Abstract
Organic light-emitting diode (OLED) displays are applied to various electronic devices such as smartphones and televisions in our society, replacing liquid–crystal display (LCD) due to many advantages: self-emitting property, high contrast, slimness, and flexibility. Although OLED consists mostly of organic substances, because it was developed to reduce the consumptions of rare and precious metals, OLED display has a possibility to contain more metal-based components than LCD; for instance, a pixel circuit for OLED needs two thin-film transistors (TFTs), whereas that for LCD does one. Thus, this study was intended to assess and compare possible environmental impacts due to metals in an OLED display and an LCD on a same screen size basis, to examine environmental effects of the technology transition. Hazardous waste potentials at end-of-life were examined based on metal leachability tests, and resource depletion and toxicity potentials were evaluated based on life cycle impact assessment methods. The leachability test results showed that the OLED display has higher hazardous potential than an LCD due to excessive levels of leachability for many metals under California state regulation. The OLED display had 1000–2300 times higher resource depletion potentials than the LCD due primarily to the high concentrations of gold, selenium, silver, palladium, and tin. The OLED display also had 2–600 times higher toxicity potentials due primarily to the high concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and antimony. This study can be used to motivate waste recyclers and managers to actively collect waste OLED displays for circular economy and to direct manufactures to develop more environmental-friendly OLED displays for sustainable society.
Graphical abstract
This study evaluates and compares hazardous, resource depletion, and toxic potentials from metals in a Liquid–Crystal Display (LCD) and an Organic Light-Emitting Diode (OLED) Display to examine the effect of the technology transition on environmental impacts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
California Code of Regulations (2015) 66261.24. Characteristic of toxicity
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (2004) SB20 Report vol 2010
Code of Federal Regulations (2011) 40 CFR 262.11—hazardous waste determination
Eckelman MJ (2009) Hybrid life cycle energy assessment of commercial LED lamps
European Commission Enterprise and Industry (2010) Critical raw materials for the EU. European Commission
Geffroy B, Le Roy P, Prat C (2006) Organic light-emitting diode (OLED) technology: materials, devices and display technologies. Polym Int 55:572–582. https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.1974
Goedkoop MJ, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijs J, Van Zelm R (2012) ReCiPe 2008
King County Solid Waste Division (2007) Flat panel displays: end of life management report
Lam CW, Lim SR, Schoenung JM (2013) Linking material flow analysis with environmental impact potential: dynamic technology transition effects on projected E-waste in the United States Lam et al. Technology Transition Effects on U.S. E-waste. J Ind Ecol 17:299–309
Lim S-R, Schoenung JM (2010a) Human health and ecological toxicity potentials due to heavy metal content in waste electronic devices with flat panel displays. J Hazard Mater 177:251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.12.025
Lim S-R, Schoenung JM (2010b) Toxicity potentials from waste cellular phones, and a waste management policy integrating consumer, corporate, and government responsibilities. Waste Manage 30:1653–1660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.04.005
Lim S-R, Kang D, Ogunseitan OA, Schoenung JM (2011) Potential environmental impacts of light-emitting diodes (LEDs): metallic resources. Toxic Hazard Waste Classif Environ Sci Technol 45:320–327. https://doi.org/10.1021/es101052q
Lim S-R, Kang D, Ogunseitan OA, Schoenung JM (2013) Potential environmental impacts from the metals in incandescent, compact fluorescent lamp (CFL), and light-emitting diode (LED) bulbs. Environ Sci Technol 47:1040–1047. https://doi.org/10.1021/es302886m
Ministry of Housing SP, and the Environment, Netherlands, Center of Environmental Science LU (2001) Life cycle assessment: an operational guide to the ISO standards
Ogunseitan OA, Schoenung JM, Saphores JDM, Shapiro AA (2009) The electronics revolution: from E-wonderland to E-wasteland. Science 326:670–671
Rosenbaum RK et al (2008) USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:532–546
Son KB, Lee DS, Lim SR (2016) Effect of technology convergence for tablet PC on potential environmental impacts from heavy metals. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 23:154–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2015.1106613
Steen B (1999) A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in product development (EPS). Version 2000—models and data of the default method. CPM Report No. 5
Thejokalyani N, Dhoble SJ (2014) Novel approaches for energy efficient solid state lighting by RGB organic light emitting diodes—a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 32:448–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.013
Tremblay JF (2016) The rise of OLED displays (vol 94, pg 29, 2016). Chem Eng News 94:2
U.S. EPA (1992) Method 1331: toxicity characteristic leaching procedure. http://www.epa.gov/waste/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/1311.pdf. Accessed Jan 15 2017
U.S. EPA (2007) Method 6010C: inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/6010c.pdf
Woo SH, Lee DS, Lim SR (2016) Potential resource and toxicity impacts from metals in waste electronic devices. Integr Environ Assess Manag 12:364–370. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1710
Zissis G, Bertoldi P (2014) 2014 Status report on organic light emitting diodes (OLED). Eur Comm Joint Res Centre. https://doi.org/10.2790/461054
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1A09000632).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yeom, JM., Jung, HJ., Choi, SY. et al. Environmental Effects of the Technology Transition from Liquid–Crystal Display (LCD) to Organic Light-Emitting Diode (OLED) Display from an E-Waste Management Perspective. Int J Environ Res 12, 479–488 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-018-0106-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-018-0106-y