Monday, July 7th 2008
Material Used in LCD 17,000-times More Warming-Effective Than CO2
A lot of us switched over to LCD displays over CRT for reasons such as reduced electricity bills, thereby reducing our carbon-footprint. It is true, LCD displays have done a great job reducing power consumptions and effectively reducing CO2, but to what extant is this 'carbon-footprint reduction' helping reduce green-house gases?
New studies find that a material used in the manufacture of LCD displays called Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), is the 'missing gas' which adds up to the equation of exactly which substances contribute to global-warming. A study conducted by Michael Prather (read here) reveals that this gas has a stunning 17,000 times greater contribution to global-warming. This compound is still used in the manufacturing of LCD and synthetic diamonds. According to Prather, the compound was initially missed by the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty governing response to global warming, due to the fact that it was not widely used at the time and its nature wasn't established.
The Kyoto Protocol missed several such compounds because they felt they were used in very insignificant quantities, although at that time the harmful effects of NF3 might not have been established since Parther's letter is dated 26th June. The amount of nitrogen nitrofluoride emissions is expected to total this year to approximately the emissions of a smaller industrialized nation, such as Austria in CO2, the equivalent of about 67 million metric tons worth. The rise of digital and high-definition television resulting in increased production of LCD and related technologies in the consumer electronics industry, contributes to the rise of emission of this substance.
Environmentalists will have a tough time convincing governments to enforce regulations. The demand for LCD products is so huge, industrialists will find it too big an expense to halt production and make core redesigns to a 'hot'-selling technology.
Source:
DailyTech
New studies find that a material used in the manufacture of LCD displays called Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), is the 'missing gas' which adds up to the equation of exactly which substances contribute to global-warming. A study conducted by Michael Prather (read here) reveals that this gas has a stunning 17,000 times greater contribution to global-warming. This compound is still used in the manufacturing of LCD and synthetic diamonds. According to Prather, the compound was initially missed by the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty governing response to global warming, due to the fact that it was not widely used at the time and its nature wasn't established.
The Kyoto Protocol missed several such compounds because they felt they were used in very insignificant quantities, although at that time the harmful effects of NF3 might not have been established since Parther's letter is dated 26th June. The amount of nitrogen nitrofluoride emissions is expected to total this year to approximately the emissions of a smaller industrialized nation, such as Austria in CO2, the equivalent of about 67 million metric tons worth. The rise of digital and high-definition television resulting in increased production of LCD and related technologies in the consumer electronics industry, contributes to the rise of emission of this substance.
Environmentalists will have a tough time convincing governments to enforce regulations. The demand for LCD products is so huge, industrialists will find it too big an expense to halt production and make core redesigns to a 'hot'-selling technology.
122 Comments on Material Used in LCD 17,000-times More Warming-Effective Than CO2
Yes, OLED has a future, though its current cost-of-production is like what LCD's was about a decade ago. The industry will feed us LCD first, then come up with a "LCD is obselete, scrap it, buy OLED" drama. They need our patronage to stay alive.
im sure that some things we do may be speeding this up but who's to say this isn't just a natural cycle that the earth gos through that couldn't be prevented anyway:confused:
back on topic this seems to be the trend with all green electronics no matter what we do its a trade off. just take those cfl light bulbs yea they use less power but the all contain a small amount of mercury where as old light bulbs a pretty much glass gas and ferrous metal which are pretty environmentally friendly
seriously how many ppl do you think are gonna collect up those cfl light bulbs and dispose of them properly most ppl don't use them let alone know that your not supposed to throw them in the trash
Im going green to reduce energy bills, dust, polution, etc and also to help the environment. I just dont think the think tanks need to scare us like this.
I bought it because it provides a sharper, more accurate picture and it takes up less space than a CRT. Get me a screen that looks even better and I'll upgrade to that, but I'm not going to make the change just because the consensus is that I'm harming the environment with LCD's.
Currently, cows produce more green house gas than we do.
I promised myself that I would buy a LCD only when one will offer as much fidelity as the "obsolete" CRT... without costing a fortune of course.
However, even if some individuals are not convinced by our contribution to global warming, environmental protection IS important. Personally, I dont care too much if the world get 20 degress hotter. Better summers. Never mind about 3rd world countries near the equator. They are more trouble than they are worth anyway. BUT
1./ We made a mess of the ozone layer
2./ We made a mess of nuclear radiation
3./ We made a mess with toxic rivers
4./ We made a mess with the health of thousands and millions of people and children through mismanaged/tested chemicals/pharmaceuticals
Dont be "too liberal" in your thinking. We need to take collective responsibility for more than just our own personal consumption.
Seriously though, I agree with you. Global warming isn't a new thing. I remember back in first grade learning about it, and that was 1991. Too many people are quick to jump on Al Gore for pushing it like it's a new idea or something. Personally I commend the man for trying to bring environmental awareness to the masses.
Interestingly, there is no absolute proof of man-made carbon emissions having an overall long-term effect on our temperatures and/or well-being.
Many of the carbon footprint related actions are performed on a "what if" basis.
While I am in agreement that we should all do what we can to be increasingly enviro-friendly, we should also be very careful not to commit to potentially fallacious movements which may have long-standing and/or irreversible economic and/or law-changing implications.
Example:
We now have overwhelming scientific evidence which details how the sun contributes to ozone creation and its levels across the globe. Currently, the area with the most "depleted" ozone layer sits above Antarctica. However, by the time the truth is learned, countless economically restrictive regulations are set in place, at the expense of the health of various industries and economies.
I do believe that global warming is being accelerated by humans, and it really sucks; raise another few degrees and soon I'll be having 50C summers!:mad:
As for OLEDS, the O in the name stands for Organic; they're made out of hydrocarbons and the like, so they can't be too bad...
Even if we reduce our carbon emissions by 20% that still won't change anything. Scientists estimate that we need to reduce our emissions by 50% over the next few decades! Even then, I'm sure that China and India will be speeding up their factories more than enough to cancel out any gains that we make.
It might seem stupid, but I firmly believe that we need to focus on furthering our technological progress before we devote all of our energy to reducing emissions. Emissions will continue to decrease as we adopt newer technologies because for the most part newer tech is cleaner anyway.
All that Al Gore did was to encite mass hysteria. Now people are spending so much time worrying about the next mega hurricane and environmental disaster to think straight. :shadedshu
yeah I knew there had to be some kind of catch to the lcd, (well other than the massive heat all 4 create in one room) but I agree that it's better to implement the change in the future tech than in this tech. that way it's an easier transition and it will grant consumers a better option. I seriously doubt joe shmoe is goign to buy a green version of the same monitor for a higher price because theirs a premium for the new manufacturing process. no he'll buy the cheaper non green verison because he see's no gains in buying the green one. If you implement it into the new tech, he'll have a reason to buy the green one, as it'll ahve better picture etc.
Sorry if I sound like al gore, but this is something that he DIDNT say:
I really feel sick when some people ignore global warming because they'll DIE BEFORE IT IMPACTS THEM. They do not care about the next generation of people in short. This is the majority of the ruling world; who will not be impacted by global warming. Only some people step out to prevent this who are ruling, but they are a minority.
However for people like me, and others its a totally different story.you guys in the US are bloodly lucky that you aren't experiencing anything big in relations to global warming.
Australia is supposed to get drought cycles once every 25 years according to research. However that data is now irrelevant as recently its changed to droughts occuring every TWO years. Guess what it does? It drives prices of food up-as a result we are now paying much more for food.
Yes you accepted the existance of CFCs, however did you ever accept the existance of CO2?
Now to get things straight, the US government has probably tried to coerce you guys to NOT believe in it so that you would continue your economy-building practises; yes you guys are being used. As a result you dont believe in this.
In Australia, ALMOST EVERYONE knows of the existance, and believes in it. A majority of the population is affected by it, and you never get a politician denying its existance.
Scientific data; you cannot deny it. If your government is telling you that global warming isnt happening, even though data suggests it is well someone's dishonest!
Now back on track, this news is rather old. It has been stated that LCD monitors didnt exactly turn out to be as environmentally friendly as they were meant to be.
OLEDs ftw, much more vibrant image compared to LCD monitors.