Since humans learned to make stone tools two million years ago, technology has been serving as a catalyst for positive global growth. We all know that technology can do some wonderful things.
Sustained technological advancement is essential for the development of our species. And, as history has shown us, technology can have profound implications for our future. However, there’s also the negative impact of technology on the environment that we cannot fail to consider.
When we think about technology, the first thing that leaps to mind may be the devices that most of us carry with us and use every single day. Smartphones, tablets, and laptops have revolutionized the way we live – and many would argue, have brought us numerous benefits. But there is no denying that these everyday technologies have come at a cost to the environment.
These, and other modern electronic devices all present concerns when it comes to resource use, energy use, carbon footprint, and waste. When we look at the entire life cycle of our technological devices, it is easy to see why these electronic marvels are also a huge problem for our environment.
When analyzing the environmental cost of technology, it is important to consider what materials went into making them in the first place, and where those materials came from. A huge number of finite natural resources and precious metals go into making our electronic devices and other modern technology. The picture is a complex one, and the ingredients required to make just one phone come from all over the world. This can make the end-to-end analysis difficult.
However, when you begin to delve into where the different elements come from – the environmental toll (and human costs) truly begin to mount up. Mining itself, of course, comes with a high carbon cost. Huge machinery, usually powered by fossil fuels, is usually involved and the processes involved often use a lot of water and are hugely polluting. Mining is responsible for deforestation, landscape degradation, and water pollution, as well as the release of vast quantities of carbon dioxide into the air2.
Examples of environmental problems with the sourcing of minerals and precious metals for technological devices and electronic equipment are everywhere you look. Consider the issues with cobalt mines in the Congo, to lithium despoiling the Chilean desert, and to lakes of toxic sludge in Inner Mongolia. Evidence shows how our desires for technology and need for rare earth minerals affect the environment. And these three examples are just the tip of the iceberg.
The more you delve into the origins of the minerals and other materials required to make our everyday technologies – the more worrying and bleak the picture becomes.
On average, around 35 different materials are used in smartphones. This is just one example of everyday technology. When you begin to think about where all these different materials have come from, you begin to see the scale of the problems.
Plastic is, after silicon, the second most-used material. And as you are no doubt aware, plastic is derived from fossil fuels. Production requires high-emission techniques, and poses a range of serious threats to our environment. Iron, aluminum, copper, lead, zinc, tin, nickel and barium are the next most important materials (in terms of the percentage of the finished product). All these things have to be mined. As we have seen from the above, mining can carry huge environmental and human costs.
The environmental impact of technology does not end with the raw materials and where they have come from. Manufacturers require massive energy to turn them into the complex electronic, technological products we use. Transportation of these products around the world also comes with a high carbon cost.
Of course, huge servers and data banks that enable these technologies to work also use vast quantities of energy each year. And much of that does not come from renewable energy sources. Global data center electricity demand in 2018, for example, was an estimated 198 TWh, or almost 1% of global final demand for electricity. Efficiency is increasing, and the use of renewable energy is very much on the rise, but we still have a long way to go.
It is also worth remembering that every time we plug in an electronic device to a non-renewable source, then our use of that device comes with a carbon cost. This contributes to greenhouse gases and our climate crisis.
The environmental costs of consumer technology do not end there. These products also pose a problem at the end of their useful lives. Globally, we are throwing away $62.5 bn of electronic waste every year.
A small proportion of old electronic devices are recycled. However, the vast majority ends up in landfill sites or burned in dumps. These dumps are usually located out of sight, around some of the planet's poorest and most vulnerable people. Obviously, this not only endangers human health but also impacts the environment in a range of hugely negative ways.
Only around 1/5 of e-waste generated globally is currently formally recycled. Millions around the world are believed to work unofficially to recycle the precious materials which smartphones and other such devices need. These people are often exposed to dangerous working environments, and the surrounding environment can also be put at threat.
But while e-waste is currently a massive threat to our environment, it could also be viewed as a massive opportunity. Precious metals and other minerals and metals in e-waste can be reclaimed, one of the many reasons we should recycle e-waste.
Many useful materials can be reclaimed through careful recycling processes. By reclaiming them, rather than digging up more, we can reduce both the waste and the environmental harm associated with collecting new materials. This will offer us both environmental and economic benefits.
By moving away from the idea that technological items are disposable, and moving towards a circular economy, we can reduce the environmental impact of technology. A circular economy is focused on restoration and regeneration3. In such an economy, everyone is more interested in reusing materials for a more sustainable approach to consumption. But we cannot achieve a circular economy when our current technology companies are heavily promoting consumption.
Unfortunately, all too often, tech companies hinder rather than helping to move towards a more responsible, circular economic model. Computer hardware brands, smart devices brands, and marketing teams hinder efforts in a range of ways. For example, in the pursuit of profit, they build planned obsolescence into their products, so they must be replaced after a certain period of time.
A smartphone that should last its user 4-6 years of use quickly becomes obsolete. Every year, there’s a newer, (and promised) better option available. Some companies may even slow down the performance of those older devices or hinder repair access. In doing so, encouraging buyers into making a new purchase.
Their consistent update of hardware and software, along with highly aggressive marketing, means that these tech companies promote hyper-consumerism. These issues can make it difficult for consumers to hold onto their devices for longer – the best way to reduce harm to the environment. Many large tech companies also refuse to take responsibility for the negative effects of e-waste they help to create.
Positive change requires big shifts to be made not only by producing companies, but also by governments, authorities, and individuals. Appropriate legislation can force the hands of tech companies (and consumers) and be an agent of good when it comes to the environment.
The French government is one of the few that are actively fighting built-in obsolescence by the tech companies who operate in their jurisdiction. In 2015, the French National Assembly established fines of up to €300,000 and jail terms of up to two years for manufacturers planning the failure of their products in advance. In 2018, after Apple admitted that their older devices were intentionally slowed down through updates, the company was investigated under this French law.
Other governments and legislations have also sought to regulate e-waste. In the US, there is no nationwide law regarding the effects of technology on the environment. But there are laws at the state level.
California was the first state to pass an e-recycling law back in 2003 and 27 other states have since followed suit. New York was the first major city to establish its own e-waste collection program. The city also placed a ban on electronics going into garbage cans. Around the world, many other jurisdictions also have laws or regulations on e-waste.
The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes1 and their Disposal is the most comprehensive international environmental agreement on hazardous and other wastes. This agreement is almost universal, with 187 Parties. But in many places, these laws, regulations, and agreements still fall short of the mark.
Self-regulation by technology companies and government legislation are both extremely important. This will help further reduce the negative impact of technology on the environment. But we, as consumers, also have to play our part. There are some things over which we have little control. But we can help limit the negative impact of the technology we use by:
There are many creative ways in which you can use an old smartphone. These devices already contain the software to carry out many tasks. For example, you could use an old smartphone as a:
By repurposing old technology in these sorts of ways, we can also reduce our need to buy new technology. (And all the environmental harm each new item brings).
You can do this by:
It is possible for us to significantly reduce the significant harm that technology does to our environment. As consumers, we often have more power than we believe to make positive impact. After all, if we buy products, they will keep being made. By withdrawing our financial support for companies who refuse to make things better, we can be part of creating a more sustainable future.
|UN Environment Programme, Basel Convention: Controlling transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal|
|Mensah, A. K. , Mahiri, I. O. , Owusu, O. , Mireku, O. D. , Wireko, I. , & Kissi, E. A. (2015). Environmental Impacts of Mining: A Study of Mining Communities in Ghana. Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 3(3), 81-94.|
|Geissdoerfer, Martin & Savaget, Paulo & Bocken, Nancy & Hultink, Erik. (2017). The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?. Journal of Cleaner Production. 143. 757–768. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.|