The Unthought Known Effects of Multimedia on the Environment: A life cycle approach

The Unthought Known Effects of Multimedia and the Environment

A Life Cycle Approach

Sean H. Smith and Linda Misiura

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Interactive Media Elon University Elon, NC

Copyright 2010. Sean H. Smith, Linda Misiura. All Right Reserved

Abstract: With the advancement of interactive and multimedia in today’s digital world, little is known, or at least thought of when the effects that all these electronic devices that we use to communicate and share information have on the environment. This paper will shed light on the amount of energy and natural resources that are exhausted to create and use electronic multimedia devices such as computers, cell phones, and cameras. It will do so by examining the Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of these products from the retrieval of resources used in manufacturing to the end of a product’s life.

The authors must point out that much of the information obtained from their research resulted in data primarily from the EU or data that may be considered outdated. We believed that this lack of data is unacceptable. It is rather disheartening that very little information was obtained from the EPA. It is obvious that a lot of research needs to be conducted to obtain more current data.

Introduction Since the dawning of man, and even before that, the ability to create and use tools has been a necessity for survival of a species. Chimpanzees learned to harness the power of sticks and rocks to dig up insects from the ground or crack open fruit and seeds to access the fleshy sustenance within. Soon after man came to be on Earth, humans quickly learned the same techniques as their primate ancestors and began to take these tools and techniques to another level.

We learned to shape rocks and sticks into more useful and effective tools allowing us to actively hunt prey from long distances and safety as well as allowing us to more efficiently use all parts of a prey’s carcass. With these tools man was now able

to create fire, which could then eventually be used to create other tools and more importantly communicate.

Humans’ ability to harness the power of tools was what allowed us to begin to communicate and share information with each other in ways that could never be done before. Fire could be used to create smoke that would over time be used to communicate with others of long distances. With the use of sticks and ink, produced from berries and seeds with the help of fire, man was now able to create symbols that had meaning leading to the formation of language. In addition to this our human ancestors could now write on the walls of caves and rocks allowing them to create a history and educate their future descendents by leaving behind their life experiences and legacy.

As time went on and man became more sophisticated in the way he utilized tools, new resources and methods were used and created to manufacture more elaborate and efficient tools and weapons. This allowed humans spread throughout the world settling in new areas and exposing them to new resources which they took advantage of. These new resources allowed the human population to expand to the nearly billions of individuals. As a result of this population growth man was beginning to consume more resources than were available.

By the 18th century the British Empire for one had exhausted one of the most valuable natural resources Earth has to offer, trees. They were used to create the

famous armada and of course used to form paper, which over time had become the primary medium for communication. Trees were such a valuable commodity, that upon colonizing the Americas the British set out to harvest the vast forests that blanketed the land to use for their shipbuilding and manufacturing of homes.

For centuries the practice of deforestation continued and once the industrialization of the world occurred in the early 1800’s, the harvesting of trees began to happen at a rate that was no longer sustainable. Millions of trees and acres of land around the world were destroyed for the mere purpose of producing paper so we could communicate and share information to everyone and everywhere.

As this raping of the planet became a concern in the 1970’s a new revolution in communication was in its infancy, the computer. Over the following years these new devices were beginning to be produced at a smaller scale and in greater numbers allowing individuals to own their own. Then in 1993, as the personal computer had become a staple in many homes thanks to the work of IBM and Apple, a new way of communicating with others around the world was introduced to the world. Tim Berners‐Lee, a physics engineer from the European Organization of Nuclear Research (CERN), had invented the World Wide Web (WWW), initially as a way for scientists to communicate and share research at the speed of light.

The WWW grew and was no longer just a vehicle for those in the science field.

Anyone with a computer and a telephone line could now access the Internet and

communicate with millions of others by the simple click of a button. This resulted on a lesser reliance on paper as information could now be shared electronically.

This new form of communication was seen as a relief to the planet in regards to the amount of paper that could be saved. Hundreds of millions of people now had access to a computer and the Internet, no longer relying on paper to connect to the rest of the world. Seemingly everywhere, people were logged on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, clicking away, unaware of the possible consequences.

Although paper was no longer as much of a necessity, some did begin to realize that the use of the Internet and multimedia devices they used to log on to it were still having an adverse affect on the environment. Instead of the over use of trees, other natural resources were being sucked up at alarming rates to manufacture and run these new devices. The public’s concern over this exploitation of the planet was starting to grow and forcing the hand of manufactures and governments to find new ways of monitoring the use and types of materials in the manufacturing of electronic devices.

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)

In 2001, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) published standards for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a tool for evaluation of environmental impacts (Muir, 2006). LCA is a process where an evaluation of the effects that a

product has on the environment over the entire period of its life cycle is done. It is carried out in a systematic way that adapts the ‘cradle‐to‐grave’ approach (Tan, 2005). It is a tool which helps to analyze the energy consumption, raw material consumption, different types of emissions and other factors over a product’s life cycle and attempts to assign environmental impacts to these various product stages (Socolof et al., 2001).

An LCA is a highly complex process of collecting objective data, ideally being independent of bias or particular ideologies. Not only does a LCA provide data for the primary use and manufacturing processes of a product but it also includes data associated with ancillary resources and manufacturing processes that go into the primary production of said product. For example it collects data on the amount of coal that is consumed for the production of electricity that is used in both the manufacturing process and use of a product.

LCA provides a goal for any parties involved in a products manufacture to reduce adverse effects throughout the product life cycle. While a life cycle analysis doesn’t necessarily certify a product as “environmentally friendly”, it can aid in the identification of problem areas to be improved (Tan, 2005).

A Life Cycle Analysis typically analyses the life of a product through the following four stages: •

Raw Material Acquisition

•

Manufacturing

•

Product Life/Use

•

End of Life (EoL).

Within these stages, an LCA also provides an impact assessment allowing analysts to (Solocof et al, 2001):

•

Calculate a product’s environmental impact

•

Identify the positive or negative environmental impact of a process or product

•

Find opportunities for process and product improvement

•

Compare and analyze several processes based on their environmental impacts

•

Quantitatively justify a change in a process or product

This paper will explain in further detail, these stages of the Life Cycle Analyses as well as the impact assessment of cell phones and computers in the following sections. As mentioned previously, these LCAs are extremely complex and detailed providing quantities of data that could not be covered in full in this paper. The purpose of this paper will be to only provide a few examples and select data sets in hopes of highlighting some of the products, processes, and waste that occur during the lifespan of a particular electronic device.

Raw Material Acquisition Stage The Raw Material Acquisition stage includes the harvesting of materials or natural resources and the transportation of those materials to manufacturing sites. The production of various electronics requires the harvesting of a variety of metals that are used in the semiconductors, circuit boards, wiring, and housing of these products. These metals include base metals such as lead, zinc, copper, gold, platinum as well as alloys including aluminum and steal.

An LCA conducted by the University of Tennessee’s Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies and funded by a grant from the EPA studied the inputs and output of resources and their use throughout the various stages of cathode ray tube

(CRT) and Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) of desktop computer monitors (Socolof et al., 2001). Although the study was conducted in the late 1990’s and analyzed the production of now obsolete CRT monitors, it did included data regarding LCD monitors, which are the norm in today’s PC and laptop computers making the data rather relevant.

Their findings (Socolof et al., 2001), regarding the amount of resources used for the production of one monitor, indicated that a 17” CRT required the use of 9.76 kg. of lead oxide glass including 0.45 kg. lead, accounting for 46.1% of the weight of the one monitor. In order to produce glass one must use a combination of sand, flint, spar, and other silica based materials that are products of the sea. In addition to glass 5.16 kg of steal go into an average 17” CRT monitor making up 24.2% of the monitor’s weight. Steal is an alloy produced from the ancillary combination of iron with a carbon element, all of which must be extract from the earth. Considering that the Earth’s crust consists of 5% iron, this could have a detrimental effect to the environment.

Fortunately, the advancements in technology have led to the creation and production of LCD monitors. These newer monitors have led to a reduction in the amount of resources that go into them. Relative to CRT monitors, only 2.53 kg of steal is used to produce one monitor, almost half the amount required for a CRT monitor (Socolof et al., 2001). In addition much less glass goes into LCD monitors as their screens are made of polymers and liquid crystals. While this may seem to be

an improvement, it must be noted that these polymers or plastics make up the majority of the modern monitors. In order to produce these plastic a lot more fossil fuels and water are necessary.

According to the European Union’s (EU) Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (WEEE) (2010) More than 90% of the waste in the life cycle of a mobile phone is generated at the raw‐material stage. Cell phones are typically made of 40% metal, 40% plastics, and 20% ceramics and other trace metals. The average cell phone contains about 0.00008 kg of gold, which doesn’t seem like much (Pace Butler Corporation, 2007). However, when one considers that in America alone there are over 140 million cell phone users that adds up to almost 5 tons of gold (Iamgreen.com, 2010). To acquire one ton of gold, 350,000 tons of ore, the rock and other strata material in which the gold resides, must be removed in order to extract the precious. That creates quite a large and worthless hole within the Earth, and that’s just to acquire gold. Other metals such as platinum, which requires the extraction of even more ore per kg of the element, are also used in cell phones.

Manufacturing Stage The manufacturing stage of the LCA includes a products manufacture and assembly, packaging, and transportation to final distribution including retail stores and online warehouses (Muir, 2006; Socolof et al., 2001). Although the packaging and transportation of electronic plays a major role in the consumption of fossil fuels and the use of plastics this paper will only focus on the components of the electronic

devices themselves and how the manufacturing processes impact the environment.

Both computers and cell phones function via microchips and processors that require large amounts of ultra‐pure water during their manufacturing (Adamson et al., 2005). These microchips are then bathed in a variety of chemical for cleansing and ensure purity, including hydrochloric acid, hydrofluoric acid, arsenic, benzene and hexavalent chromium (Adamson et al., 2005). Many of these chemical solvents are known to cause adverse environmental and human health effects. Some of the most toxic chemical used in the manufacturing of these microchips and circuit boards are those found in brominated flame retardants, including polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) known to be carcinogenetic agents. These chemicals have been found to be so harmful to those working in the factories and living in the surrounding communities that the EU and United States have force manufactures to phase out the use of these chemicals by 2011 (Herat, 2008).

One of the major components of computers that is necessary for them process and store all the information we require of them, is random‐access memory (RAM). This memory takes the form of, or is stored in Integrated Circuit (IC) boards. The production of these boards has a major impact on the environment. The manufacturing of just one 32MB RAM module requires 32kg of water, 1.6kg of fossil fuels, 700g of gases, and up to 72g of different chemicals. (WEEE, 2010). As significant as this may be it is only a small portion of the total weight of materials

that go into the manufacturing of one desktop PC. The average 24 kg desktop computer with monitor requires at least 10 times its weight in fossil fuels and chemicals to manufacture. A PC is much more materials intensive than an automobile or refrigerator, which only require 1‐2 times their weight in fossil fuels.

Researchers found that manufacturing one desktop computer and 17‐inch CRT monitor uses at least 240 kg of fossil fuels, 22 kg of chemicals and 1,500 kg of water – a total of 1.8 tons of materials (Kuehr and Williams, 2003). Multiply that by the more than 1 billion computers in use today and convert it to American system units that is 252 billion lbs of fossil fuels, 48.4 billion lbs of chemicals 3.3 trillion lbs of water. Are we really better off using computers instead of paper?

Contrary to the WEEE directive information, the research conducted by Kevin Chin Ning Tan (2005) found that 90% of cell phone waste is generated during its production stage. The reason for this contradiction may be due to the lack of some data or the use of an alternative ISO standard. But most likely this is because his results include the impacts from the packaging that the phones are ship in.

Regardless, Tan states that this waste during the manufacturing stage is due to the fact that there are a lot of energies and materials required to produce a phone’s Printed Circuit Board (PCB) and ICs. Like computers the majority of harmful materials that are used during the production of these parts are toxic chemicals.

In addition to the use of harmful chemicals, which are hazardous to the health of those exposed to them but they are also emitted into the environment. Amongst the

top environmental impacts from cell phone manufacturing is the vast consumption of fossil fuels and minerals as previously stated. The effect of these materials on the environment is much greater due to the fact that they are non‐renewable resources.

Once they are used they cannot be replaced or returned to the earth. Behind these impacts from mobile phone manufacturing the most significant is climate change (Tan, 2005). These chemicals as well as the carbon dioxide that is emitted during the manufacturing process are the major contributors to this phenomenon.

Product Life/Use Stage The Use stage of LCA includes energy and emissions during normal product life, required maintenance, and product reuse (refurbishing, material reuse) (Muir, 2006; Solocof et al., 2001). The impacts on the environment from this stage are rather significant. They are more than one would think. But what must be considered in the amount electricity that is used to run electronic devices and the consumption of fossil fuels in the ancillary production of this electricity.

In the 2001 University of Tennessee LCA of desktop computer monitors, a 15” LCD monitor uses 237 KWh per effective lifespan (effective lifespan is much shorter than the manufacturer’s life as computers quickly obsolete and are replaced) (Solocof, 2001). One KWh of electricity equals 1.6 lbs of coal. Therefore, a computer monitor consumes 379.2 lbs of coal during its average 1‐3 yr lifespan.

Not only do personal computers use massive amounts of electricity, it is estimated that the information and communication technology (ICT) industry as a whole (servers) are responsible for 2% of the global carbon dioxide emissions. This is equivalent to the aviation industry (Gartner, 2007). This is a rather shocking statistic when one thinks about all the power and exhaust airplanes consume and emit.

Of all the electronic devices that most of us use on a regular basis, the cell phone’s use stage has the most undesirable effects on the environment. During a cell lifespan, which on average is only 12‐18 months, it produces 99 kg (218 lbs) of carbon dioxide that is emitted into the atmosphere. This is 750 times its own weight in gas emission (WEEE, 2010).

Much like the computers mobile networks have a major part in the destruction of the environment. ESU Services (2003) conducted a study evaluating the environmental sustainability of the UMTS mobile communication system in Switzerland by means of a Systems Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA). They determined that cell phone use and production accounted for 90% of the environmental impact from these devices, confirming what was previously stated in this paper. In addition they found that the base stations that these cell phones accessed accounted for 80% of the network’s environmental impact.

In a recent University of Massachusetts study of 3G phones (Balasubramanian, N., et

al., 2009), researches determines that a 50KB download of data consumed on average, 13 joules (J). Considering that 3.3 MJ equals 1.6 lbs of coal, if the 700 million cell phones in the world conducted 100.000 of these downloads during its brief lifespan, it would be the equivalent of using 420 million lbs of coal. This is a surprising number considering the small size of cell phones.

When it comes to electronics, and not just computers and cell phones, the most wasteful phase of use is the “no‐load” phase. This occurs when a devices is turned off yet still plugged into a power outlet. Within the past ten years, research has determined that a staggering amount of electricity is still being consumed by electronic devices during the “no‐load” phase. Cell phones that are not in use but still have their chargers plugged in, still draw about a half Watt of power. If you all of the 140 million cell phones in America charged unused for 24 hrs, they would draw enough energy to power 28,000 American homes (Iamgreen, 2010).

End of Life Stage This stage of the LCA looks at the recycling, landfill disposal, liquid waste, gas emissions, etc. of electronic devices. Considering that there are over a billion computers and 700 million cell phones in use on Earth with an average lifespan between the two devices of 2 years, the number of these devices that are being disposed of is overwhelming. 140 million cell phones alone will be tossed in landfills this year. That is 4 phones per second (Iamgreen, 2010). Every year, 20‐50 million tons of electrical and electronic equipment waste (e‐waste) are generated

world wide (UNEP, 2005).

Bearing in mind that cell phones and computers contain toxic chemicals in the form of plastics, toxic metals such as lead and mercury, and other elements such as Nitrogen and Phosphorous, discarding of these devices will rot our planet. From the 140 million phones in America 80,000 lbs of lead will seep into the Earth (Iamgreen). Most people probably don’t understand the complexities of the Earth’s watershed (underground water storage) systems. Everything that enters a watershed travels to a nearby stream, which in turn runs to a river, and the river runs to the ocean. These watershed and river basin act as the planet’s vascular system transporting these toxic chemicals around the globe.

One of the major environment impacts from the EoL is eutrophication, the increase in the concentration of chemical nutrients in an ecosystem. Even the seemingly harmless and natural elements such as Nitrogen and Phosphorous being introduced into the environment from electronic devices, in unbalanced levels will through off complete ecosystems. Fresh water systems are highly sensitive to these elements and the slightest imbalance will have adverse effects on the ecology, much like a red tide in marine ecosystems.

Currently, the most popular option for the disposal of e‐waste is the dangerous, yet cost‐effective, and sometimes illegal exportation to developing countries such as India and China. This act is usually disguised under the umbrella of “charity” by

countries such as the United States and others throughout Europe. This is of course an attractive options for industrialized nations as the labor costs are much lower and regulations are not as firm in these developing countries. A report in 2004 found that 70% of e‐waste collected at recycling units in India were exported or dumped from developed countries (UNEP, 2005). If that wasn’t shocking enough, it is estimated that 80% of all the world’s e‐waste is shipped to Asia, and 90% of that ends up in China (Liu, 2006).

This waste usually ends up in recycling workshops where workers are dismantling this equipment in unsanitary and dangerous conditions. These people are handling toxic chemicals and metals in facilities ill equipped to discard these caustic substances in a safe and environmental manner. Through the exporting of e‐waste, wealthy nations are spreading this electronic disease and poisoning all corners of the Earth.

Conclusion As this paper has hoped to point out, the production, use, and disposal of multimedia devices is a huge concern for this planet. Without action it is only going to get worse as more of the world gains access to computers and cell phones through movements to narrow the digital divide and encourage net neutrality.

What seems like the right thing to do from a social aspect may be the wrong thing to do from an environmental one.

Just as users are at the forefront of aforementioned movements, users too will be responsible for the way multimedia devices are produced, used, and disposed of.

We need to take a closer look at our governments and having better understanding of legislation that is being passed regarding e‐waste. While the EU WEEE directive has kept a keen eye on the types of materials used in the production of electronics, some of their legislation such as holding producers responsible for the disposal of e‐ waste, has it’s drawbacks (WEEE, 2010). It is legislation such as this that encourages manufacturers to seek inexpensive means of disposal such as the exporting of e‐waste to developing nation such as India and China.

We the users must be the ones overseeing the formation of policies and laws driving positive change in what materials and processes are used in the production and disposal of multimedia devices to ensure the safety of ourselves and of the environment.

Bibliography Adamson, M., Hamilton, R. Hutchison, K., Kazmierowski, K., Lau, J., Madejski, D., MacDonald, N. (2005). Environmental impact of computer information technology in an institutional setting. (Case study). University of Guelph, Toronto, Ontario.

Balasubramanian, N., Balasubramanian, A., Venkataramani, A. (2009). Energy Consumption in Mobile Phones: A Measurement Study and Implications for Network Applications. Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement conference. pg. 280‐293.

ESU Services Ltd. (2003). Life Cycle Assessment of the Mobile Communication System UMTS: Towards Eco­efficient Systems. Mobile Communications. Retrieved from http://www.esu‐services.ch/cms/index.php?id=umts.

Gartner. (2007). Gartner sstimates ICT industry accounts for 2 percent of global CO2 emissions. Gartner Symposium/ITxpo. [Press Release]. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=503867

Herat, S. (2008). Environmental impacts and use of brominated flame retardants in electrical and electronic equipment. Environmentalist. 28,348–357

Iamgreen.com. (2010). The environmental impact of cell phones. Iamgreen.com.

Retrieved from http://sayiamgreen.com/infographic/environmental‐impact‐of‐cell‐ phones.

Kuehr, R., Williams, E. (2004). Study tallies environmental cost of computer boom.

The newsletter of United Nations University and its international network of research and training centres/programmes. (31). [Review of the book Computers and the environment]. Retrieved from http://update.unu.edu/archive/issue31_5.htm Liu, Y. (2006). China's E­Waste Problem: Facing Up to the Challenge. Worldwatch Institute. Retrieved from http://www.worldwatch.org/node/3921.

Muir, M. (2006). Lifecycle assessment for strategic product design and management.

(Master’s thesis). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

Nokia. (2010). Materials and substances. Nokia. Retrieved from http://www.nokia.com/environment/we‐create/creating‐our‐products/materials‐ and‐substances Pace Butler Corporation. (2007). Cell Phone Recycling – The Gold in Your Cell Phone.

Pace Butler Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.pacebutler.com/blog/cell‐ phone‐recycling‐gold.

Socolof, M.L., Overly, J.G., Kincaid, L.E, Geibig, J.R. (2001). Life­cycle assessment of desktop computer displays. United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/dfe/pubs/comp‐dic/lca.

Tan, K. (2005). Life cycle assessment of a mobile phone. (Bachelor’s thesis).

University of Southern Queensland, Sprinfield, Australia.

UNEP. (2005). E­waste, the hidden side of IT equipment's manufacturing and use.

Environment Alert Bulletin.

WEEE. (2010). The product life cycle. The WEEE Man. Retrieved from http://www.weeeman.org/html/what/lifecycle.html.