INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056 Reducing Electronic Waste through the Development of an Adaptable Mobile Device Loveroop Singh #PEC university Vidya Path, Sector 12, Chandigarh, 160012 Loveroopsingh786”gmail.com Abstract— Electronic waste is a growing problem in the world. As technology is more rapidly developed and made accessible to the public, an increase in the disposal of old electronics becomes more imminent. Electronic waste is harmful to the environment and the amount that it attributes to the waste stream can be reduced. Electronic products such as mobile devices are ubiquitous and the rates with which they are acquired and replaced by the consumers continue to rise. The current mobile device market encourages the acquisition of new devices more often than the end-of-life of the entire product. To create a more sustainable technological future, there must be a reduction in mobile device contribution to electronic waste. The problem of electronic waste with specific focus on mobile devices is approached from a systems engineering perspective. We performed a requirements analysis of alternative architectures that could potentially encourage and inspire customers to keep mobile devices for longer durations. In particular, we explored the idea of Phonebloks or a modular device, identified the critical factors in the development phase as outlined by ISO 15288 and ISO 9001 standards, and implemented a survey to evaluate user interest. This research explores a proof-of-concept design for a mobile device that is durable and customizable. A modular device allows for the consumer to replace a piece of the phone rather than the entire phone when they need to update their device. The consumer base is important to the success of the product, and our survey indicates a significant potential for consumer interest. The success of such a device could influence the development of more sustainable devices that will further encourage environmentally conscious technological design. .Keywords— mobile device, modular, Phonebloks, e-waste, electronic waste. I. INTRODUCTION Electronic waste is rapidly growing as more technology is developed and improved. Electronic waste or e-waste is the fastest growing type of solid waste in the world and there is still no proper protocol for disposal [1]. Electronic waste is not just limited to computers, televisions, and phones; it also includes light fixtures, microwaves, radios, refrigerators and other types of technology or complex goods. Without proper disposal of electronic waste, there can be negative impacts on the environment and public health [2] The negative environmental impact of irresponsible disposal of electric waste is due to the harmful contents of the devices which include high levels of hazardous materials such as Mercury (Hg), Lead (Pb), Cadmium (Cd), Hexavalent Chromium (Cr), PVC, and Brominated Flame Retardants [3]. At the end-of-life of an electronic device, the device can be disposed of, recycled, or stored. When an electronic device is disposed of in the trash the device will end up in a landfill and those toxic materials will potentially seep into the environment [1]. Aside from electronic wastes’ contributions to landfills in America, some e-waste is shipped overseas after being collected for recycling [4]. Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean are major channels for exporting the United States’ electronic waste. To wit, an estimated 10% of used mobile devices are exported on average. This estimate is subject to uncertainty since tracking electronic waste is difficult due to the absence of trade codes for used products [5]. Some of the estimated waste ends up in “informal channels” of recycling in Asia where the electronics are broken down for precious metals in unsafe conditions [6]. A major contributor to electronic waste is the mobile device. Mobile phones are the most often disposed of electronic device [7]. Smart phones have become a part of the American culture. New models of smart phones are introduced to the market frequently and upgrades are made possible through mobile providers. On the average, Americans exchange their cell phones every 22 months [8]. As a result, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, in 2010 roughly 19,500 tons of mobile devices were gotten rid of by United States’ consumers. Only 11% of those were recycled, while the rest make their way to landfills. Also based on the EPA’s 2010 findings, the United States disposes of more than 416,000 mobile devices every day [9]. Part of the Volume 8 Issue 8 2019 417 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056 reason such a large amount of waste is occurring is because in order to keep up with the latest software or newest technology, buying a new phone is a necessity. As technology develops more rapidly, consumers are forced to upgrade their devices entirely to utilize the most current advancements in a single tool. Worldwide, mobile phones have seen a 3.6% increase in sales from 2012 to 2013 [10]. Purchasing mobile devices and upgrading is becoming more accessible and widespread. The problem of electronic waste and the harm that it causes the environment will continue to escalate if there is not a feasible solution for reduction in the rate of mobile device disposal. II. PRELIMINARY SYSTEMS ANALYSIS I. Problem Statement The mobile devices’ contribution to electronic waste, which is the greatest per unit device, creating 152,000 units of waste in 2010, will continue to increase with the rapid development of new technologies [11]. II. Requirements Analysis In order to find a solution to reduce electronic waste from mobile devices, we identified a set of criteria that are deemed to be important in encouraging consumer reduction of e-waste. These criteria had to reflect the realities of consumer’s needs to have access to the newest innovations in the mobile device industry, keeping in mind that the proposed system should not hinder innovation. The following are the requirements we specified for the proposed solution: 1. Sustainability - The system shall reduce the production of electronic waste due to mobile devices. 2. Durability - The system shall encourage a lifespan of longer than 22 months for the average mobile device [8]. 3. Innovation - The system shall provide access to the newest technologies. 4. Cost - The system shall be competitively priced in the mobile device industry. III. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS To properly find a solution we need to analyze the possible alternatives that could fulfill the main objectives and requirements presented in the previous section. The alternatives considered for mobile device replacement and acquisition are evaluated in Table I. They include a range of changes the mobile carriers could make to their device contracts, legislation which could hinder e-waste, and a sustainable design Volume 8 Issue 8 2019 418 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056 I. Two-Year Mobile Device Upgrades The first alternative is the most common plan among cellular phone carriers, which is to provide a two- year contract to customers. The current scenario has led to an incredible amount of electronic waste and has customers chasing trends and throwing out entire devices for small upgrades. Continuing this strategy will not result in the desired reduction of electronic waste, but has to be considered as it requires no change and is therefore the cheapest alternative to pursue. II. No Annual Contract Another alternative is to offer no two-year contracts and allow customers to buy the newest phones at full cost independently from their carrier. This approach allows for the newest technology for the customer, but is very costintensive on the customer side. The full priced acquisition of devices entails expensive upfront costs. In this way, for people who cannot afford devices at full price, there would be a reduction in electronics purchased and consequently added to the waste stream. Innovation may increase with the loss of annual contracts because devices will need to inspire expensive customer purchases. III. Yearly Upgrade with Rebate A new emerging approach offered by some phone carriers, such as AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile, is the possibility for customers to upgrade to newer phones once a year for a slightly increased monthly payment [12] [13]. In addition, customers are required to return their old phones in order to qualify for the upgrade. This alternative allows customers to upgrade to the newest technology for a reasonable surcharge. Adversely, more phones will be in circulation due to the more frequent upgrades. In addition, depending on the recycling or reuse methods of the carrier this alternative could be harmful to e-waste. When the phone carriers collect the phones, since proper recycling is very expensive, the phones will most likely either recirculate as used phones or enter into an informal waste channel. Recirculation is a good way to reduce e-waste, but since more phones would be kept by the first customer for less than the average period, the life cycle of the device will still not be improved significantly. IV. E-Waste Legislation The next alternative is to implement legislature which would mandate electronics companies to ensure their mobile devices and other products are collected and properly dealt with at their end-of-life. The legislation would be similar to that of the Waste Electrical and electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive implemented in the European Union [14]. The directive could be seen to encourage durability since companies will have an incentive to make longer lasting devices as they are now in charge of the end of the device’s life. But even with this legislation in place, e-waste continues to be exported to developing countries and overall has not equated to more environmentally friendly processes of breaking down used electronics [14]. Responsible recycling for electronics companies is costly.