Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Interest in green electronics has grown significantly as global electronic production, electronic waste (e-waste) generation, and resource depletion rise in parallel with international efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The persistent challenges of successful e-waste recycling and the environmental impact of resource consumption highlight the urgent need for transformative solutions in the electronics sector. Without major breakthroughs, conventional electronics as currently manufactured and consumed fall short of contributing to climate and other sustainability targets. Therefore, to support the transition to greener electronics, this work reviews existing research and legislation relevant to the field and considers the perspectives and ongoing efforts of the EU Green Electronics Working Group (comprised of 12 green electronics-focused Horizon Europe projects) to identify and define the most important aspects of green electronics. Given the absence of a widely accepted definition of what makes electronics truly “green,” the most critical aspects are clarified to support the development of a common, unified definition:Electronics that, when measured against their alternatives over their whole lifecycle and value chain, have a reduced environmental impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, toxicity, and resource depletion and avoid burden shifting from one impact to another or along the value chain, while fulfilling a given function. A set of recommendations and best practices, informed by the latest advancements and ongoing research developments in green electronics, is then provided to address the entire lifecycle of electronic devices. These strategies offer a framework to guide the development and adoption of greener electronics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vogel et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: