Are Substitutes to Cd-Based Quantum Dots in Displays More Sustainable, Effective, and Cost Competitive? An Alternatives Assessment Approach

Light
emissive organics and inorganic nanoparticles are substance
classes competing for applications in displays in the form of organic
light emitting diodes (OLEDs) and quantum LEDs (QLEDs), respectively.
Upcoming substance classes, perovskites and Q-OLED displays, also
contain novel nanomaterials and organics for these applications. However,
the safety and viability of these emissive substances is difficult
to assess quickly and broadly because of their complexity, their inherently
different structures, and their rapid evolution in the literature.
We propose the use of an alternatives assessment focusing on hazard,
cost, and performance, so as to compare these possible substitute
substances, with incombent cadmium-containing quantum dots. This assessment
type is used in industry and government to inform chemical substitution.
It uses available information, while pointing out important data gaps
for decision-making. The cost assessment highlights competitiveness
of OLEDs because of the low amounts needed in their application for
display, but performance assessments do not identify a preferred alternative.
The hazard results indicate that there is no clear alternative either,
with each novel nanomaterial or organic substance having different
negative aspects. These results identify the need for a low-hazard
high-performing alternative substance, and the assessment provides
a framework for researchers to evaluate their own novel substances.