So what is it? If you are anything like me you may have accumulated quite a trove of digital devices that have outlived their use.
When I got Jenna’s article I took a look around in our home to take an e-waste inventory and discovered my wife has almost every cell phone she ever acquired from clamshells to smartphones. I, too, have some lying unused in my desk drawers. In our basement storage locker in the apartment building, we have a router, a range extender, a working micro-laptop, an electronic writing to digital text tablet, and an old but still serviceable audiovisual projector. All of these items take up space and fill a large sealed tub. I don’t need them but don’t know what to do with them. I know there are e-waste depots here in Toronto but all these devices still work. I just don’t have a use for them anymore now that we have downsized and I have retired from consulting.
Feeling like a packrat with all these devices made me wonder how others are handling their obsolete or discarded digital technology. I went online to find out just how much is out there. The World Counts website states “we generate about 50 million tons of it every year. This is equivalent to throwing out 1000 laptops every single second.” That’s an astounding amount. So with no further ado, I give you Jenna’s look at e-waste and what we can do about it.
Recycling is a major factor in the push for sustainability and green living. In recent years, you may have heard the term e-waste in discussions about recycling. If you’re not sure what it means, you’re not alone. E-waste is simply electronic waste. It can include anything from cell phones to laptops to refrigerators and more. Anything with an electrical aspect to it can become e-waste.
The problem lies with its handling. Recycling e-waste comes with a whole set of issues but there are ways to combat this environmental threat.
E-waste affects the environment in numerous ways from the presence of toxic materials and pollutants within it to its transportation.
Producing electronics relies on the mining of materials such as gold, silver, platinum, lithium and more. In extracting these raw materials there are process byproducts including toxic chemicals and heavy metals. Lead and mercury are among these.
The housings of electronic devices are often manufactured using polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic which in itself can prove to be hazardous in disposal.
Most electronic e-waste ends up in landfill where it breaks apart over time exposing the toxic materials inside to pollute the air, ground and water supply. This type of pollution produces many different health risks for people let alone harm to the environment.
Some e-waste gets incinerated which can also be a source of airborne toxins and emissions.
And some is recycled to prevent some of these risks. But even in recycling, there are problems because most of these operations take place overseas.
Many countries in the Developed World export their e-waste to the Developing World. The practice has environmental consequences releasing greenhouse gas emissions during transportation and if recycled can release toxins into the environment. Workers in some Developing World countries often attempt to refurbish and sell salvageable e-waste but in the process they are exposed to dangerous chemicals and substances during the sorting process.
Then there is the issue of e-waste containing digital content that has not been removed by former owners potentially creating security issues and identity theft.
You can no longer separate technology from your life, which is not necessarily a bad thing. The e-waste that is a byproduct of our technology dependence, however, is something that human society has to consider as we continue to be lured into buying a growing number of new devices. It seems that one can never keep up with the latest smartphone model with all of its bells and whistles making the device you already own seem obsolete when in fact it isn’t.
Manufacturers feed the demand by shortening the life cycle of their products. It often becomes easier to replace a device rather than repair it, and manufacturers making fixes more expensive than buying something new.
Raising awareness is an important first step. Consumers have a say and can let manufacturers know that e-waste is a problem for which they need to participate in finding solutions. That means improving production methods, replacing harmful materials in manufacturing with eco-friendly ones. And it means recycling e-waste has to be built into the product lifecycle.
Standard recycling is a beneficial way to help the environment. E-waste recycling is no different with those who do it implementing safety precautions and the wearing of protective gear during disassembly, cleaning, and sorting for material recovery. This type of recycling needs to be adopted globally to be effective and brings us to the issue of product lifecycle management.
The concept known as the circular economy is built around an industrial model involving not just material sourcing, manufacturing, and distribution, but also in the managing of a product after it is no longer being used. It is a solution that has become a growing practice for waste management and the electronics industry. In a circular economy, 100% of the materials going into a product get reused reducing waste and pollution significantly.
Today, there is a disproportionate gap between what society produces and what it discards and e-waste is no exception. This, however, is changing as more manufacturers and waste management companies adopt circular economy principles within their operations. The mantra is repair, reuse, remanufactured and refurbish with non-recyclable and single-use materials being removed from production processes.
The growing demand for new technology is not going to slow down. So the future of e-waste will require a revolutionary change. A move by manufacturers to a circular economy offers a sustainable model for recycling and reuse. And finally, each of us individually, by changing what and when we buy, can save the environment from piling up an increasing amount of e-waste.
]]>
When the Hummer first hit the market, it became something of a joke. The consumer version of the military Humvee was popular but it also earned a reputation for barely making it from one gas station to the next — the H1 only managed about 10 miles to the gallon.
While the brand didn’t survive the Great Recession, with the last model rolling off the assembly line in 2010, a recent announcement from GMC has hinted that the Hummer will be making a comeback in 2022 — but it won’t look like the gas guzzler of the past. Instead, this new Hummer will be one of a few electric trucks coming to the market in the next few years.
As demand for alternatives to traditional internal-combustion-engine (ICE) vehicles grows, the truck industry is experimenting with electric trucks. Here is what to expect — and whether or not these trucks will be able to provide a suitable alternative to ICE-powered ones.
Details are currently scarce about what we’ll be able to expect from the new electric Hummer, with GMC planning to provide more information in a few months, but right now what we do know is exciting. The electric powertrain will generate a whopping 1,000 horsepower and accelerate from 0-60 in three seconds or less. That and the fact that it will appear in 2022 sums it up.
The new Hummer isn’t the first or only electric truck to be announced in the last year. Tesla beat GMC to the punch with the debut of the company’s Cybertruck, which should be available sometime in 2021. The Cybertruck is also a fully electric truck with a 250-mile range that can accelerate from 0-60 in less than three seconds. The Cybertruck will start at $40,000, cheap compared to other trucks, but still fairly expensive.
Other companies are planning electric versions of existing models. Ford, for one, is developing a completely electric version of the F-150. Not a lot is known about this truck yet, but Ford has published a video of the electric F-150 pulling what the company claims to be one million pounds. And Fiat Chrysler has announced electric versions of its Jeep line of trucks, and the RAM pickup.
Rivian is an electric truck startup that recently received investments from General Motors. The company is developing an electric light truck, the R1T, and the R1S, an SUV.
All of these trucks are expected to deliver horsepower and torque comparable to most leading ICE trucks, and may just provide a more climate-change friendly alternative to the top-sellers on the market.
It isn’t just passenger trucks that are trading out their fossil-fuel-powered engines for an electric powertrain. Recently, Dot Transportation — one of the largest food redistribution companies in the country — deployed its first electric freight truck in Modesto, California. It works 12 hours a day, and could potentially save the company tens of thousands of dollars every year, all but eliminating the cost of fuel.
Tesla is also working toward developing and delivering fully-electric freight trucks which can allegedly reach 60 miles per hour in 20 seconds while hauling 80,000 pounds of freight, and with ranges from 300 to 500 miles, depending on battery pack size.
Whether companies choose a diesel or an electric freight hauler, they all need to be compliant with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations, something that can be challenging for small companies and new startups.
Some companies, like startup truckmaker Nikola Motors, are also investigating other sustainable alternatives to combustion engine-based freight trucks — like tractor-trailers powered by energy-dense hydrogen fuel cells.
While hydrogen power has been around for years, the high price of hydrogen fuel cells has prevented their use in most consumer and freight vehicles. Now, however, after years of R&D investment, the hydrogen fuel cell has have become a more practical, emissions-free alternative to electric and ICE vehicles.
Nikola, which reportedly hopes to launch its hydrogen-powered eighteen-wheeler sometime next year, is also working to develop a light truck powered entirely by fuel cell. They do, however, face a steep challenge, the lack of a hydrogen cell refueling infrastructure across the country.
Undaunted Nikola plans to provide additional details about its hydrogen fuel cell trucks at its upcoming Nikola World 2020 in September.
While electric vehicles (EV) that are cars do not rely on fossil fuels, some industry pundits argue that their manufacturing processes create just as much greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as those that burn gasoline or diesel. They use the example of lithium mining’s excessive use of water, 1.9 million liters (500,000 gallons) to produce one ton of lithium. And nickel and cobalt, both used in the production of EV batteries, they point out, are toxic to the environment as well as those mining these minerals. Those defending the status quo argue that the GHGs produced in manufacturing an EV can be up to 68% worse than a comparable fossil fuel-powered vehicles.
Whether you’re a fan of the Hummer brand or not, or of fossil-fuel powered trucks, the EV truck is arriving in showrooms around the globe. And if current market trends hold, it’s likely that EVs as a whole will become far more popular in the future. By 2022 we should know if the EV truck will be equally well received by a world seeking answers to the challenges of reducing carbon emissions from the transportation industry. As for those who think EVs are bad for the environment, there is the option of developing hydrogen fuel cell alternatives. And depending on how the hydrogen is sourced (not from natural gas but from water) this mode of transportation power could prove to be truly zero-emission.
]]>
In this contribution, Jenna looks at the rise of deep fakes and what it means for the future of news. Is what we will read and see real or not? Will disinformation make news reporting meaningless? Let me know what you think.
When deep fakes started going viral this year, they were widely regarded as an amusing application for deep learning artificial intelligence (AI). Whether you wanted to see Donald Trump star in Breaking Bad or Harrison Ford in the much-maligned Solo: A Star Wars Story instead of Alden Ehrenreich, someone could use AI to superimpose a face on someone else’s body. But now that the novelty has worn off, the reality of this technological capability has left us wondering whether deep fakes produced using AI are going to be the next source of fake news that we have to combat. Let’s take a closer look at these AI-generated images and how to fight them.
Why are digital fakes so effective? This Obama fake video is a good illustration. It features former President Barack Obama but the words and ideas being spoken come from the mouth of comedic actor Jordan Peele. This almost convincing video was produced using a couple of programs and 50 hours of deep learning processing. It showcases how easy it is for celebrities or people in positions of power to have their faces and voices stolen with a little bit of processing power and an actor who is a good mimic.
We’re steeped in disinformation. Instead of being able to trust in news sources for unbiased and accurate information, today we have to take multiple steps to confirm a source of a piece of information before accepting it as true. “Fake News” has become the headline of the year and most social media websites today come equipped with fact-checkers to flag things suspected of being false or partially true. That air of skepticism and distrust in information is part of why deep fakes are so effective. We know they’re false but want them to be true.
The scary thing about deep fakes is that while not yet perfect, they can be incredibly convincing. It appears that it is not hard to put words in someone’s mouth. As deep fake technology advances and the AI used to create it becomes smarter, will you be able to tell what’s real and what’s generated by a deep learning program? It won’t be long before we won’t be able to tell truth from fake, at least, not by looking or listening. “The concern is that these techniques will rise to the point where it becomes very difficult to discern truth from falsity,” says Tim Hwang, the current Director of the Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence Fund. And without a digital litmus test to determine the veracity of a video clip, even the most skeptical Internet user might find themselves drowning in a sea of deep fakes.
Industry experts are right to be worried about the potential impact of deep fakes. One recently emerged mimics President Trump, having him talking about his collusion with the Russians. While he never said the words in the video, it didn’t stop it from going viral with opposition using it to “prove” the President’s guilt.
That’s what makes a digital litmus test so important. It would be a system designed to protect world leaders, and analyze their unique ways of speaking and moving. It would compare authentic video footage to suspect clips, and hopefully, determine whether a video is real or a deep fake designed to sew discord in the ranks. One company, Amsterdam-based Deeptrace, is working to turn deep fake technology on itself, analyzing videos with a discriminator algorithm that spots when real videos take a turn toward the fictional. The Deeptrace software is being fed thousands of fake videos, using deep learning to hone its detection capabilities.
Deep fakes can be a neat way to see your favorite celebrity in a movie that they didn’t work on, or transport yourself into a favorite film. It’s a unique application for deep learning technology and AI, but only if it’s being used as entertainment. Things are likely to get worse before they get better, well before companies like Deeptrace release deep fake detection algorithms. So for now, it’s a good idea to view everything on the Internet with a healthy degree of skepticism until we have a foolproof way to detect what is fake and what is real.
