ArticleScientific reports2024
Life cycle assessment (LCA) of circular consumer electronics based on IC recycling and emerging PCB assembly materials.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Information-Driven Approach for the Early Health Technology Sustainability Assessment and the Frugal Design of the Internet of Medical Things: Exploratory Study of Wearable Activity Monitoring Devices.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Lignin-Based Copper Nanoparticles for Green and Flexible Electronics.ACS applied electronic materials · 2026Article
- Packaging Glasses: From Containers to EncapsulationMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Semiconductor manufacturing wastewater challenges and the potential solutions via printed electronics.iScience · 2025Review
- Self-focusing high-frequency ultrasonic transducers for non-destructive testing applications.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As consumer microelectronics become ever more ubiquitous, there are growing concerns about their environmental impact. However, the diversity of designs and components used in modern devices makes a coherent mitigation strategy hard to formulate. In this work, we perform a quantitative life cycle assessment (LCA) of the environmental profiles of both high-value (a smartwatch) and low-value (a TV remote) devices and find that the optimal mitigation strategy varies substantially between these two extremes. We find that the impact of the smartwatch is dominated by the production costs of its integrated circuits (ICs), and so a priority on device lifetime and design-for-recycling of the ICs is the best path to minimizing impact. On the other hand, the TV remote's impact is dominated by the cost of its fiberglass (FR4) substrate, with the much simpler ICs playing a much smaller role. Our results show that the impact of low-cost devices is best mitigated by incorporating eco-friendly substrates and additive manufacturing techniques, while also minimizing the use of critical raw materials (CRMs). These results will help guide future industrial strategies, and we provide a list of challenges and opportunities in making electronics green.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.