ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)

ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)






TECHNICAL REPORT
Environmental Engineering (EE);
Explore the challenges of developing product group-specific
Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs)
for smartphones

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
2 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)



Reference
DTR/EE-MICT2
Keywords
LCA, smartphone
ETSI
650 Route des Lucioles
F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE

Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00  Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16

Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C
Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la
Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88

Important notice
The present document can be downloaded from:
http://www.etsi.org/standards-search
The present document may be made available in electronic versions and/or in print. The content of any electronic and/or
print versions of the present document shall not be modified without the prior written authorization of ETSI. In case of any
existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions and/or in print, the prevailing version of an ETSI
deliverable is the one made publicly available in PDF format at www.etsi.org/deliver.
Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status.
Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at
https://portal.etsi.org/TB/ETSIDeliverableStatus.aspx
If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services:
https://portal.etsi.org/People/CommiteeSupportStaff.aspx
Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying
and microfilm except as authorized by written permission of ETSI.
The content of the PDF version shall not be modified without the written authorization of ETSI.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.

© ETSI 2019.
All rights reserved.

TM TM TM
DECT , PLUGTESTS , UMTS and the ETSI logo are trademarks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members.
TM TM
3GPP and LTE are trademarks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the 3GPP Organizational Partners.
oneM2M™ logo is a trademark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the oneM2M Partners.
®
GSM and the GSM logo are trademarks registered and owned by the GSM Association.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
3 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
Contents
Intellectual Property Rights . 5
Foreword . 5
Modal verbs terminology . 5
Introduction . 5
1 Scope . 8
2 References . 8
2.1 Normative references . 8
2.2 Informative references . 8
3 Definition of terms, symbols and abbreviations . 11
3.1 Terms . 11
3.2 Symbols . 11
3.3 Abbreviations . 11
4 Introduction of Product Environmental Footprint . 12
5 Product Category Rules (PCR) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) models for the smartphone
product category . 12
5.0 General . 12
5.1 Raw Material Acquisition . 12
5.2 Pre-processing: Components production . 13
5.2.0 General . 13
5.2.1 Active components . 13
5.2.1.1 Integrated Circuits . 13
5.2.1.2 Diodes . 14
5.2.1.3 Transistors . 14
5.2.2 PCBs . 14
5.2.3 Other components . 15
5.2.3.0 General . 15
5.2.3.1 Connectors . 15
5.2.3.2 Aluminium, plastic and steel components . 15
5.2.3.3 Capacitors. 15
5.2.3.4 Resistors . 15
5.2.3.5 Packaging materials . 15
5.2.3.6 Documentation . 15
5.2.3.7 Silver, tin and gold PCBA components. 15
5.3 Pre-processing: Smartphone Part Production . 16
5.3.0 General . 16
5.3.1 Battery . 16
5.3.2 Camera . 17
5.3.3 Display . 17
5.3.4 Charger . 17
5.3.5 Cables - USB . 17
5.4 Final assembly - production of the smartphone . 18
5.5 Distribution and storage . 18
5.6 Use stage . 18
5.7 End-of-life treatment . 20
6 Comparison of gaps between existing PCRs/FLCAs and the PEFCR Guidance requirements . 22
6.0 General . 22
6.1 Scope setting . 22
6.2 Data quality . 24
6.3 Impact assessment methods used . 26
7 Challenges associated with Full LCA of smartphones . . 27
7.0 General . 27
7.1 Scope . 27
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
4 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
7.1.0 General . 27
7.1.1 Comparisons and system boundaries for studied systems . 27
7.2 Unit of analysis . 27
7.3 Reference flow . 28
7.4 Representative products . 29
7.5 Product classification . 29
7.6 System boundaries . 29
7.7 Data quality requirements . 29
7.8 Data collection . 29
7.9 Benchmark and classes of environmental performance . 29
7.10 Interpretation . 30
7.11 Reporting . 30
7.12 Disclosure . 30
7.13 Communication . 30
7.14 Verification. 30
8 Challenges with PEF Screening . 31
8.0 General . 31
8.1 Data challenges in general . 31
9 Insights and conclusions . 31
10 Suggestions for future standardization activities . 32
History . 33

ETSI

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
5 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
Intellectual Property Rights
Essential patents
IPRs essential or potentially essential to normative deliverables may have been declared to ETSI. The information
pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found
in ETSI SR 000 314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in
respect of ETSI standards", which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web
server (https://ipr.etsi.org/).
Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee
can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web
server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document.
Trademarks
The present document may include trademarks and/or tradenames which are asserted and/or registered by their owners.
ETSI claims no ownership of these except for any which are indicated as being the property of ETSI, and conveys no
right to use or reproduce any trademark and/or tradename. Mention of those trademarks in the present document does
not constitute an endorsement by ETSI of products, services or organizations associated with those trademarks.
Foreword
This Technical Report (TR) has been produced by ETSI Technical Committee Environmental Engineering (EE).
Modal verbs terminology
In the present document "should", "should not", "may", "need not", "will", "will not", "can" and "cannot" are to be
interpreted as described in clause 3.2 of the ETSI Drafting Rules (Verbal forms for the expression of provisions).
"must" and "must not" are NOT allowed in ETSI deliverables except when used in direct citation.
Introduction
In 2013, the European Commission (EC) released a proposal for the use of common methods to measure and
communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organizations [i.1]. EC started a journey to test
the Product and Organization Environmental Footprint methods in action. Together with more than 260 volunteering
organizations EC tested how to develop product- and sector-specific rules, how to communicate and verify
Environmental Footprint (EF) information. In January 2018 EC announced that the journey is coming to an end [i.2].
It can therefore be concluded that Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) seems to be slowly converging into a useful policy
tool. To this end the electronics and ICT industry and others have in recent years started to prepare for possible LCA
legislation from the European Commission according to the so called Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method.
The aim of PEF is to enhance the quality of LCAs by harmonization, leading to comparable product environmental
footprints within specified product groups in a single market.
Figure 1 shows a set of non-comparable and non-standardized GWP100 results for smartphones for selected life cycle
stages.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
6 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)

Figure 1: Non-comparable and non-standardized GWP100 results for smartphones
The PEF method might help verify the reliability of the results such as those shown in Figure 1.
Nevertheless, PEF has been questioned for not leading to comparative results but only reproducible results [i.3] and
[i.25]. Using PEF, specific features of individual products can seemingly not be reflected (e.g. how to compare
"standard" and "durable" devices when the same lifetime is assumed). Still, the PEF Category Rules (PEFCR) Guidance
[i.7] states that comparability is possible if the results are based on the same PEFCR.
NOTE: This might be true for PEFCR but it is not true for the EPD System Product Category Rules (PCR) [i.19]
which are too flexible regarding data quality and functional unit selection.
Examples of unique features of PEF - compared to e.g. the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)
standard for LCA [i.4] and [i.5] - are the strict requirements on data quality, definition of exact FU, default end-of-life
(EoL) scenario, mid-point impact categories, and that cut-off should be avoided. Moreover - in order to be compliant
with PEF - the industry leaders for each product group sold in the EU - such as smartphones - will have to reach
consensus on the product category rules (PCR) for these product groups.
Recently IT storage equipment - belonging to classification 26.2 in Statistical Classification of Products by Activity in
the European Economic Community [i.6] - was investigated in an official PEF pilot.
In 2017 a guidance document was published including the experience of the PEF pilots [i.7]. Oja et al. argued that it is
important to find a balance between comparability, reliability, and costs when performing PEF LCAs [i.8].
The common wisdom is that simplified LCA approaches do not have enough precision compared to Full LCA (FLCA)
when applied to the rather complex life cycle of smartphones. Still, there exist several simplified LCA methods for
smartphones [i.10]. Andrae identified that there are at least 14 different - simplified and full - methods for LCA of
consumer electronics such as smartphones [i.11]. One of the FLCA methods is the PEF method, expected to be the
state-of-the-art for FLCA [i.7]. In the present document only FLCA of smartphones will be discussed. PEF has very
strict data quality requirements as product comparisons need good quality data. Ojala et al. [i.8] argued that PEFCR
developers should devote time to finding the most appropriate methodological choices. There exists no analyses of the
degree to which current smartphone Full LCAs fulfil the requirements of the strict PEF Guidance [i.10]. To shed light
on that issue is one of the main objectives of the present document.
Moreover, the present document will discuss the discrepancy between FUs currently formulated for smartphones
compared with those required by PEF. While comparability is the ultimate aim of the PEF FLCA method, it will require
very high data quality lowering the uncertainty. Even with "perfect" data quality, there will be variability of LCA scores
for the same type of smartphones.
Andrae and Vaija [i.5] argued that PEF has several strengths and weaknesses. Strengths include guidance and
requirements on FU definition. Moreover, PEF demands relatively precise analyses of the supply chains which could
lead to eco-innovation. Furthermore, the fact that cut-off is not "allowed" gives an estimation of the truncation error.
Another benefit is that the circular footprint formulae should improve the end-of-life modelling for all.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
7 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
However, again, the PEF method has several weaknesses. First the ambitious data collection targets cannot - by most
actors - be applied consistently along the supply chain. Furthermore, the usefulness beyond traditional ISO [i.12] and
[i.13] and ETSI FLCA standards [i.14] is in doubt as these data and comparability issues are not solved.
PEF also might threaten the flexibility needed by LCA practitioners in their pursuit to influence the product design
holistically. Such worries are echoed by recent research [i.25].
The present document is expected to provide valuable input for all users of LCA within the smartphone sphere and to
some degree also for the consumer electronics sphere. Five smartphone manufacturers approaches for FLCA have been
analysed based on openly available information.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
8 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
1 Scope
The present document investigates current approaches, concepts and metrics of LCA as proposed by PEF and their
applicability for the smartphones. The present document:
1) searches to identify if Product Category Rules (PCR) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) models for the
smartphone product category have been developed;
2) explores existing PCRs and LCAs for gaps compared to the PEFCR Guidance requirements;
3) explorse the challenges associated with: setting the scope, defining the unit of analysis, reference flow,
representative products, product classification, system boundaries, data quality requirements, data collection,
benchmark and classes of environmental performance, interpretation, reporting, disclosure, communication,
and verification;
4) explores the challenges with PEF Screening (impact assessment, interpretation and conclusion, report).
2 References
2.1 Normative references
Normative references are not applicable in the present document.
2.2 Informative references
References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or
non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication, ETSI cannot guarantee
their long term validity.
The following referenced documents are not necessary for the application of the present document but they assist the
user with regard to a particular subject area.
[i.1] European Union: "Single Market for Green Products Initiative", 2014.
NOTE: Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/index.htm.
[i.2] European Union: "Final Conference of the Environmental Footprint Pilot Phase", 2018.
NOTE: Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/EFconference_2018.htm.
[i.3] Lehmann, A.; Bach, V.; Finkbeiner, M.: "EU product environmental footprint-mid-term review of
the pilot phase", Sustainability 2016, pages 1 to 13, article 92.
NOTE: Available at http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/1/92.
[i.4] Andrae, A.S.G.; Vaija, M.S.: "To Which Degree Does Sector Specific Standardization Make Life
Cycle Assessments Comparable? - The Case Of Global Warming Potential Of Smartphones",
Challenges 2014, 5, 409-429.
NOTE: Available at http://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/5/2/409/htm.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
9 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
[i.5] Andrae, A.S.G.; Vaija, M.S.: "Life cycle assessments of an optical network terminal and a tablet:
experiences of the product environmental footprint methodology", In Advances in Environmental
Research, 1st Ed.; Daniels J.A., Ed.; Publisher: Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY, USA,
2017; Volume 55, pp. 31-46.
NOTE: Available at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317934185_The_life_cycle_assessments_of_an_optical_networ
k_terminal_and_a_tablet_Experiences_of_the_product_environmental_footprint_methodology.
[i.6] European Commission: "METADATA - Statistical Classification of Products by Activity in the
European Economic Community, 2008 version".
NOTE: Available at
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/nomenclatures/index.cfm?TargetUrl=LST_NOM_DTL&StrNom=CP
A_2008&StrLanguageCode=EN&IntPcKey=&StrLayoutCode=HIERARCHIC.
[i.7] European Commission: "Guidance for the implementation of the EU Product Environmental
Footprint (PEF) during the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase version 5.2", February 2016.
NOTE: Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/pdf/Guidance_products.pdf.
[i.8] Ojala, E.; Uusitalo, V.; Virkki-Hatakka, T.; Niskanen, A.; Soukka, R.: "Assessing product
environmental performance with PEF methodology: reliability, comparability, and cost concerns",
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2016, 21, 1092-1105.
NOTE: Available at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298908043_Assessing_product_environmental_performance_w
ith_PEF_methodology_reliability_comparability_and_cost_concerns.
[i.9] Andrae, A.S.G.: "Life Cycle Assessment of a Virtual Reality Device", Challenges 2017, 8, 15.
NOTE: Available at http://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/8/2/15.
[i.10] Andrae, A.S.G.; Vaija, M.S.: "Precision of a Streamlined Life Cycle Assessment Approach Used
in Eco-Rating of Mobile Phones", Challenges 2017, 8, 21.
NOTE: Available at https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/8/2/21.
[i.11] Andrae, A.S.G.: "Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of consumer electronics: A review of
methodological approaches", IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine 2016, 5, 51-60.
NOTE: Available at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7353286/.
[i.12] ISO 14040 (2006): "Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Principles and
framework".
NOTE: Available at https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html.
[i.13] ISO 14044 (2006): "Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Requirements and
guidelines".
NOTE: Available at https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html.
[i.14] ETSI ES 203 199 (V1.3.1): "Environmental Engineering (EE); Methodology for environmental
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) goods,
networks and services".
NOTE: Available at
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_es/203100_203199/203199/01.03.01_60/es_203199v010301p.pdf.
[i.15] Smith, L.; Ibn-Mohammed, T.; Koh, S.L.; Reaney, I.M.: "Life cycle assessment and environmental
profile evaluations of high volumetric efficiency capacitors", Applied Energy 2018, 220, 496-513.
NOTE: Available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261918304057.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
10 ETSI TR 103 679 V1.1.1 (2019-05)
[i.16] Andrae, A.S.G., Xia, M., Zhang, J., Tang, X. "Practical eco-design and eco-innovation of
consumer electronics-The case of mobile phones", Challenges 2016, 7(1), 3.
NOTE: Available at http://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/7/1/3/htm.
[i.17] Allacker, K.; Mathieux, F.; Pennington, D.; Pant, R.: "The search for an appropriate end-of-life
formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative",
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2017, 22(9), 1441-1458.
NOTE: Available at https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11367-016-1244-0.pdf.
[i.18] Compal Communications: "Product-Category Rules (PCR) for Preparing an Environmental
Product Declaration (EPD) for Smartphone PCR 2011:1.0".
NOTE: Available at https://www.idbcfp.org.tw/GetDownloadSubFile.ashx?id=85.
[i.19] The International EPD System: "Product Category Rules".
NOTE: Available at https://www.environdec.com/PCR.
[i.20] Heo, Y.C.; Bae, D.S.; Oh, C.Y.; Suh, Y.J.; Lee, K.M.: "Assessment of the Potential Environmental
Impact of Smart Phone using LCA Methodology", Journal of Korean Society Environmental
Engineers 2017, 39(9), 527-533.
NOTE: Available at http://www.jksee.or.kr/journal/view.php?number=4059.
[i.21] Yeom, J.M.; Jung, H.J.; Choi, S.Y. 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", International Journal of Environmental Research 2018, 12,
479-488.
NOTE: Available at https://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41742-018-0106-y.
[i.22] Belkhir, L., Elmeligi, A.: "Assessing ICT global emissions footprint: "Trends to 2040 &
recommendations", Journal of Cleaner Production 2018, 177, 44
...