Q&A: E-Waste
Think that those old PCs you've been dropping off for "recycling" are really getting recycled properly?. Not necessarily. E-waste, as a recent BBC News report put it, "is thought to be the fastest growing part of municipal waste in the developed world."
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates that as much as 50 million tons of waste from discarded electronic goods is generated each year.
E-waste is particularly problematic for certain West African nations, such as Nigeria and the Cote d'Ivoire. The BBC recently described Nigeria as "increasingly the world's PC dumping ground." Although Nigeria reportedly has a thriving second-hand computer industry, one Nigerian industry representative estimated that up to 75 percent of the PCs exported to Nigeria are outdated and unusable. Jim Puckett of the Basel Action Network, a nongovernmental environmental organization, has stated that unscrupulous brokers and exporters take machines that their former owners intended to be recycled, but do not recycle and instead commingle working and nonworking machines that are exported.
Is there recycling once the unusable computers reach nations like Nigeria? Yes, but not in the way you'd imagine or want. For example, around Lagos, which has no regular computer recycling facilities, e-waste computers reportedly "build up in huge piles" at dumps around the city. Children scavenge these dumps for the waste computers' contents, from which they can earn about US$2 per day, but also expose themselves to serious health risks in the process. Hazardous waste products in the computers include lead, arsenic, and mercury, as well as heavy metals such as nickel, cadmium, and chromium which leach into the soil and end up in plants and in people who consume vegetables.
Are there measures for international cooperation to combat e-waste? Since 1989, the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Convention) has offered a basic legal regime for international action. While other G8 members have ratified or approved the Convention, the United States has not yet done so. The State Department's explanation of the U.S. position is that "before the United States can ratify the Convention, there is a need for additional legislation to provide the necessary statutory authority to implement its requirements." (As a point of reference, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to ratification in 1992.) In the meantime, the State Department also notes that, "with respect to classifying used and scrap electronics, the current Basel system for controlling international shipments of hazardous waste makes trade in many of these materials difficult, and in some cases impossible. The U.S. supports consideration of alternative systems of control for 'e-waste' under the Convention."
Is there consensus about what those alternative systems should be? Not yet. The electronics industry and government officials are far from unanimous on what to do about e-waste. Proposals range from making manufacturers take back used electronics to imposing recycling fees on consumers and establishing cost-sharing arrangements between manufacturers, retailers, and consumers. Earlier this month, the Convention member governments issued an "urgent call for action" on e-waste, with priorities on "launching pilot projects to establish take-back systems for used electronic products, strengthening global collaboration on fighting illegal traffickers and promoting best practices through new technical guidelines."
What can individual consumers do in the meantime? Among other things, whenever you plan to recycle a computer or peripheral, start by asking the manufacturer if it has a recycling program, and ask for details that provide some assurance that they do what they say they'll do. Also, ask organizations like the Sierra Club or the Environmental Defense Fund for recommendations on reliable recycling companies or groups.
In some ways, the problem of e-waste is like the problem of conflict diamonds. No one person or company in the distribution chain is solely responsible for the problem, and most people would agree that the commodity is undesirable, yet under current legal regimes even a comparatively small number of unscrupulous enterprises can profit from its sale at the expense of innocent people. Perhaps, like conflict diamonds, e-waste needs its own "Kimberley Process," in which companies certify that they will recycle the electronics that they receive and will not ship them elsewhere for profit. Such a process could create incentives for reducing e-waste and provide a basis for concerted action by industry and governments in reducing the international spread of e-waste.
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates that as much as 50 million tons of waste from discarded electronic goods is generated each year.
E-waste is particularly problematic for certain West African nations, such as Nigeria and the Cote d'Ivoire. The BBC recently described Nigeria as "increasingly the world's PC dumping ground." Although Nigeria reportedly has a thriving second-hand computer industry, one Nigerian industry representative estimated that up to 75 percent of the PCs exported to Nigeria are outdated and unusable. Jim Puckett of the Basel Action Network, a nongovernmental environmental organization, has stated that unscrupulous brokers and exporters take machines that their former owners intended to be recycled, but do not recycle and instead commingle working and nonworking machines that are exported.
Is there recycling once the unusable computers reach nations like Nigeria? Yes, but not in the way you'd imagine or want. For example, around Lagos, which has no regular computer recycling facilities, e-waste computers reportedly "build up in huge piles" at dumps around the city. Children scavenge these dumps for the waste computers' contents, from which they can earn about US$2 per day, but also expose themselves to serious health risks in the process. Hazardous waste products in the computers include lead, arsenic, and mercury, as well as heavy metals such as nickel, cadmium, and chromium which leach into the soil and end up in plants and in people who consume vegetables.
Are there measures for international cooperation to combat e-waste? Since 1989, the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Convention) has offered a basic legal regime for international action. While other G8 members have ratified or approved the Convention, the United States has not yet done so. The State Department's explanation of the U.S. position is that "before the United States can ratify the Convention, there is a need for additional legislation to provide the necessary statutory authority to implement its requirements." (As a point of reference, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to ratification in 1992.) In the meantime, the State Department also notes that, "with respect to classifying used and scrap electronics, the current Basel system for controlling international shipments of hazardous waste makes trade in many of these materials difficult, and in some cases impossible. The U.S. supports consideration of alternative systems of control for 'e-waste' under the Convention."
Is there consensus about what those alternative systems should be? Not yet. The electronics industry and government officials are far from unanimous on what to do about e-waste. Proposals range from making manufacturers take back used electronics to imposing recycling fees on consumers and establishing cost-sharing arrangements between manufacturers, retailers, and consumers. Earlier this month, the Convention member governments issued an "urgent call for action" on e-waste, with priorities on "launching pilot projects to establish take-back systems for used electronic products, strengthening global collaboration on fighting illegal traffickers and promoting best practices through new technical guidelines."
What can individual consumers do in the meantime? Among other things, whenever you plan to recycle a computer or peripheral, start by asking the manufacturer if it has a recycling program, and ask for details that provide some assurance that they do what they say they'll do. Also, ask organizations like the Sierra Club or the Environmental Defense Fund for recommendations on reliable recycling companies or groups.
In some ways, the problem of e-waste is like the problem of conflict diamonds. No one person or company in the distribution chain is solely responsible for the problem, and most people would agree that the commodity is undesirable, yet under current legal regimes even a comparatively small number of unscrupulous enterprises can profit from its sale at the expense of innocent people. Perhaps, like conflict diamonds, e-waste needs its own "Kimberley Process," in which companies certify that they will recycle the electronics that they receive and will not ship them elsewhere for profit. Such a process could create incentives for reducing e-waste and provide a basis for concerted action by industry and governments in reducing the international spread of e-waste.
posted by Jon Rusch at 4:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home