By Sustainability team
27th August 2010.
11:13
Monthly Archives: August 2010
Smartphones are not “green” and it is a very relevant topic at busniessgreen.com.
Not Green but they may well be sustainable and some are definitely more green than others. There will always be an intrinsic environmental impact from all products but human society can become sustainable and IT and Telecom needs to be key enablers for us to achieve that.
James says “But these environmental benefits will only be realised if people really do use their smartphone for everything and stop buying other gadgets…” and continue “Otherwise, smartphones have simply been awarded extra points in the new O2 rating system that they do not really deserve” This is very true but on the other hand if the functionality is not there then it cannot be used either.
At the end James claims that you may question rating system based on “… that green rating systems that edge away from the physical characteristics of a device….”. I think this is not the case in the O2 system. It takes all the things James ask for into consideration but balance it with functionality relevant for a more sustainable life style.
I truly believe that there are electronic solutions that – if we use them right – they will develop society and make it more sustainable. However, the substitution will not happen automatically. I discuss this in the previous post on this blog.
Related to the post below, I think the O2 eco-rating is the best available rating on sustainability so far.
There are three main reasons for this. The first being that the eco-rating address positive potential for a product to contribute to a more sustainable life of the consumer and this is the first structured attempt to do this. Secondly the information gathered on the product is well balanced focusing on the relevant parameters from a life cycle perspective while many other attempts are too superficial alternatively dig very deep into things that makes no difference what so ever on the total product impact. Thirdly that that it takes the wider sustainability scope looking at company performance and not only a product “carbon footprint” potentially with some added environmental aspects.
Many skeptics claim that mobile phones does not replace anything. I believe this to be wrong. Let me give you one example. When I went to some interviews yesterday on the launch of Eco-rating I passed by London Eye. Then I noticed that there are almost no disposable cameras for sale in the small shops anymore. I realized that some years ago there would be hundreds. They are now replaced by the high quality camera in the mobile phone (for people that forgot their regular camera at home). Think about all the plastic and film and chemistry saved. Not to mention all the bad photo paper wasted on pictures that I remeber throwing away after they where taken with these inferior devices. Now, almost all people that forget their camera use their mobile phone (most people remeber to bring that) and if they print something then it is only the good pictures not every single frame.
I believe that if the functionality meets the customer requirement and expectation in a way that is easy and intuitive to use then the consumer will be very happy to replace a gadget or an activity. I remember the exact same discussion some years ago when e-mail was new. “E-mail does not save any paper, people print to read anyway”. Now, with better screens and improved user experience, I do not se anyone printing e-mails just to read. Yes, sometimes to file or bring directions on a trip but never just to read.
Sony Ericsson Elm™ Tops New Green Chart from O2
London 24 August 2010 – The Sony Ericsson Elm™ phone has been named the most sustainable handset on the market. The UK’s first sustainable rating system for mobile phones, O2’s Eco rating, awarded the Sony Ericsson Elm™ phone 4.3 out of 5 for its green credentials and companies good sustainability work. For more information information on how phones rank visit the O2 site “think big”. (some problems to access the rating outside UK)
Amongst 65 mobile phones, from six manufacturers*, the Sony Ericsson Elm™ phone was measured for its environmental impact, how it helps people lead more sustainable lives and Sony Ericsson’s ethical performance as a manufacturer. 5 out of the top 10 models in the rating come from Sony Ericsson with three models on the second highest score: Zylo, X10 mini and X10 mini pro.
Have a look at the Sony Ericsson press release
The title of the article in today’s the times is “Mobile phones ‘built on slave labour ”. Thank you for highlighting this topic.
Sony Ericsson does not benefit from the horrific situation in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The price for metals is set by the metal market and the amount originating from illegal sources is not enough to influence the price of metals. Rebel groups or other parties exploit the unstable situation in the region and reap the benefits.
Will a law in US or other places make any difference? Most of the activities surrounding so called conflict minerals in DRC are already illegal e.g. there are laws in DRC against child labor as well as for workers protection but the upholding of laws in the area is limited to say the least.
Problems with political and economic stability, rebel groups, respect for human rights, respect for the law, corruption etc blight the country and I fear that if the situation in DRC and surrounding countries is not improved then any system or attempt to trace conflict minerals will be challenging if not impossible. However, raising awareness about the topic is important. Pushing for attention and change in the supply chain will shed more light on the issue and bring more attention to the rebel groups’ operations, but ultimately it will take more than this to solve the problem.
For anyone who is interested in knowing more of sustainability of products – the UN National Resources Forum journal published an article written by me on substance knowledge and phase out of unwanted substances. The article is describing why we have phased out substances such as brominated flame retardants and PVC and how companies can keep track of their use of materials and substances in their products.
As described in earlier posts (you can find them here and here), brominated and chlorinated compounds can form highly toxic dioxins when incinerated and this is a growing problem in countries where poor and inproper recycling methods are used. By knowing of what you are using in your products, you can take the correct decisions on subsitution of unwanted substances for safer alternatives.
The article can be downloaded at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2010.01304.x/abstract
Margot Wallström (previously EU commissioner now UN Secretary General Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict) wrote a petition in a Swedish daily asking Sweden and EU to start process to regulate against use of conflict minerals. She writes that she see a link between the extraction of these minerals and abuse of women. The main objective of such a law would be to try to stop the illigal trade of minerals and metals from conflict regions. In US there is already a draft bill on the topic.
Sony Ericsson supports attempts to stop the trade of illegal minerals and certainly all efforts to stop the appalling conditions surrounding illegal mining. This was also discussed in a TV show this morning. It will be interesting to see if it is possible to develop any regulation that is feasible to implement and possible to enforce. This is an extremely complex and difficult topic and a law on its own will not solve the issue.
Se us dicuss this topic on Swedish National TV (sorry in Swedish);