{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016751638747268753, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005826656955571741, 'mean_word_length': 5.481132075471698, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparative assessment of life cycle assessment methods used for personal computers.

This article begins with a summary of findings from commonly cited life cycle assessments (LCA) of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) products. While differing conclusions regarding environmental impact are expected across product segments (mobile phones, personal computers, servers, etc.) significant variation and conflicting conclusions are observed even within product segments such as the desktop Personal Computer (PC). This lack of consistent conclusions and accurate data limits the effectiveness of LCA to influence policy and product design decisions. From 1997 to 2010, the majority of published studies focused on the PC concluded that the use phase contributes most to the life cycle energy demand of PC products with a handful of studies suggesting that manufacturing phase of the PC has the largest impact. The purpose of this article is to critically review these studies in order to analyze sources of uncertainty, including factors that extend beyond data quality to the models and assumptions used. These findings suggest existing methods to combine process-based LCA data with product price data and remaining value adjustments are not reliable in conducting life cycle assessments for PC products. Recommendations are provided to assist future LCA work.