University of Idaho Mechanical Engineering

ME 404 Sustainability and Green Design Project:

A Comprehensive Analysis of Sustainable Alternatives
for Testing Students
Submitted to: Dr. Rezaie
Author: Cristofer A. Farnetti

Date: 6 April, 2016

I.)

INTRODUCTION

Redesigning in terms of sustainability is a global trend, and one of the best tools to combat
climate change in places that already have set ways. Whether it is a redesign or a new design for
a new application, devising solutions that are considered sustainable is the challenge that
scientists and engineers face today. Whether the scale is large, like cleaning up micro-plastics
from the ocean, or small, such as using photovoltaic solar panels to power your house, there is a
difference made in the direction of sustainability.
Sustainability is a multidisciplinary issue and is often considered to have three main
components: environmental, economic, and social. There is a wide range of tools that are
available to determine the sustainability of a product or process, namely life cycle analysis
(LCA), environmental footprint (EF), social footprint (SF), economic footprint (ENF), and a
number of composite footprint indicators. LCA is a comprehensive measure of sustainability and
is widely accepted among industry and academia, however it only focuses on the environmental
aspects of sustainability. In a perfect world where time is an infinite commodity a LCA could
trace all aspects of a product or process to an infinite extent. The reality is that time is a
constraint that engineers must always consider, so as an alternative to LCA a streamlined life
cycle analysis (SLCA) will be performed in this study in order to effectively narrow the scope of
the analysis into a comprehensible project. SLCA is primarily used in industry to quantify a
product or process so that the engineer can identify areas for improvement, and such is the case
for this study, but more importantly it will serve as a platform to make a comparison between
alternatives. A SLCA has four constituent parts: scope and goal definition, inventory analysis,
impact analysis, and interpretation (the same is true for a LCA, however the extent of each part
of the analysis is drastically reduced). For an illustration of the relative depth of analysis, see
Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Life Cycle Analysis Spectrum. Diagram is an adaptation from [5], pg. 193

SLCA lacks as a total sustainability indicator in that it only really considers the environment,
but there are social and economic aspects as well. In this analysis the SLCA will be modified to
quantitatively consider the economics of the products being assessed, while qualitatively
discussing the social impacts of the products in the study.

Looking into the small scale (localized) applications where there is a potential to have a
major positive impact on climate change for the University of Idaho, the polya mathematics
center is a prime candidate for improvement given its dated technology and since it is one of the
largest computer centers on campus. The polya center is a place where students in classes
ranging from basic algebra to calculus II can come and get tutoring help. For the lower classes,
like college algebra, pre-calculus, and trigonometry (math 108, math 143, and math 144
respectively) the students have to come into the polya center and take all of their exams in a
proctored environment. The current method for testing students on the material utilizes a desktop
computer (monitor and processing unit) where all of the test information is located, along with
approximately three sheets of paper; two of which are used for showing their work, and the other
is a simple check sheet where students must fill their name, class, date, and initial various
agreements that ensure academic honesty. Throughout the semester math 108 students have four
exams, math 143 students have three exams, and math 144 students have three exams and each
student gets three attempts at every exam. If each student has three attempts at every exam they
take, and it requires a minimum of three sheets of colored copy paper, then there is a large
quantity of paper that gets moved through the polya center. The amount of paper being used
really becomes an issue when these three classes alone have nearly 1500 students in the Fall
semester, 700 in the Spring semester, and 60 in the Summer semester. This adds up to an average
of 300 reams of paper per academic year. Another issue for the polya center is that it not only
spends a large portion of its budget purchasing copy paper, but they also have to pay to hold the
paper for three years in a secure facility and then pay to have it shredded where it is eventually
recycled. The latent but even more pressing issue is the sheer volume of paper, and how
purchasing that paper has the potential to fuel the massive amount of logging that occurs to
create paper products.
The goal of this study is to evaluate using tablet computers as an alternative in place of the
desktop computers and paper to reduce the environmental impact in the use and recycling phases
of the product life cycles. The evaluation will be in the perspective of sustainability and good
engineering practice of form meeting function. The initial consensus is that tablets are
smaller, more affordable, consume less energy than desktop computers, do not require paper, and
come with a three year extensive warranty for educational institutions, so where is the argument
in that? A closer look at the data could provide some insight into the tradeoffs associated with
using tablets.
II.)

METHODS AND BACKGROUND

The best way to be comprehensive in the analysis while optimizing the researchers abilities
and resources is to use the SLCA, in which all aspects of a traditional LCA are limited such that
the task of taking on quantifying a products life cycle becomes more manageable. It is
important to state that the use phase of the life cycle is the priority of this analysis, with the
recycling phase being a sub-priority. All of the other phases are supplemental and the data will
only serve to further the argument for implementing tablets in the polya math center. Another
cornerstone of this analysis is that the limiting aspects of the scope are given in context with the

inventory analysis, and the scope that is describe in the following section is to provide a sort of
platform.
1. Goals and Scope of the Analysis
The goals of the analysis are to (1) provide data that elucidates the environmental impact
associated with the two alternatives, (2) conduct a streamlined analysis that recognizes its
shortfalls and points out where data is needed, (3) provide clarity to the relative magnitudes
between alternatives, (4) provide a recommendation to polya on how it can strive toward
sustainability.
The scope of the analysis will be set such that the alternatives can be compared rather
linearly over the span of three academic semesters (Fall, Spring, and Summer), which is
equivalent to 263 days for the University of Idaho. The polya center requires a minimum of 50
computers in order to have the capacity to test students, so all of the calculations will be for the
sum of 50 computers. One of the most difficult tasks with performing a comparative analysis
with different products and processes is setting a boundary in a way such that the products can be
compared while recognizing the differences in each process. To start, the desktop and the tablet
can be compared in a linear fashion since they have very similar manufacturing, packaging, use,
and recycling phases. The boundaries for the two can be seen below in Figure 2 and Figure 3,
and it is notable that transportation will not be considered in this analysis. Additionally, with the
high variability in the processes between computers and their components, it is possible that
there is significant error by generalizing desktops and tablets as a whole but nonetheless it gives
a frame of reference for our purposes. This is true for paper also, with a large variation in the
processes that can be devised to create paper there is likely a large variation in the data that could
be obtained from each process.

Figure 2: Tablet Computer Scope

Figure 3: Desktop Computer Scope

The addition of a paper life cycle is where the issues can arise when striving for a linear
comparison. For paper, it will be a separate cycle but the data will be coupled with the inputs and
outputs of the desktop computer in every part of the life cycle since they are used in the same
application.

Figure 4: Paper scope. Adapted from [15], pg. 6

2. Inventory Analysis
The inventory analysis is the stage of the SLCA where all of the data for the desktop, the
tablet, and paper is obtained. In the grand scheme of the SLCA, we will be determining the

environmental sustainability of both alternatives based on material choice (MC), energy use
(EU), solid residue (SR), liquid residue (LR), and gaseous residue (GR) in every stage of the
products life from manufacturing and packaging, to use, and to its ultimate disposal or recycle.
Naturally, the data that is obtained is relevant to each of these categories for every stage. In order
to obtain the data necessary for every stage of the life cycles, existing literature was reviewed for
each product. For GR, LR, SR the data that was sought after was the carbon dioxide emissions,
water consumption, and paper waste respectively.
2.1 Notes on the Use phase of the life cycles
The use phase has much more data available since the polya center is a localized place where
data can be easily obtained or extrapolated. For EU in this phase, the energy consumption of the
devices over three semesters can be easily calculated from the specific consumption rate of
tablets and desktops, see equation (1). A major assumption made here is that the computers are
on for the full extent of the business hours of polya, while at night the devices go into sleep
mode, see Figure 5 for the daily use of a single device.

Figure 5: Daily energy consumption from a single device

The carbon dioxide emissions from the polya center can also be taken into account by
extrapolating the data from [12] to say that the percent of the energy used by polya is the same as
Idahos EU percentages and it comes from specific energy sources like natural gas,
hydroelectric, renewables, and energy from other parts of the country. These sources have an
associated emission rating (kg-CO2/ kWh) [11] that can be used to quantify the gaseous residue
from the operation of tablets and desktops based on the percentages described in [12], and Table.
See equation (2) below for the calculation of carbon dioxide emissions from polya. These
estimates take on a lot of assumptions and are likely large over-estimates when looking at carbon
dioxide emissions. Additionally, there are other sources of energy that are consumed in Idaho,
but by employing the 5% rule [5] we can narrow the energy sources to a select few: Natural

gas, distillate oil, hydroelectric, renewables, biomass, coal (less than 5% but emissions are
known to be significant), and state inflow of energy (see Table 2). For the state inflow of energy
it was assumed that most, if not all, was from natural gas and oil based sources so an average
carbon dioxide emissions rate was calculated. See the figures and tables below for the exact
values of all the use phase constants. The LR for the use phase was based on the values for
energy consumption and the rate of water consumption for a select few energy sources: natural
gas, distillate oil, and state inflow of natural gas/oil products. See equation (3) for the water
volume calculations.
= [(( 1 ) + ( 2 )) ]
2 = =1,2,6( )
=

[]

(1)

[] ;

(2)

[3 ]

(3)
Table 1: List of constants for equations

Variable

Description
Power rating from
device during the
daytime [kJ/hr]
Power rating from
device at night [kJ/hr]
Number of hours in
awake mode per day
Number of hours in
sleep mode per day
Time in an academic
year [days]
Conversion from kJ to
kWh
Percent of the energy
type used in the state
Rate of CO2 released
[kg/kWh]
Rate of water
consumption based on
energy type used
[m^3/kWh]

1
2

Tablet
90

Desktop
972

36

216

15

15

263

263

.0002778

.0002778

* see Table 2 and obtain actual values from results section

Table 2: Energy indicator, n, for the different constants involved in the calculations

Type
Natural gas
Distillate oil
Coal
Biomass

n
1
2
3
4

20.2
10.9
1.5
6.3

38.7
23378.6
1323.9
204143

0.55338
0.74389
n.a.
n.a.

Hydroelectric
Inflow
Renewables
Other

5
6
7
8

15.3
21.9
4.8
19.1

258.3
38.7
3229.1
n.a.

n.a.
0.64864
n.a.
n.a.

2.2 Material Choices

Material will be qualitatively assessed in terms of humans and environmental toxicity, while
total masses will be used when discussing product function. In this analysis, it would be helpful
to create a list of all of the materials that go into each product throughout their life cycle, and
what component they go into (see Appendix A). Much of the data for the tablets and desktops is
proprietary, and thus not available so the actual masses of each single material cannot possibly
be accounted for; however, its type and environmental stress can be evaluated, while the masses
can be taken into account at the component level (i.e. mass of the display, glass, etc.)[3, 16, 19],
see Table 3.
The material choices in the manufacturing phase of paper can be qualitatively accounted for
and discussed as well. For paper in the use phase, the average amount of paper consumed in the
use phase was 300 reams of paper (1 ream= 500 sheets). Over the course of a year, polya will
consume nearly 20 trees for the amount of paper that it requires [9]. Furthermore, in the
manufacturing phase paper uses large volumes of chlorine dioxide and an alkaline cooking
solution to prepare the pulp. The actual volumes are not available in literature, but they allude to
the large volumes of chemicals used in paper production.
Table 3: List of masses for significant components in the manufacturing and packaging phases
Tablet
Main Features
Manufacturing
Display
Battery
Aluminum
Plastics
Circuit Boards
Glass
Other Metals
Packaging
Paper (corrugate,
molded fiber)
High-impact polystyrene
other plastics

Desktop and Monitor

Main Features
Quantity

Quantity
94g
123g
80g
17g
43g
51g
36g

Manufacturing
Display
Aluminum
Circuit Board
Glass
Steel
Copper
Power Supply
Cords and Cables

4650g
3405g
520g
1020g
610g
30g
450g
350g

392g

Plastic

525g

61g
6g

Hard Drive
Packaging
Paper (corrugate, molded
fiber)
Expanded Polystyrene
Propylene (film, fabric)
Other Plastics

100g

4545g
660g
65g
25g

*A list of materials that are commonly used to manufacture desktop and tablet computers can be found in Appendix A.

2.3 Solid Residue

Data availability is virtually non-existent for the amount of solid residue produced from the
processes associated with the manufacturing, packaging, and recycling of computer products.
There is data available for paper, however introducing this data would make this analysis
inconsistent, not to mention that there is a large variability in the processes that can be used to
manufacture, package, and recycle paper. The amount of paper consumed by the polya center is
discussed only for purposes of showing the amount of waste that has the potential to be
eliminated. For polya, the paper is sent to a shredding company, which inherently consumes
resources as well, but the real issue can come with recycling. The quality of paper and its utility
is assessed usually by its fiber length; if the pulp has long fibers, it will create high quality paper
products (copy paper) and if it has short fibers it will be turned into something like toilet paper.
Accounting for the degradation in the paper recycling phase could upheave unprecedented
challenges, and is thus out of the scope due to time constraints on the analysis.
2.4 Liquid Residue
One of the largest concerns with liquid residue is the amount of water waste from a product
or process. The data for water consumption and/or waste was unavailable for all life cycle stages
except for the use phase for tablets and desktops, however paper had data available for every
stage of its life. For calculating the amount of water consumed during the manufacturing of paper
a ratio of 1 sheet for every 10 liters of water was used [5].

Figure 6: Water Consumption for all alternatives [20]

2.5 Gaseous Residue

The gaseous residue is assessed on the amount of carbon dioxide released into the
atmosphere because it is the single largest contributor to anthropogenic climate change. For the
manufacturing stage different computer types, models, and sizes can play a role in the carbon
emissions and the numbers can have significant variation. Apple Computers produces reports on

their products that are straight-forward to the reader and product specific, as a pose to Samsung
which produces lengthy reports on a macro scale (the emissions from their manufacturing
plants). Given the convenience of the report from Apple, their data was used as a benchmark for
tablet and desktop computers regarding gaseous residue in the manufacturing stage.

CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS (KG)

tablet PC

38930

Desktop PC

37480

3401.94

1.9

9240

15.7
945

manufacturing
and packaging

Paper

use

2.1

Paper
Desktop PC
tablet PC

recycling

Figure 7: Carbon Dioxide emissions for all alternatives, [1, 13, 14, 17, 21]

2.6 Energy Use

Energy use will be defined as the sum of all aggregate processes in each stage of a products
life. This is one of the most impactful and important factors to look at since energy is so
intricately connected to the environment, humans, and in how we define our standards of living
[16]. Data availability on the energy use to manufacture and package a tablet computer is
unavailable, however the energy use to manufacture a desktop is widely available (likely due to
its long history relative to tablet use). Additionally, given that energy use and carbon emissions
are so closely related, the same ratio of carbon emissions from desktops to tablets will be applied
to the energy use to obtain a representative figure of the expected energy consumption during
manufacturing. This could be considered a rather large extrapolation (with some error
accumulation), but since the priority of this study is in the use phase having a representative
value for tablet energy consumption in manufacturing and packaging serves the study well.

10

Figure 8: Energy use for all alternatives [2, 12, 13]

2.7 Economics
The feasibility of these alternative rests heavily on the costs associated with each alternative
in the use phase. The academic discount for universities must be taken into account and will be
set at 20%, as quoted from a Dell Computers representative. Additionally, the polya center needs
a minimum of 50 computers in order to have the capacity to test all of their students. The tablets
will need a stylus in order for students to take the exams on them, while the desktop alternatives
will require paper, monitor, keyboard, and mouse. On top of both alternatives there is an
operating cost, and an installation/ maintenance cost. See Table 4 for the inventory of the
economic aspects associated with the two alternatives.
Table 4: Inventory of the costs and quantities for alternatives

Item
Tablet PC
Stylus
Operation
Desktop
Monitor
Mouse
Keyboard
Paper
Operation

Tablet
Quantity
50
50
6,115 [kWh]
Desktop and Paper
50
50
50
50
300 reams
60,360 [kWh]

Cost/ unit (discounted) [$]

199.20
24.21
0.0744 [$/kWh]
319.20
79.20
Free
Free
4.80
0.0744 [$/kWh]

The amount of money that is invested into each of the alternatives can be assessed from the
prices given, but this calculation does not include the time value of money nor can we estimate

11

what the salvage price of the components will be at the end of their lives due to economic
fluctuations. It is expected that tablet computers could still maintain a lot of value after their
warranty as society strives toward more modular solutions (a higher percent of their value could
be salvaged than desktops), however this is speculation. Additionally, maintenance is already
subsidized by the University of Idaho so its not required for the analysis.

Figure 9: Economics of Desktop and Paper alternative

Figure 10: Economics of Tablet alternative

III.)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results shown below are based on the data from the inventory analysis, but a discussion
is presented that qualitatively assesses some important environmental impact categories such as
acidification, eutrophication, and anthropogenic climate change potential.
1. Impact Analysis
1.1 Manufacturing and Packaging Phase
1.1.1 Material Choice
The materials chosen for all the alternatives each have their obvious utility in the
manufacturing process, but when it comes to assessing the environmental impacts some of the
materials used can be hazardous to humans and their environment. For tablets and desktops,

12

several materials have been classified as hazardous by the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA): antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, mercury, and selenium [8]. These
materials are commonly used to manufacture computers, and although current efforts by industry
have been moving away from these materials they can still be found in use. Additionally, a
number of hazardous solvents are used to manufacture computers that have many effects on the
people who use them. These effects include nervous system damage, death, cancer, bone marrow
damage, nausea, kidney and liver damage, etc. [4]. These chemicals are well controlled and
rarely ever effect the operators themselves, but the fact still remains that there is a potential for
human and environmental damage if there is a contamination event. Tablets utilize the materials
to culminate in a product that consumes about 903g in its main components while desktop
systems utilize the materials to culminate in a product that consumes about 16,995g in its main
components. If the products can both perform the same function for the polya center, the sheer
material consumption of both products automatically puts the tablet as a top contender for use in
testing students.
The material choices for paper in the manufacturing stage vary greatly depending on the
process. Most notable in the material choice is the amount of trees that must be consumed to
manufacture paper. Polya consumes nearly 20 trees a year based on the data obtained from [9]
about the manufacturing process of paper. This doesnt seem like much, however if the amount
of embodied energy was calculated for a tree (out of the scope) the numbers could be quite
astounding. It is common knowledge that trees are some of the largest carbon sinks on this
planet, and contributing to deforestation of the large trees required for paper manufacturing can
present a real issue for the climate change effort.
1.1.2 Energy Use
When looking at alternatives the energy use by each alternative in the manufacturing stage
can provide insight to which option is the best due to the interconnectivity of energy. The
desktop computer and paper are used at the same time for polya so their consumption in all
stages must be coupled when comparing them to tablets. The total energy consumption in the
manufacturing stage for desktops and paper is nearly 5.3 times that of the tablet computer. Since
the tablet acts as the computer and the paper (students show their work on the tablet) the
energy required for a product that performs the same function is greatly reduced in the
manufacturing stage.
1.1.3 Carbon Dioxide Emissions
Carbon dioxide emissions is a great indicator of how greatly a product or process is
negatively affecting the climate in terms of global climate change. Carbon dioxide has an
atmospheric residence time of nearly close to 100 years [6] meaning that a reduction in
emissions today can have a really positive impact on future generations of people. The carbon
emissions from manufacturing desktops and paper are nearly 6 times greater than the
manufacturing of tablets. A reduction of this magnitude can help the University of Idaho do its
part in a consumer driven economy to help manufacturers continue on an eco-friendly path.

13

As a side note, other air emissions such as nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide are common
and abundant in the production of paper which have a large role in acidification. However, these
pollutants were out of the scope of the study.
1.1.4 Water Consumption and Pollution
Determining the impacts of the water consumption and the pollutants that go into the water
is crucial. The data in the manufacturing stage of tablets and desktops was virtually non-existent
when looking at individual products (e.g. iPad). The major computer manufacturers do release
sustainability reports that indicate the amount of water consumption by the facilities that create
their products. This is out of the scope of the project, and furthermore it would be nearly
impossible to interpolate what the water consumption or pollution amounts are that pertain to
manufacturing a desktop or a tablet. Although it is difficult to discuss the impacts of water
related to computer products, the data is quite widely available from paper manufacturers. Data
obtained from a study conducted on the Portuguese pulp and paper industry indicated that there
are two main types of emissions into the water system: chemical oxygen demand (COD) and
absorbable organic halogens (AOX) [13]. By extrapolating the data to pulp and paper industry in
the United States, the demand of paper from the polya center amounts to the release of nearly
68kg of COD, which is a main driver in eutrophication. Additionally, polya demands nearly
48.8kg of AOX which is a sub-driver of eutrophication because it is a result of the chlorine
dioxide and bleaching processes that are necessary for paper production [13].
1.2 Use Phase
1.2.1 Material Choice
The material choices in the use phase are the same as in the manufacturing stage, however
their impacts are different. The users do not see any direct negative side-effects as a consequence
of using any of the products. The utility of each alternative can be assessed at this point to see
how the material choices positively affect the users. For both alternatives, the user will be able to
take exams for their math classes but in the case of the tablet the user will be able to seamlessly
alternate between reading the prompted test questions and show their work since they are both on
the same screen. This of course is in contrast to having a desktop computer where the prompted
questions are displayed and the user has to continually shift their attention between the screen
and the piece of paper where they show their work.
1.2.2

Energy Use

The energy consumption in the use phase is a focus of this study since it is the most
controllable factor that polya has on its environmental impact. Polya has the option to choose
between energy efficient computers that appropriately fit its needs. The tablet computers
consume nearly 10 times less energy than conventional desktop computers. This has the potential
to reduce polyas consumption by nearly 90%. Paper products do not necessarily consume any
energy when they are in use, so their elimination from polya would not decrease its consumption.
1.2.3

Solid Residue

14

The polya center has a significant amount of solid residue that comes from its boundary.
Nearly 6000 lb. of paper is consumed by polya. Since the paper is not immediately discarded the
environmental impact of this waste stream is difficult to track (polya is required to hold test
papers for three years since they are classified as sensitive documents by state law). The real
impact from the paper is observed in the recycling phase of its lifecycle where it begins to
consume resources to recycle it.
1.2.4

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

The carbon dioxide emissions from the use phase in polya is significant between alternatives.
The desktop and paper combined produce nearly 39.7 times more than tablets do in the use
phase. Using tablets would produce an estimated 97.5% decrease in carbon dioxide emissions
from the polya center, and an overall decrease in the effect the University of Idaho has on global
climate change.
1.2.5

Water Consumption

Water consumption from the use phase of polya was the only place where there was data to
extrapolate from. The water consumption from the use of desktops and paper was about 90%
greater than the use of tablets. It is difficult to estimate what the pollutants are in this stage
because it would be dependent on the energy source for the polya lab, which is out of the scope
of the analysis.
1.2.6 Economics
The economic impacts are an important factor to evaluate. The tablets are three times cheaper
over the course of their lives than the desktop and paper alternative. This provides polya with
ability to allocate their funds in ways that could provide students with a better learning
environment, or even provide enrichment activities for professors.
1.3 Recycling Phase for Computing Devices
Recycling electronics is still a developing science. Some have managed to make business
opportunities out of it, while others, like manufacturers have been taking it upon themselves to
refurbish old electronics for re-use. The impacts of recycling electronics are not entirely safe and
they have their own associated risks for the environment. The methods for extracting materials
(metals) from computer components can include solvent based methods, electrorefining, and
pyrorefining. Electrorefining is a relatively non-toxic operation that consumes small amounts of
energy in comparison to mining operations. Pyrorefining is often used in conjunction with
electrorefining in order to obtain as much material as possible out of the process, but it requires
significantly more energy (still less than mining operations). Solvent based methods include the
use of hydrochloric and nitric acid in order to separate metals from ceramic components, and
while it does not require external energy, it is quite hazardous to the environment [9]. The
impacts of these methods are difficult to assess because of how much they can vary for
individual applications. Polya would have to sell their computers back to the manufacturers at
the end of their warranty, where the manufacturers would be responsible for the majority of the
end of life stages.

15

One thing that is worthwhile to mention is tablets are moving toward modular and
upgradable designs, so the waste that is required to be recycled is significantly less. This is
because the casings remain while only certain parts are replaced in order to keep the technology
current. The net result is a massive reduction in waste that needs to be recycled.
1.4 Recycling Paper
Paper is not infinitely recyclable and it has a potential for significant impact. While the data
shows that the amount of resources and waste involved in recycling paper is low in comparison
to the life cycle stages of computers, the fact still remains that it contributes to environmental
degradation in the same ways that manufacturing paper does.
IV.)

CONCLUSION

The polya center at the University of Idaho has the choice between two alternatives that can
both be utilized to test students on mathematics course material. The use of tablet computers in
place of conventional methods (desktop and paper) has the potential to greatly reduce the polya
centers environmental impact in every aspect of the SLCA. Furthermore, tablets have been
proven to be a more economical solution that not only meets the polya centers needs, but
exceeds them in terms of low energy consumption and waste. The MC, EU, SR, LR, and GR in
the life cycle of tablets are all either lower or have less of an impact at every step than
conventional desktop computers and paper life cycles. While there are significant assumptions
made throughout the analysis, it can provide some perspective to the choices that the polya
center has. Not only polya, but other schools across the world could implement technologies that
are less environmentally degrading and more sustainable to show the benefits of what happens
when form meets function in pursuit of sustainability.
V.)

FUTURE WORK

The future of this project rests on more abundant and accurate data that has the possibility to
reduce the number of assumptions, extrapolations, and interpolations. A place to start would be
gathering data for MC, EU, SR, LR, and GR on a component level for electronic devices, at least
generally, so that others can make predictive assumptions of the real impacts associated with the
life cycle of computer products. Another path would be to look into quantifying the processes
associated with recycling computer products (i.e. EU for electrorefining for different metals).
The culmination of all of our scientific efforts can be applied to making the world a sustainable
place, and its only going to happen through collaboration and transparency for data gathering on
the stressors that humans impose on the planet.
The polya center does not do studies on their emissions or consumption patterns. In order to
see the total impact on the building in which the polya center operates, energy and emission
studies could prove to be useful for seeing the overall impact reduction of using tablets.
One of the most abundantly clear objectives that could be sought after are the social aspects
of implementing tablets into polya. How students can best learn material is often debated in the
light of a virtual learning platform, and while it serves polya well to have online resources an
important question to ask would be how does it affect student learning if their course content in

16

entirely virtual, even their paper? It is a question that is complex and intertwined with cognitive
psychology and other social fields alike which should be answered by those with the expertise.
As a recommendation to polya, there a couple tablet computers on the market that align with
the data presented in this report. The first candidate is the 10 inch Dell Venue Pro 5000 Series
(32GB) because it has a low price of around $200.00 and still falls into the realm of the analysis.
This is the most affordable alternative and also the most rugged since the glass interface screen is
composed of a unique silicate (Gorilla Glass) that is approved for military and industrial
specifications. The next device is the 9.2 inch Apple iPad Air 2 which is likely the most
environmentally sustainable alternative, and was the exact device used to base the analysis on.
Apple was unavailable to give a quote on academic discount, but its base price is $399.00 which
is a significant cost increase from the Dell. There are number of other alternatives that could well
suit polyas needs, however the sustainability of them is unknown.
VI.)

RESOURCES

[1] Anders, S.G., Otto Anderson. Life cycle assessments of consumer electronics- are they
consistent? International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (2010): 827-836. Springer. Web.
24 April 2016.
[2] Arena, U., et. Al. "Environmental Assessment of Paper Waste Management Options by
Means of LCA Methodology." Industrial and Engineering Chemical Research 43 (2004): 5702714. Web. 20 Apr. 2016. <http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie049967s>.
[3] Bausch, Jeffery. "Mining Your IPhone." 911 Metallurgist. 2012. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.
<https://www.911metallurgist.com/mining-iphones/>.
[4] "Common Chemicals Used in Chip Making." Global Arcade. 1999. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.
<http://www.globalarcade.org/sv/chemical.html>.
[5] Graedel, T.E., and B.R. Allenby. Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering. 1st ed.
New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2010. Print.
[6] Hischier, Roland, et al.. Evaluating the sustainability of electronic media: Strategies for life
cycle inventory data collection and their implications for LCA results. Environmental
Modelling and Software 56 (2014): 27-36. Elsevier. Web 24 April 2016.
[7] Houtman, Carl. "Computer Recycling." The Encyclopedia of Earth. 4 Apr. 2013. Web. 17
Apr. 2016. <http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/151411/>.
[8] How Its Made Copy Paper. Dir. Gabriel Hoss. YouTube. Discovery Channel, 27 Sept. 2013.
Web. 10 Apr. 2016. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Kt5dHMBvYM>.
[9] How it works- Computer Recycling. Dir. Unknown. YouTube. Free Documentary, 29 June
2014. Web. 25 April 2016. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU62hh3DBfg>

17

[10] How much carbon dioxide is produced per kilowatt-hour when generating electricity with
fossil fuels? U.S. Energy Information Administration. 29 Feb. 2016. Web. 14 April 2016.
<http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=74&t=11>
[11] Idaho State Profile and Energy Estimates U.S. Energy Information Administration. 29
Feb. 2016. Web. 14 April 2016. <http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=id>
[12] Lopes, E. "Application of Life Cycle Assessment to the Portuguese Pulp and Paper
Industry." Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003): 51-59. Elsevier. Web. 24 Apr. 2016.
[13] "Mac Mini Environmental Report." Apple Computers, Oct. 2014. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.
<http://images.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/desktops/Macmini_PER_oct2014.pdf>.
[14] "Printing and Writing Papers: Life-Cycle Assessment Summary Report." Afandpa.
American Forest and Paper Association. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.
<http://www.afandpa.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/printing-and-writing-lcareport.pdf?sfvrsn=0>.
[15] Rosen, Mark. Energy Sustainability: A Pragmatic Approach and Illustrations. Journal of
Sustainability 1 (2009): 55-80. Web. 19 April 2016.
[16] "Thunderbolt Display: Environmental Report." Apple. Apple Computers, 20 July. 2011.
Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
<http://images.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/displays/ThunderboltDisplay
PER_july2011.pdf >.
[17] Williams, Eric. Energy of Computer Manufacturing: Hybrid Assessment Combining
Process and Economic Input- Output Methods. Environmental Science and Technology 28
(2004): 6166-6174. Web. 24 April 2016.
[18] Wright, James. "What Materials Are Used to Make Computers?" EHow. Web. 15 Apr.
2016. <http://www.ehow.com/list_6162960_materials-used-make-computers_.html>.
[19] "9.7 Inch IPad Pro: Environmental Report." Apple. Apple Computers, 21 Mar. 2016. Web.
19 Apr. 2016. <http://images.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/ipad/9.7inch_iPadPro_PER_mar2016.pdf>.

18

APPENDIX A
Table 6: List of Common Materials and their Abundance [3, 8, 19]

19