Information and communication technologies may be environmentally sustainable but not...

document, by the online social justice network Association for Progressive Communications and the Dutch Humanist Institute for Development Cooperation, sets out arguments for and against ICTs as a force for “greening” the environment. Understanding their sustainability requires examining the life cycle of electronic devices apart from the raw materials used through production, use and disposal, said Paul Mobbs of the U.K. Free Range Activism Website. There are serious questions about how long people will be able to use high-speed digital technologies before the “ecological limits” on production make them too rare or costly to be justified as another “invisible” element of the mass-consumption culture, he wrote. All devices, which at the simplest level are an assembly of millions of transistors, rely on the same raw materials for production, he said. The problem isn’t silicon, which is plentiful, but the minute amounts of rarer materials such as indium, hafnium, germanium and gallium needed for microchips, he said. Those minerals are only available in a few places and some governments argue that they're critical raw materials which should be protected, said Mobbs. Another important metal in the manufacture of miniaturized digital electronics is tantalum, half of the global supply of which is mined in Australia, he said. But 1-10 percent may be mined illegally in central Africa, perpetuating armed conflicts there, he said. Rare metals aren’t the only problem, he said. Rare minerals such as gold can theoretically reach peak production and then decline just as oil has, spurring illegal mining, he said. Another key sustainability issue is the chemicals used in consumer electronics devices, which can pollute local areas, Mobbs said. There’s also rising concern about the amount of electricity ICTs consume, and growing recognition that the production cycle uses more energy than the everyday use of the devices, he said. The debate over “green ICTs” shows how complex the issues are, and it’s not enough to focus on carbon emissions, he said. The ICT industry must “get its own house in order” instead of simply trying to help other sectors go green, said Hopeton Dunn of the University of the West Indies. The industry now accounts for around 2 percent of global carbon emissions, a number expected to mushroom as developing countries go digital and the number and size of data centers rise, he wrote. While the prognosis on the ICT sector’s own future contribution to climate change is “worrying,” there’s strong proof that the technologies can spark innovations and social and economic changes that can help cut carbon emissions, he said. One of the critical challenges now is to balance the competing demands for more widespread use of ICTs with their energy-efficient deployment and safer electronic waste disposal, he said. E-waste raises several issues requiring immediate attention, including a lack of data, how to finance e-waste management and allocate economic responsibilities along the downstream chain, and how to hold producers to account, said Panos London. Its website said it promotes inclusion of poor and marginalized people in development debates. The concept of a green economy raises key questions, the International Institute for Sustainable Development said, including: (1) Whether the increased energy and material efficiencies enabled by the Internet will boost consumption. (2) What the human impact is of the openness and dematerialization the Internet allows. (3) What new threats and vulnerabilities might arise in a world where human, material and natural systems are interconnected and hyperlinked in real time. Although the need for a green economy is now widely recognized, governments are slow to put policies in place and “powerful economic and political forces” often protect the status quo, it said.