Sustainable Electronics Initiative Blog

With the new year comes a new focus for the Sustainable Electronics Initiative (SEI). SEI continues to be a consortium dedicated to the development and implementation of a more sustainable system for designing, producing, remanufacturing, and recycling electronic devices. Members of the consortium include academia, non-profit organizations, government agencies, manufacturers, designers, refurbishers and recyclers. Over the next several months, our efforts will be geared more toward conducting and sponsoring research, as well as integrating principles of sustainability into the curricula and educational experiences of engineers, industrial designers, computer scientists and others involved in the design, manufacture and consumption of electronics products. We will be moving away from the previous paid membership structure to a more open network of like-minded individuals, organizations, and corporations who believe in working together to stem the tide of e-waste production through innovation and systems thinking. Bear with us over the next few months as we work to update our web site to reflect this slight shift.  Joy Scrogum, Emerging Technologies Resource Specialist for the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), will be assuming responsibilities as Education Coordinator for SEI. Nancy Holm, ISTC Sponsored Research Program Coordinator, will serve as the SEI Research Coordinator.

The Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), the host agency for SEI, is located on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and therefore well positioned to work with the academic community to address electronic product life cycle issues and sustainability, as well as to involve students in such considerations via internships and research projects. More information on possible student opportunities will be available on the SEI web site and blog as details are finalized. UIUC students and professors interested in participating in SEI activities should contact Joy Scrogum. Professors from other colleges or universities interested in, or already incorporating sustainability into their curricula, are also encouraged to contact Ms. Scrogum regarding potential collaboration. During the Spring 2012 semester, ISTC will be hosting a few seminars on sustainable electronics and for Fall 2012, ISTC is planning a full series of seminars on this topic. We hope to offer these seminars as webinars to increase the reach of the information presented. Again, watch our site for details in the coming months. Researchers or industry representatives interested in sharing information about their sustainable electronics projects should contact Nancy Holm.

SEI and ISTC will once again be hosting the International E-Waste Design Competition in 2012, though past participants should note that the registration period has been moved from the spring semester to fall (September 1, 2012-November 1, 2012). The shift in timing is meant to allow increased outreach and promotion of the competition, and allow more professors to incorporate the competition into course syllabi for the fall. Participants are asked to explore solutions to either remediate the existing e-waste problem or prevent e-waste generation in the future. The spirit of this competition is to prompt the industrialized world to dialogue about product designs for environmentally responsible green computing and entertainment. The goals of this competition are to learn about ways to reuse e-waste for new and productive means, explore ideas for how to address e-waste problems, and contribute to the body of knowledge that advances the practice of environmentally responsible product design for current and future computing technology products. Awards, jurors, and other details for this year’s competition are still in the planning stage, but check the competition site for updates in the coming months. Prize money totaling $20,000 was awarded to six teams and three honorable mentions at the conclusion of last year’s competition, with prize money contributed by corporate sponsors including DELL and Walmart. You can view the winning videos for the 2011 competition on the competition web site or the SEI YouTube Channel. Contact Joy Scrogum for more information or with questions related to the design competition.

Those of us at SEI look forward to a year full of collaboration, innovation, and steps toward sustainable solutions for electronics manufacturing and waste management. Happy New Year!

Winners have been announced in the International E-Waste Competition.  The competition is part of the Sustainable Electronics Initiative (SEI) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

College students and recent graduates from around the world were encouraged to submit their ideas for products or services.  The entries were ideas that prevent e-waste generation through life-cycle considerations (E-Waste Prevention Category) or that incorporate e-waste components into a new and useful item (E-Waste Reuse Category).  The competition is designed to prompt dialogue about product designs for environmentally responsible computing and entertainment.

The winners were announced at the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), the coordinating agency for the Sustainable Electronics Initiative. ISTC is part of the Prairie Research Institute at the University of Illinois.

A total of 29 entries were submitted; 12 in the Reuse category and 17 in the Prevention category.  Jurors awarded monetary prizes to the top three projects within each category, along with three honorable mention awards. The first place winners will receive $5000, second place is $3000, and third place receives $1000. A total of $20,000 was awarded, which has been made possible through generous contributions by several sponsors, including Dell and Wal-mart.

Reuse Category Winners

• Platinum ($5000): CardioReach. This project involved an electrocardiograph (ECG) device composed of components found in e-waste. From the project description: “Our plan is to acquire smart phones through donation programs and re-purpose them to become the CardioReach. The costs of developing our device will be minimal and significantly less than alternative ECG devices in developing countries. CardioReach will utilize the cellphone hardware for processing and transmission, while using some additional components for signal input and isolation. The software will include an open-source code and the ECG leads and tabs can be obtained from a separate source. The price of the CardioReach will be adjusted so that it can cover business expenses and be less than competitive products such as the GE Mac 400, which costs $1400 as ‘used’ and is popular in Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The CardioReach technology is currently in early stage development, and a functional prototype is expected to be made by August 2011.” This team was comprised of a group of biomedical engineering students from the Georgia Institute of Technology.
• Gold ($3000): SparkDrive by Team eWasteX. The idea behind this project is the reuse of discarded hard-drives in a micro-energy generator which “functions as a technology platform for multiple applications including harnessing wind energy, powering small electronics such as cell phone chargers and desk lamps.” The goal is provide “a platform for innovators in the developing world in communities specifically facing chronic lack of electrification.” This project was submitted by a multinational group of graduate students, three of whom attend the University of Cape Town in South Africa and two who attend the Indian Institute of Technology.
• Silver ($1000): s:i. “s:i” stands for “sound:illumination,” and this concept involves a recycled laptop, iPod, call and smart phone parts to create a portable audio and projection device. This entry was submitted by a student from New York University.

Prevention Category

• Platinum ($5000): Edentify. This is a smart phone app used to scan the barcodes of electronic products and present the user with information on various aspects of product life cycle, from the manufacturing to post consumer phases. Recycling information would be included, and consumers could see point values for different products. The idea incorporates games and rewards into the point system in an effort to “create awareness and inspire e-waste prevention in a fun and immersive way.” This project was submitted by three industrial design students from California State University at Long Beach.
• Gold ($3000): Dismantle. By replacing screws with “drafted embossed fasteners” and employing a “master-lock” pin to hold the circuit board in place, this team has developed a laptop with can be fully disassembled in about 90 seconds.  This compares to a case study of a Dell Inspiron 15 inch laptop, which takes about 12 minutes to disassemble. This allows for easier replacement of components and disassembly for recycling/reuse at the product’s end of life. This team was comprised of two industrial design students from the Rochester Institute of Technology.
• Silver ($1000): Laptop Design for the future. This group of students has formed a company with a business model using lease-based sales for new and used laptops and a goal of zero waste. They have proposed a laptop designed around modularity with a durable, lightweight aluminum unibody. Online services would be provided for sales, returns, support, upgrades and backup. This undergraduate team consists of four electronic engineering students and one student in product design and technology, all from the University of Limerick in Ireland.

Honorable Mentions

• $1000, Boombottle. This design brings together reused speaker components, discarded plastic bottles and LED lights to create portable, rugged, waterproof, illuminated audio systems. The jurors felt that although it was entered in the Prevention category, this project was really more about the reuse of old electronic components than the prevention of e-waste generation. However, they appreciated the creativity, simplicity and effective presentation of the concept, as well as the fact that the products are already in production and in limited distribution. This design was submitted by a recent graduate in industrial and product design from Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
• $500, re:use. This concept is a community-level approach to e-waste management described as “an organization of designers, engineers, construction managers, and urban planners that communicates with city officials and with the regional community to safely recycle consumer electronic excess and waste for use in public projects. This system creates a closed cycle that allows for the proper disposal, awareness, and discussion of e-waste as well as solutions to community needs.” The idea includes the placement of e-waste collection bins throughout the city of Long Beach, California. Collected e-waste would be sent to a local recycling facility, separated, accumulated and eventually reprocessed and remanufactured for public project. An online forum would educate, increase awareness and allow citizens to submit suggestions for city improvements that could implement using feedstock from the collection infrastructure. The example provided was a suggestion for a park bench repair that might lead to the creation of a new bench made from recycled plastic from used printers. This idea was submitted by a group of three industrial design students from California State University at Long Beach.
• $500, CircuitBreaker, the E-Waste Recycler. This is a proposed industrial recycling machine that incorporates the use of nanotechnology to break chemical bonds in toxic molecules such as flame retardants, to render them inert and to reclaim rare earth metals. This idea was submitted by a team of four undergraduates from Arizona State University.

The competition was started at UIUC in the fall of 2009. In 2010, the competition was expanded so students from all over the globe were able to submit their projects and an online video. Each project was judged on the project description and video. The international scope was evident through students who submitted entries from six U.S. states as well as India, Hong Kong, England, Ireland, South Korea, and South Africa. The jury was comprised of a variety of experts, including:

• Roger Franz, Senior Research Engineer, UL Environment
• Susan Kingsley, Artist/Metalsmith/Activist
• Ki-Chol Nam, Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Design, College of Design and Art, Yeungnam University
• Bill Olson, Director, Office of Sustainability and Stewardship, Mobile Devices Business, Motorola, Inc.
• John Pflueger, Principal Environmental Strategist, Dell, Inc.
• Clive Roux, CEO, Industrial Designers Society of America

The videos of the winning entries will be shown on the websites of the e-waste competition www.ewaste.illinois.edu, www.istc.illinois.edu, www.sustainelectronics.illinois.edu, as well as SEI’s YouTube Channel.

For more information on the International E-Waste Design Competition, contact Joy Scrogum.

In light of recent international events which may have impacted the lives of potential international competitors or international students studying within the U.S., event organizers have decided to extend the deadline for the 2011 International E-Waste Design Competition. Interested individuals or teams (of up to 5 people) may submit entries by 4:59 p.m. (Central Time), May 9, 2011.

Registration is free and materials are submitted online. College students and recent graduates from around the world are encouraged to submit their ideas for products or services that prevent e-waste generation through life-cycle considerations (E-Waste Prevention Category) or that incorporate e-waste components into a new and useful item (E-Waste Reuse Category). See the rules posted on the competition web site for complete details regarding eligibility and descriptions of project categories. One entry per person or team is allowed. Students are not allowed to be on more than one team, but students are allowed to submit a project with one team and additionally submit one individual project.

As part of their entry, participants will upload an online “video commercial” for their project to YouTube. (See “Registration” on the competition web site for complete entry requirements.) Expert jurors from Fortune500 companies, professional organizations, government agencies, universities and non-profits will award monetary prizes to individuals or teams in each category, for a total of six prizes. Honorary mention awards may be given at the discretion of the judges. Competition sponsors include leading manufacturers, retailers and professional organizations.

The spirit of this competition is to prompt the industrialized world to dialogue about product designs for environmentally responsible green computing and entertainment. The goals of this competition are to learn about ways to reuse e-waste for new and productive means, explore your own ideas for how to address e-waste problems and contribute to the body of knowledge that advances the practice of environmentally responsible product design for current and future computing technology products. We invite you to create a broad range of design concepts and innovations for technology products that demonstrate fresh approaches and responsible solutions for green computing technologies. Engineering, design, sustainability, or business knowledge will be helpful but not required for success in this competition.

For more information on the competition, visit the competition site or contact Joy Scrogum at 217-333-8948.

Registration is now open for this year’s International E-Waste Design Competition. College students and recent graduates are encouraged to submit their ideas for products or services that prevent e-waste generation through life-cycle considerations (E-Waste Prevention Category) or that incorporate e-waste components into a new and useful item (E-Waste Reuse Category). See the rules posted on the competition web site for complete details regarding eligibility and descriptions of project categories. One entry per person or team is allowed. Students are not allowed to be on more than one team, but students are allowed to submit a project with one team and additionally submit one individual project.

As part of their entry, participants will upload an online “video commercial” for their project to YouTube. (See “Registration” on the competition web site for complete entry requirements.) Expert jurors from Fortune500 companies, professional organizations, government agencies, universities and non-profits will award monetary prizes  to individuals or teams in each category, for a total of six prizes. Honorary mention awards may be given at the discretion of the judges. Competition sponsors include leading manufacturers, retailers and professional organizations.

Submissions are due by 4:59 P.M. Central time on April 1, 2011. Awards will be presented at the International E-Waste Video Festival on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign on a date to be announced. Winning videos will be screened at the festival. Winning videos from last year’s competition are available on the competition web site. It should be noted, that the definition of “e-waste” has been refined and strictly specified for the purposes of this year’s competition to avoid confusion and to be more in line with the general idea of what e-waste entails as held in the United States.

A University of Illinois News Bureau article on the competition is available here. For more information on the competition, visit the competition site or contact Joy Scrogum at 217-333-8948.

The second annual SEI Symposium, Electronics & Sustainability: Design for Energy and the Environment, is scheduled for March 23-24, 2011 on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The call for papers is available online.

The annual symposium brings together members of industry, academia, government, technical assistance providers, representatives of relevant non-profit organizations, and others to discuss the growing problem of e-waste generation and handling, as well as how to create a more sustainable electronics manufacturing system throughout product lifecycles. See the SEI web site for highlights from last year’s symposium.

Questions can be directed to Aida Sefic Williams, Conference Coordinator.

Whenever electronics are discussed, the conversation always involves the argument that electronics are environmentally damaging. In order to make electronics, we need materials that have to be mined out of the ground, be highly processed, and manufactured in astronomically high quantities. Electronics also require energy to function, and many electronic components are often discarded with little or no consideration about the materials, energy, and time that went into making the product.

If all of the previous points were not enough, I unfortunately have yet another thing to add: the consumption of rare earth materials. The phrase “rare earth materials” has been used frequently when discussing many technologically advanced designs, but what exactly does this phrase mean? Rare earth materials are 17 metallic elements, all of which have similar properties, as they reside in the same families within the periodic table of elements. The elements are: lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium, lutetium, scandium, and yttrium [1].

While the general consumer may not hear about many of these individual elements, one thing is certain: They are vital to our current technologically-charged world. These materials are used in fiber optics, hybrid car batteries, x-ray units, magnets used in computer hard drives, and many other applications [2]. While many of us enjoy the applications of rare earth materials (REM), we may not be able to enjoy them for much longer. Since these materials are rare, it seems that we have currently depleted 95% to 97%, depending on which article you read, of the Earth’s REMs [3]. The rapid depletion of these materials becomes alarmingly more critical, since China controls most of the materials. More significantly, some reports have stated that China has been decreasing their REM exports and will completely stop them in 2012. (If you believe that the world will end in 2012, I am sure this news rings a very loud and alarming bell.)

While one may easily dismiss articles published by The Economic Collapse as pure paranoia, it is much harder to dismiss several claims by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). In April of 2010, the GAO gave a presentation, which is publicly available, titled “Rare Earth Materials in the Defense Supply Chain“. The report explains further information and details about rare earth materials, their applications, as well as possible solutions to the REM depletion.

Slide 16 of the GAO report lists other countries with rare earth material deposits. The list of countries includes the U.S., China, Australia, Brazil, India, Malaysia, and others. Furthermore, the report mentions that work new rare earth material mines needs to be begin. IndustryWeek reports of a mine in California that was previously used to mine REMs within the United States, but the mine’s Chinese competitors successfully drove the mine out of business. Naturally, an option under consideration is the re-opening of this new mine, which would take at least 3-5 years to become fully operational. In order to create a completely new mine, significant capital investment is needed in order to get the mine 100% operational in 7-15 years, according to the GAO. In the best case scenario, that leaves the U.S. and remainder of the world without REMs 1-3 years, or in the worst case scenario, this would be 5-13 years.

Some sources, such as the Natural News, suggest that we (the global, societal “we”) should recycle rare earth materials. After all, there is a significant market for recycling common metals such as lead, copper, and aluminum. The UN Environmental Programme has stated the importance of metals recycling. In fact, the UNEP has published a report stating current metal recycling rates and also explains the need for increased recycling of specific materials of interest. A press release from May 13, 2010, offers a brief summary as well as a link to the full text of the report.

If you read this post and all of its related links, you may start believing in the Mayan prediction for the year 2012. But the goal of this blog post is not to scare or stir people into a frenzy. Instead, the goal of this post is to inform and brainstorm! Because of this, I want to involve you, the reader. I want your input and feedback. What do you think can be done? Is increased mining the answer? Do we need to find new technologies for recycling these precious materials? Can the world’s brilliant scientists create new materials which would have the desired properties of rare earth materials? What other options can you offer?

While the technical questions are important, it is vital to also ask several social questions. For example, if you do believe in being eco-conscious, how much are you willing to give up in order to save these precious metals? Will you hold on to your computer, cell phone, or other device for 2-3 instead of 1.5 years, if it will save some rare earth materials which could be used in medical equipment that can save someone’s life? What are you willing to give up? And how much of it?

There are many more questions that I could ask, but I think these brain teasers should be enough. What do you think? I would love to enter a dialogue, not of “The world is ending!” but, “This is a problem, and here is what we can do”. Please, I invite you all, scientists, engineers, designers, environmentalists, students, consumers and everyone else to humor me for a few minutes. Let me know what you think about this subject!

As I have been browsing the internet for new e-waste related news, I have found a few news items that have sparked my interest. All of the following are exciting, since they promote the use of less energy and also less electronic waste. This is not an advertisement for a particular organization or company, but of a pat on the back to the designers and engineers who are concerned about sustainability.

1. Universal Laptop Chargers

Two Taiwanese companies have openly stated that they are in favor of universal laptop chargers! The two companies are Asustek and Acer, who place fifth and second, in all worldwide laptop shipments (PC Pro). This is very exciting news, as chargers and other laptop and electronics accessories are large suppliers of electronic waste. According to DigiTimes, manufacturers such as  Quanta Computer, Compal Electronics, Wistron, Pegatron Technology and Inventec also support the move to uniform laptop chargers. I am interested to see this new development, since verbal support does not always materialize in financial support. As someone who lives in a household with three laptops for two people, I would be very happy to see a move to a more efficient use of our resources and cables.

2. Bike-Powered Electronic Devices

Cell phones are ubiquitous in today’s society, and one thing accompanying cell phones are their chargers. There have been several design concepts suggesting various ways to charge cell phones by simply using kinetic energy; these ideas include foot power, cranking, rotating, and more (Green Diary). One concept I have heard about on several occasions have been a bicycle-powered cell phone charger. Most designs I have heard about, however, have been student project designs with little marketing capabilities. But it seems that Nokia has created a bike-powered cell phone charger that is marketed toward developing nations or nations with high bike-riding populations (Inhabitat). As someone who loves to ride her bike to work and also forgets to charge her cell phone frequently, this concept is perfect – and perfectly sustainable! With this new product, you can charge your phone, help the environment, and also prevent your cell phone charger from turning into an energy vampire.

3. Cell Phone Charger Energy Vampire Slayer

As briefly mentioned above, cell phone chargers have a tendency to be energy vampires. Energy vampires are devices that draw energy while plugged into a wall but not plugged into another device. This means that you cell phone is drawing energy when it is only plugged into the wall and not plugged into your cell phone as well. To combat this problem, AT&T has recently announced their first Zero Draw charger. This new technology turns off the charger once your phone or other electronic device is fully charged. This helps protect the environment and your pocketbook! In addition, this charger also aims to increase its compatibility with various chargers and ports.

I hope that you share my excitement in these new developments. I hope the market will answer in a positive way that will only encourage more sustainable design!

Our planet is taking quite a beating. This has never been more evident than today given that, thus far, 4.8 million gallons of oil has spilled into the Gulf of Mexico.

What can we do to help this planet? I’ll go with my strong suit and tackle some problems with design-the first step in the process of consumption. We are constantly designing things to be used briefly then thrown away (consider packaging.) I have addressed this issue before (Greener Electronics Start with Smarter Designs and Designing Wastefulness.)  But I was given a new lease on the topic after hearing a 7-year-old confirm my aggravation.

A couple weeks ago the Sustainable Electronics Initiative set up a booth at an expo called “Naturally Illinois” held by the Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability. Over 1000 students walked through the expo and looked at about 50 exhibits all having to do with modern science conducted at the University of Illinois.

Our booth housed a kid friendly information board displaying electronic waste information. A curious 7-year-old came up to our booth and after we gave a brief explanation of electronic waste and why/how big the problem is, he responded with the question: “Why don’t they just make computers that last 100 years?”

One of the answers to this question is an easy one: planned obsolescence. The reason why this is one of the answers is more complicated.

Planned obsolescence is when a manufacturer consciously designs a product to not last as long as it could so that consumers will purchase more of those products. Razors that indicate they should be changed by a strip that wears away before the actual end of life of the razor is an example of planned obsolescence.

Despite the image painted in my mind after hearing this definition, planned obsolescence was probably not hatched by mustache twirling guys with an evil laugh. Companies need consumers to continuously purchase their products and if their consumers stop buying after one purchase that company will probably not last very long.

But there are ways a business can thrive while being sustainable. In fact, sustainability often helps profits. Not only will consumers trust the quality of the products if they are not designed for obsolescence and therefore keep buying from that company, they will also pass this information to their friends–in this age of the Internet and easy communication, having quality long-lasting products will be noticed. There are also other ways in which companies can keep having the consumers come back for more. Making components or entire products out of materials that can safely decompose will allow consumers to responsibly throw them away and then buy more. (See this article about biodegradable shoes.)

We don’t have to stop at biodegradable materials. I hope designers continue to incorporate things that can be reused, upgraded, easily disassembled, or made from other products. An example of a product that starts to address this concept is Motorola’s phone, “Renew,” which has a casing made of 100% recycled materials.

Have you recently thought of a great invention?  Think about how it can be made with something you are throwing away and what will happen to that product when you are done using it.

Recently, AppleInsider published a story titled “Nearly 30% of Apple’s first-gen iPhones are still in use – report“. In short, the report mentions several statistics regarding the first generation iPhone. Please keep in mind that the first iPhone was released in June 2007, only to be replaced by the iPhone 3G in July 2008. That means that this phone was marketed (very well, if I remember correctly) for a mere 13 months.  The first generation iPhone sold 6.1 million units, which were  most likely all purchased within those 13 months. After all, why would someone want to buy an old version of a phone, if the newer, cooler, faster, sleeker model is available for a similar price?

The report names several other statistic, but I want to focus on the main statistic here. 30% of first generation iPhones are still being used. This means that 1.83 million first generation iPhones are still in use. And yes, that is a large number. However, 4.27 million is a greater number – this represents the amount of first generation iPhones that are no longer in use. What happened to these phones? Did they break? Did they suffer a fall that rendered them incapable of functioning correctly? I bet this happened only rarely. Instead, Apple came out with a new product. This product was superior to the previous generation of Apple products.  If my memory serves me correctly, since the introduction of the first generation iPhone, the world has also been introduced to two more generations of iPhones, as well as the iTouch and the brand new iPad. (And in related news: Apple Sold 1 million iPads in a month!)

While these new gadgets are a lot of fun, I am concerned about our lasting impact on the environment. The resources and natural capital needed to make these products is expensive, as well as environmentally hazardous. More importantly, the vast disposal and often improper disposal methods increase our need for a more sustainable system. However, Electronics Recyclers International CEO John Shegerian seems to disagree with me. In the article “Why the E-Waste Industry Love the iPad“, he mentions that this the iPad is a good thing.

I wonder if it is possible to allow designers to be creative and create new products, which would add to existing gadgets, instead of creating a desire for increased disposal and consumption of new products? Even if Apple, or any other electronics designer and manufacturer, would introduce a new performance-based, rather than product-based, model for their business and industry. We still have to convince consumers  that a cell phone, computer, or other electronic device can function to its full potential by simply maintaining the equipment, similar to the way you maintain your car, and possibly upgrading to a few new features. This would allow us to use our new gadgets until they actually fail, instead of only lasting as long as we think they are fun. For example, when the seats in your car start to wear down, do you get rid of your car and purchase a new one? Why can’t we have the same model for our electronics?

Apple is obviously concerned about their impact on the environment, as they have published information about the carbon emissions related to their products. By performing such analyses, one only hopes that Apple designers and engineers will be able to make products which will improve their products by leaving a lower environmental footprint. But I do want to encourage Apple and other electronic recyclers to research the life cycle impacts of their products, and consider not only the design of their products, but also the lasting environmental impact their products will leave on the Earth and future generations.