A trouble with 5G that nobody has mentioned in the comments is that we'll be redeploying hundred of millions of new devices, which has a significant cost on the environment for very little benefits.
How do those costs and benefits compare to something like, say, coffee? In general, how should society decide whether a technology/product/service has too big an environmental cost?
The sober answer is that if you are living a 'regular' middle-class life in the developed world, your C02 emissions are likely far far above sustainable thresholds as set by the UN. As such buying a new phone before the old one has completely died out is too big of an environmental cost.
Good question, ideally we'd integrate environmental cost in prices, and the market would determine if it's worth or not, but currently not the case. Also I think the ratio marginal_benefit/environmenal_cost for 5G is probably one of the lowest in history. If you think about it, it's almost caricatural.
