Share
19. Dec. 2023
“I don't use paper bags. I use reusable plastic ones for shopping. And if I forget, I look for boxes in the store to use at home.” According to sustainability expert Associate Professor Jana Drbohlavová, reuse is more important than mindlessly rejecting “bad” plastics. In addition to advice on how not to pollute the environment, in the interview, she discusses her time at the European Commission and upcoming projects where safety and sustainability are elevated above other aspects.
Where do you currently work?
I work in three departments – CEITEC Brno University of Technology, the Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Communication (FEEC), Brno University of Technology, and JIC. At CEITEC, I help in a research group focused on biopolymers with safety and sustainability aspects, which means, for example, that I participate in the selection of suitable calls under the Horizon Europe funding programme. At FEEC, I work at the Department of Microelectronics, where under the supervision of Assoc. Ház, I am preparing a project that deals with the preparation of a competence centre for semiconductors. This is also very much related to the topic of sustainability. My biggest field of activity is in JIC – my task is to prepare companies to be open for cooperation in the semiconductor ecosystem, to know that a competence centre is being created here and for us to get to know their needs.
How much interest is there in the field of microelectronics?
Lower than needed. We are actively addressing the fact that there is a lack of talent and students graduating in microelectronics or related fields, which then logically leads to companies not having enough skilled workers. This is not just our problem; it is a global problem.
How do you try to make the field more attractive?
It's a long run. We're not going to generate a specific number of male and female students in a short period of time. We have to go about it systematically and start with education in primary and secondary schools. Supporting technological scientific disciplines is also the intention of the South Moravian Region. And, of course, women must be involved in the field, because we make up 50% of the population and it won't work without us (laughs).
Why did you decide to go into science?
Personally, I enjoyed chemistry, I had a great teacher, so it was an easy decision for me and nobody talked me out of it. I think I was also influenced by the story of my mother who wanted to study chemistry but her parents didn't allow it, saying she had to study at a vocational school. She was very disappointed. In the end, she became an electrician, which was useful because as a woman, she benefited from this technical field all her life. I think it is important not to force our children into something we want, but to give them the space to make their own choices. There are already many organisations that help male and female students find out what direction to take and what their options are.
What projects are you working on?
Right now, I am in charge of one project in particular – the preparation of a competence centre for semiconductors in cooperation with the Czech National Semiconductor Cluster. We would like to cover the entire semiconductor value chain – that is, from design and design tools for chips to manufacturing. And of course, this involves, as I mentioned, mapping out the needs of companies, and setting the right curriculum for relevant faculties and specific institutes.
Why is there a need for a competence centre for semiconductors?
The project arose from a call from the European Union, which does not want to be dependent on third countries for chip manufacturing and development. The dependence became apparent during the pandemic, with the production of cars, smartphones, digital devices in the energy sector, healthcare... The economy, the way it currently works, was disrupted due to the interruption of chip supply. For example, a single car needs up to 1,500 chips, which cannot be provided by a single supplier. So, on the one hand, there is demand and a boom in production, but on the other, we must not forget the environment. The production of chips and semiconductor components in general involves a whole range of chemical processes that have a huge impact on our ecosystem. There is a lot of talk at the moment about so-called perpetual chemicals. How to manufacture without harming nature. This is sustainability. It is also my daily bread, and so it should be for everyone.
So the European project is also supposed to push companies to find alternatives to hazardous substances?
Exactly. The impact is long-term. One deterrent example is the disaster associated with the American company 3M. At the turn of the millennium, it built a factory around Antwerp and closed it down more than 20 years ago. The area where the factory originally stood has been put to other uses. But it was found to be contaminated. Dangerous carcinogenic perpetual chemicals, PFASs (per- and poly-fluorinated substances), were found in eggs, water, and crops. While companies understandably have filters, they are unable to catch everything. It's a huge problem.
Are safer options already in progress?
Belgian firm STMicroelectronics is already well on its way. But we have to realise that replacing them with safer substances won't happen right away. It's not as if it's just a simple piece-for-piece replacement. The European Commission and the Joint Undertaking on Chips are trying to weave this into future funding calls that both companies and academia can apply for.
What has been the result of your work at the European Commission as a seconded national expert?
I prepared a draft on sustainable and green production of electronic components and systems together with industry alliances, which is now to be approved. Among other things, the concept of sustainability from product design onwards is essential for me – when we invent a new product, to be able to imagine what will happen to it when it is no longer usable. How we recycle the individual components, how we take the materials from it and use them further. This concept must not be missing to achieve the right effect.
The EU is now preparing a so-called digital ecopass. What is it supposed to do?
After consulting with various parties, we have come across the fact that we have a safety assessment, a functional assessment, a techno-economic assessment and a life cycle assessment. But they are not linked together at all. A paint manufacturer has a lot of suppliers, and if he wants to claim that the paint is safe and environmentally friendly, he has to make sure that the components that go into the paint are also safe. However, it is simply hard to trace. That is what the Digital Product Passport is supposed to solve.
Where can companies get guidance on how to manage without burdening the ecosystem?
The European Commission’s Directorate General Joint Research Centre has published a support material for the “Safe and sustainable by design” concept – step-by-step guidelines on how the criteria for assessing safety and sustainability were developed and how to apply them. Information is included on biodegradability, energy consumption, water consumption, how to deal with leakage, and emissions. Toxicity and other parameters are addressed. It's very complex and it's obviously not easy to apply. Companies are unhappy about it because it is a big challenge for them. However, it is not yet binding, rather new ways are being sought and shown based on case studies.
How do you think people view sustainability, which is often associated with the European Union?
It's good that the term is gaining awareness. Of course, the media and some politicians who denigrate the Green Deal for Europe have a big influence. The Czechs are largely Eurosceptics, and I can see this in my parents, for example. But I think a good way of bringing sustainability to people's attention is through specific examples. Where it works and where it doesn't work. Show them the difference and give them options. To let them know that a cloth made of fibres with silver nanoparticles, which doesn't smell due to its antimicrobial effect, can cause a problem when washing – the nanoparticles get loose, get into the water, and even the purifier can't stop them. So we have to think about that too, it’s not just that I have a cool wipe.
Surely this should be regulated by some kind of institution in the first place?
The European Chemicals Agency and REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals). But there are about 10,000 new chemicals a year and the Agency only has time to examine and evaluate 200. It does not have the physical capacity for more. Companies simply need to understand that there is a role for them and they cannot just rely on EU institutions to do it for them. They have to take it into their own hands and contribute to safety and sustainability.
I was more of a consumer’s advocate. We rely on the products to be safe...
The pace of innovation is often faster than regulatory updates – when regulators are not flexible enough to react to new forms of substances, for example, as was the case with nanomaterials, products can then reach the market before there are enough standardised methods to assess their safety. These are different for nanomaterials than for conventional materials (larger than nano). Therefore, for consumers to have confidence in the product, it is crucial that safety and potential risks are openly discussed/publicised and that communication between innovators (not only scientists but also companies) and the relevant regulatory authorities (e.g. European Chemicals Agency, European Food Safety Authority, etc.) is in place, preferably at the beginning of product development. In addition, there are several options to translate safety and sustainability into everyday life. Perhaps many people act in accordance with these aspects quite naturally, they just don't think of it as sustainability. It's thinking about the product – what country it's from, how I'm going to use it, what I'm going to do with it afterwards, if I'm just going to throw it in the trash or if I'm going to "upcycle" it myself, replace it or donate it.
How is sustainability reflected in your daily life?
Sustainability is all around us, it's a very broad topic. It starts at breakfast. I pull something out of the fridge, and I think about how much packaging there is around it. You can go for packaging-free, or you can use reusable fruit bags. It's about how I get to work. For example, I admit that I don't normally use public transport because I need to commute and get to the nursery quickly to make the most of my time at work. Of course, I know this isn't exactly an eco-friendly option, and I'm thinking about an electric car, but as far as technological developments go, I want to wait until batteries are at a higher level. And here again, the topic of whether batteries and the way they are produced are environmentally sustainable comes up. If we look at how lithium is extracted, how it affects the quality and availability of groundwater...
Can we achieve 100% sustainability?
We are a society that is based on consumption. So 100% sustainability? I don't think it's gonna be that straightforward. Of course, it would be nice if we could recycle and reuse every material. I actually think that it resonates in society and in companies. There are new start-ups that are doing this.
What would you recommend to people who want to start living sustainably?
Definitely to think about these things. What we could do, change in our lives. To be interested in the topic and not be overwhelmed by one direction that this and that is the only right choice, because we all have individual needs, and things can't be applied to everyone equally. We can ask questions. Whatever you use, whatever you do: can it be done better so that it has less impact on the environment and on people’s health?
Photogallery
Author
Expert
