Cloud’s largest corporate client, with over eight million terabytes of data stored on Google’s servers.
Regarding efficiency, Google claims that while its cloud data centers increased by 550% from 2010 to 2018, the amount of energy consumed during this time grew as little as 6%. In addition, both Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services purchase Renewable Energy Credits and Guarantees of Origin to cover the non-renewable energy used in their operations.
On paper, cloud storage is definitely a winner when it comes to immediate environmental impact. Most cloud services will struggle to use the 40kg CO2e or more difference in manufacturing between storage options within a device’s lifespan. However, cloud storage can have a significant environmental impact in other ways.
The Cost of Auxiliary Infrastructure
When it comes to data storage through the cloud, it doesn’t happen instantly inside data centers. It takes energy to get data from your device through fiber optic cables, internet infrastructure to multiple hard disks in Apple’s data centers.
Unfortunately, the environmental impact of these types of infrastructure varies greatly across cities, regions, and even countries. If you are often in an area with renewable energy sources and efficient telecommunication networks, it’s likely your overall emissions through use of cloud technology will be lower than those in less developed places.
But the opposite is true if you live in an area with poor renewable energy sources.
Effects on Land Use
Data centers need to continuously utilize large areas of land to store and cool the machines. In some cases, this can affect the amount of available forest area that can be used for other purpsoes. According to AZ Central, Apple’s data center in Mesa covers 1.3 million square feet alone, which doesn’t include its other data centers and those owned by partners located across the world.
However, Apple did launch its $200 million Restore Fund in 2021. The Restore Fund invests in the company’s forestry and responsible packaging innovations with the goal of delivering both financial and climate returns.
The Problem with Carbon Neutrality Claims
Apple’s commitment to 100% carbon neutrality doesn’t negate the fact that part of this is achieved through carbon offsetting. While gaining momentum, the process of carbon offsetting still lacks of regulatory frameworks that can properly monitor its effectivity.
In the Jane Goodall Podcast, Apple’s Environmental Lead, Lisa Jackson, said that 80% of all the energy Apple uses is clean. With time, Apple can hopefully close the gap and rely less on carbon offsetting to power its overall operations.
Third-Party Data Centers
It’s important to keep in mind that until Apple removes itself completely from having to use third-party data centers, it doesn’t have complete control over the total impact its cloud storage will have on the environment.
So, while Apple’s partners are trying to be more sustainable, it’s not a guarantee. For example, The Verge reports that Apple is dependent on some data center partners like Amazon, a company that has notably fallen short of their renewable energy commitments before, according to Wired.
Choose the Right Long-Term Storage Option
Aside from the expected environmental toll, you should also seek to understand your expected storage consumption usage and access to utilities like electricity and the internet. After all, when it comes to the environment, the best option is almost always what keeps you using the same device for longer.
Apple often computes environmental impact estimates for usage based on a product lifecycle of up to four years. For this reason, every year that your iPhone is used after the fourth year helps reduce the impact of increased manufacturing and your overall carbon footprint.
As we continue to expand our media libraries, with videos and photos growing in size as file fidelity increases, it’s likely that the storage you need today will only be a fraction of what you need four years from now. With built-in storage, you’re stuck with what you bought at purchase, but cloud storage allows you to expand with the times and keep using the same device for longer.
Ultimately, Cloud Storage Is Better for the Environment
While Apple has been making strides in its commitment towards sustainability, it’s essential to understand that much remains to be done, especially when it comes to Apple’s practice of forced obsolescence.
Unfortunately, while the overall sustainability of the iPhone manufacturing process is improving, new iPhones still use rare metals, toxic substances, and parts that just can’t be recycled. So, if given the option, not buying a new iPhone is still the most environmentally friendly option available to you.
However, if you’re in need of an upgrade anyway, buying an iPhone with lower built-in storage, and relying on iCloud instead, is generally better for the environment. With its overall reduction in carbon emissions during manufacturing, it makes sense to simply invest in green cloud storage.
Read Next
About The Author
