While making a case for not reducing carbon dioxide emissions, the United States has often pointed out that developing countries, including China and India, need to first regulate their emissions. According to the 2003 International Energy Annual posted July 2005 by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, that country contributes 23 percent of the world's CO₂ emissions. The big polluters among developing countries, China and India, contribute 14 percent and 4 percent, respectively. The 2003 U.S. per capita CO₂ emissions estimated at 19.95 metric tons are 20 times more than those of India and seven times those of China.

Now consider that China manufactures most of whatever the rest of the world consumes. Industry runs most of the power bill in China. And there is significant foreign investment in manufacturing on the mainland.

But who wants to compare emissions now that the United States, China, India, South Korea, Japan and Australia have all joined hands to reportedly study "clean technologies," such as nuclear fission, without any set targets in a non-binding partnership?

I'm not writing merely to lament the lack of initiative or even responsibility on the part of some governments, but also to laud brave initiatives—the Kyoto Protocol, China's baby steps in power conservation, the WEEE and the RoHS directives and the hotly debated REACH proposal.

The Kyoto Protocol, which became legally binding Feb.16, 2005, not only sets nominal emissions reduction targets on five gases, but allows trading of emissions credits—a form of economic incentive to reduce emissions. Countries can gain credits for actions that increase the environment's carbon absorption capacity, which include planting trees either on their own soil or by working in a developing country.

Meanwhile, China is trying to reduce its power bill by requiring devices to carry power-consumption labeling, but power efficiency will be driven primarily by export market requirements. The country also has in effect the Cleaner Production Promotion Law since Jan.1, 2003, which promotes environment-friendly manufacturing.

Europe is trying to tackle electronic waste (e-waste) with the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive, which took effect Aug.13. It will, of course, take more than the WEEE to solve the e-waste problem—some companies have already been accused by activists of dumping e-waste in China and India for "recycling."

The Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) directive, which comes into force July 1, 2006, is a European legislation that sets limits, in parts per million (ppm), on substances like lead, mercury and cadmium. Any device containing a part or component that exceeds this limit will be regarded in violation of the law.

Yet another E.U. green legislation that could impact lives in the electronics industry and beyond is Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH). Still under discussion, this proposal, targeted for passage in 2007, will likely require companies to submit health data on 30,000 substances produced or imported into Europe in annual quantities exceeding one ton. Several companies, including STMicroelectronics, Infineon Technologies and Philips Semiconductors, have already expressed willingness to comply with REACH.

This is not just an irreversible trend but, given the impact on the industry and the speed with which change is required, more of a green frenzy. Electronics companies will need engineers to seek out new and cleaner technologies for batteries, circuit boards, solderless terminals and connectors, and semiconductors. With both design and manufacturing moving to Asia, it is now up to you to implement Design for Environment—to consider during product design the issues that are related to the environment over the entire life cycle of a product.

Email the Editor

Back to top