The Scope of US E-Waste 249
theodp writes "Every day, Americans toss out more than 350,000 cell phones and 130,000 computers, making electronic waste the fastest-growing part of the US garbage stream. A lot of the world's e-waste is exported to Guiyu, China, where peasants heat circuit boards over coal fires to recover lead (a 15" computer monitor can pack up to 7 lbs. of Pb), while others use acid to burn off bits of gold. Guiyu's willingness to deal with lead, mercury and other toxic materials generates $75 million a year for the village, but as a result. Guiyu is slowly poisoning itself with the highest level of cancer-causing dioxins in the world. The village experiences elevated rates of miscarriages, and its children suffer from an extremely high rate of lead poisoning. TIME suggests checking out recycling brokers and accredited e-stewards the next time you're ready to toss a gizmo."
7lbs? (Score:1, Insightful)
And I care why? (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:7lbs? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's actually inline with most estimates that I've seen. Remember a CRT will often times weigh 20lbs or more and it's not that big of a box. Lead is something that's been used for quite a while for shielding radiation.
But, as for the story, it's China's fault for not enforcing their own regulations. There is now some recognition that it needs to be done responsibly, but assuming that it's the US' fault for not enforcing Chinese environmental legislation is kind of odd. Really the best thing would be for people to get information through ban.org.
Other than that my home state of WA just officially opened up manufacturer sponsored recycling sites. The only complaint that I've got about it is that there wasn't a provision requiring compliance with the Basel Convention. Hopefully there'll be enough transparency that we know whether or not a site is.
Re:7lbs? - answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of that 7 lbs of lead is in the glass (as an x-ray shield). The summary is wrong to imply that this lead can be recovered by heating, just like circuit board lead.
Re:It is just WASTE. Fuck the E! (Score:5, Insightful)
Not exactly, there is a difference between throwing away organic waste and electronic waste. The organic waste will at least decompose at some point, whereas the e-waste has to go through quite a bit of processing in order to be recycled. It is also difference from other non-organic waste such as scrap metal and plastic. At least that can be recycled relatively easy (as compared to e-waste). The "e" is appropriate, if somewhat over-used.
So why is this the wests fault? (Score:4, Insightful)
If they're generating millions from e-waste we throw away then why is it the wests fault that they are polluting themselves?
If they dealt with the waste in a responsible manner and took even basic precautions then they wouldn't be polluting their own villages.
Willingness? (Score:3, Insightful)
Guiyu's willingness to deal with lead, mercury and other toxic materials...
There's the problem. Don't do that.
Re:Numbers? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So why is this the wests fault? (Score:3, Insightful)
If they're generating millions from e-waste we throw away then why is it the wests fault that they are polluting themselves?
If they dealt with the waste in a responsible manner and took even basic precautions then they wouldn't be polluting their own villages.
Because, rather than deal with it responsibly ourselves, we've outsourced the problem to people apparently incapable or unwilling to deal with it responsibly. Recycling that involves toxic substances is a job that probably no one wants to do if they understand the personal risks involved, but someone has to do it so it falls to the ignorant and desperate.
Deposits and core fees. (Score:5, Insightful)
We can't get but a handful of states in the US to put deposits on bottles, much less give people incentives to actually recycle their electronics. Put a damn $50 deposit/tax on new computer sales, and THEN maybe you'll have people recycling. Hell, we have core fees on automotive parts, why not electronics?
Laws and fines rarely push people to do this type of thing, and forget the "think of the children" ads. People get off their ass and do something when it benefits them directly, and nothing speaks louder than cash in hand.
Better than recycling (Score:4, Insightful)
TIME suggests checking out recycling brokers and accredited e-stewards the next time you're ready to toss a gizmo.
Even better: unless it really is broken beyond repair, re-use your old stuff or give it to someone who still can get use out of it. Freecycle what you can, recycle the rest, and throw away as little as possible.
PS! Read my tagline! ;-)
Re:And I care why? (Score:1, Insightful)
Because it is wrong to send our problems to people who are not equipped to handle them. I could take the box of batteries I have been saving to recycle, walk outside and dump them in the bushes and nothing would ever happen to me as a result, but I don't do that because it would be wrong. Instead, I'll spend a few bucks on gas to drive them to a place where they can be more safely disposed of, so that my desire for the modern convenience of portable electricity doesn't end up in someone else's groundwater.
I "dispose" of my stuff on Ebay. (Recycle) (Score:4, Insightful)
There are a lot of people who actually want this stuff, and they are willing to pay the cost of shipping/handling to get it. I've asked a few of them: Why do you want an old gadget?
(1) "I need a PC that I can experiment upon."
(2) "I am a collector of old electronics."
(3) "My camcorder broke and I need a new magnetic head to fix it."
(4) "I need a cheap laptop for typing notes."
And on and on and on. Like the old saying goes, one man's trash is another man's treasure. Rather than toss your old gadgets in the junk, sell it on ebay for 99 cents + shipping. Somebody will buy it. Recyle.
Chinese Recycling costs (Score:5, Insightful)
, would that increase costs for shipping the waste there?
Not really, the stuff is inert until you start disassembling and burning stuff. What it would do is increase the cost such that Guiyu wouldn't be making so much profit selling the resulting materials. Though substantial infrastructure upgrades(IE a PROPER recycling facility) would be more efficient, but would take decades or more to return on the investment.
ecyclers would probably look for another poor nation to accept the waste
why are these ecycler moving the waste to begin with?
Let's say I'm a recycling collection facility. Doesn't matter what I take. I collect various recyclable materials, from batteries to aluminum cans to paper to whole computers and refrigerators. I don't actually recycle anything myself. What I do is collect and sort the stuff. When I have around a semi-load of it, I get on the market for this stuff, keeping in mind shipping costs, and sell it to the highest bidder(IE who's willing to pay me the most), or to the lowest for stuff where I have to pay for them to take it.
International shipping is cheap - especially since with the trade balance ships are normally quite a bit lighter on their way back to china. So Guiyu wins the bids and gets the stuff because their 'processing' is extremely cheap and they gain enough money from the resulting materials to make a profit.
then the material would stay where it started its life cycle as waste. how would it be dealt with then?
1. If it's still economically viable to recycle in a less polluting manner, then it'll get recycled
2. If the host nation STILL insists it be recycled, you'll see recycling fees tacked on to either the purchase or disposal end to deal with the added expense. Like car tires here in the USA.
3. If they don't, it'll be placed in a landfill until an economical method to recycle it comes along(or raw material expenses goes up) making it profitable to dig it out of the landfill.
Re:And I care why? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't be serious? Do you really think the people working with this toxic waste know the dangers? I'm sure their government does but China isn't exactly a free society.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:7 pounds is complete BS (Score:5, Insightful)
> However the 7 pounds of lead in a 15 pound computer is complete BS. First
> most CRTs weigh about 30 pounds so this 15 pound number is perverse.
15" means it's a 15 inch monitor, not 15 pounds.
Re:And I care why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of those cultures prefer to be left-alone. They don't want us interfering with how they live, anymore than we would want a bunch of Bible-thumpers forcing us to go to Church every Sunday. Although I disagree with Afghanistan culture (and Arab culture in general), I don't think I should be telling other people how to live. I am not a Bible-thumper.
Re:So why is this the wests fault? (Score:2, Insightful)
Because, rather than deal with it responsibly ourselves, we've outsourced the problem to people apparently incapable or unwilling to deal with it responsibly.
It's not like we're forcing them to take it with the might of our military (not that we could). They want it. There's a transaction where we give them money and they take care of the trash. Once we give them the money, our responsibility is complete and it's their responsibility to deal with the trash.
If they decide this deal isn't in their best interests, they can simply stop being in this business (which would force us to deal with it responsibly or find someone else willing to be in the business). Or they can raise the price to an amount that would make dealing with it responsibly profitable (which might force us to deal with it ourselves if the cost is higher than what it would be for us to take care of it). Either way, it's entirely their responsibility.
Re:Charities (Score:3, Insightful)
I worked at a computer store a few years back. We had 5 complete, working PCs they wanted to donate to a local thrift-store/charity. We had to jump through hoops to donate them. We never tried again because it was just too much hassle.
Don't assume that your area is the same as all others.
Re:So why is this the wests fault? (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, they want it. They want a job so they can make money so they won't starve.
Do they understand the risks and threats associated with that job? Based on how they perform the job, it would seem that they do not have a full understanding of what they have agreed to do.
For someone who does have such an understanding, what exactly would you say are our obligations? Apparently, you would appear to be taking the position that our only obligation is to give them money for doing the job, and that's it. I don't think that's sufficient. If we're paying someone to clean up our messes, we need to make sure that they can do the job properly, and that we provide them with information for how to protect their health and safety, and preserve their environment. Otherwise, we're not solving the problem, we're simply passing the buck.
"They want us to" is a total cop-out. Responsibility for dealing with toxic substances is not all in one court or the other, it is shared. If we do not recognize our obligations and hold ourselves accountable to meet them, then surely we will fail, and needless suffering and damage will be the result.
Re:And I care why? (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point, you are responsible for throwing the stuff away in the first place. So pretending they brought the problems on themselves is pathetic evasion. You're just defending your right to pollute. Somebody still has to clean up after you.
Broken window fallacy much ?
Re:7 pounds is complete BS (Score:2, Insightful)
How did you work your math? Assume 100million devices in service with turn over in equilibrium.
Take a device with a seven year lifespan. Every year, a seventh of the population must replace their devices (so in seven years, all of the population will have turned over their devices). That is a disposal rate of about 14million devices a year.
Now take a device with a one year lifespan. Every year, the entire population must replace their devices. That is a disposal rate of 100million devices a year.
Re:And I care why? (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Do you really think that the people of this village wake up in the morning and think "By gum, I can't wait for another day of handling toxic materials with no protection whatsoever. My only hope is that those meddling foreigners, and their insipid health and safety standards, don't rob me of this, my most beloved pastime!"
Someone else posted this video, but I'll link to it again as it shows the village. These people aren't working in some factory, they are in huts with dirt floors.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4586903n [cbsnews.com]
2) If we really wanted to leave these people alone, perhaps we shouldn't be sending them tonnes upon tonnes of toxic materials?
To answer "And I care why?" - Well because all of us consumers of electronic devices are partially responsible for the suffering of these people. Because this computer you are sitting at right now may very well end up in a village in China where it will poison people.
Re:And I care why? (Score:1, Insightful)
... they're Chinese, not stupid.
Yes, I do think that anyone who breathes vapors that burn their nose and throat in the course of their work thinks, "This is probably not good for me." I suspect that when the water is so polluted that it is black and smells and tastes foul, that people think, "I bet this has to do with the things I've been dumping in it." It's quite possible that when the miscarriage rate is high and that children are falling ill frequently that people are able to conclude that these illnesses probably have something to do with the unnatural tastes and odors that they are experiencing every day.
Nonetheless, these villagers decide that in the interest of work they will carry on in this way. I'm sure you've read stories of the factory workers that suffer long work days with few or no breaks. These workers are free to go at any time, but they choose not to in order to have work.
This is a Chinese problem, caused by the action or inaction of Chinese people, in China. Like it or not, it is no one's business but theirs to solve.
Re:Baby steps. (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe use huge smelter to melt down and combust all the epoxy boards, plastic casings and everything, including dioxins to carbon dioxide and slag. The slag will contain mostly oxides of calcium (from plastic fillers), aluminum, silicon, iron, tin, lead, copper, and minute amounts of gold and silver, and some other metals such as tantalum, indium, germanium and gallium and arsenic oxides.
Processing this slag to extract things like tantalum and indium is the same problem as oxygen extraction from lunar anorthite - we basically don't have a good technology to process calcium alumino silicate. And at least the lunar anorthite is a dust, somewhat reactive powder for acid processing, but the slag from this smelter is just going to be a hard chunk of rock. Moreover oxides of lead, arsenic and chlorides of copper and iron chlorides (especially if burnt with PVC plastic parts) will tend to distill out in the process, and would have to be collected from the vapor. If you can separate the plastic casings, that can cut down on the calcium at least but the electrolytic capacitors are loaded with aluminum, and aluminum oxide is hard to process. Not oxidizing the mixture, and just melting it down anaerobically is not workable, because the epoxy boards would turn into charcoal that absorbs everything else on the surface.
Newer circuits are smaller, more of the components such as capacitors in a circuit are purely silicon on chip, so waste in 2020 will not be as dangerous as the waste from say 1980 to 2010, so investing a lot into a recycling facility that has no future, well. In case a workable semi-economic lunar oxygen extraction is found, that could indiscriminately process and safetify waste of any kind, including medical and biological waste together with electronic waste, that would be a worthy investment. In the meantime slag in a landfill with a plastic sheathing on bottom that doesn't get punctured and leak dissolved lead, arsenic, indium and such into the groundwater table is the answer, and slag is much safer than unsmelted electronics in the same landfill, because at least the toxic organic contaminants such as chlorinated solvents are dealt with, and the slag may leach toxic metals, but do so at an extremely slow rate.
Or just give it to China? Let somebody else deal with the problem, and then there is no problem? The problem starts when we don't live like the Amish, completely organic with all waste naturally recyclable, with no technology, other than say steel, that's still naturally recyclable. Once we hydrogenate vegetable oil, once we make materials such as polyethylene that nature has never seen, nor can digest, once use a cellphone that has indium displays, or gallium arsenide chips, after that the problem is here. We still choose to do it because we derive economic benefit from it, but the real problem comes later. At least steel used by the Amish for nails, horseshoes and plows, is naturally recyclable - it rusts away. There has to be a way to have electronics from the start that will be recyclable later, that's where the problem needs to be attacked. Such as fully miniaturized electronics with everything on-chip, silicon the only raw material, and some board that's easier than epoxy to separate during recycling, such as simple pure polypropylene that can be melted down, then combusted without combusting the silicon, and silicon recycled from the metal through tetrachloride distillation. That's soon doable, unless the "economy" does not allow it.
Ethics is a luxury, and should be done as a showoff of luxury, as opposed to generating massive amounts of waste as a showoff of luxury.
Re:And I care why? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd mod you up if I had the points.
This is the same mentality that people use to justify tossing garbage onto the street when there's a trash can one block further, or leaving your tray at the fast food table even though you'll pass the trash on your way out.
That said, it seems the e-waste getting to China is coming from people who were conscientious enough to not throw it in the garbage. May have even paid out-of-pocket for the recycler to take it.
Sad that an accreditation program has to be implemented, and even more government overhead to manage it. One more mark against the "the free market will take care of it" mantra; no it won't, it only gets it out-of-sight and out-of-mind, ending with the poorest of the poor.
Re:Charities (Score:3, Insightful)
You're giving Windows boxes to people who are already unstable? Are you trying to push them completely over the edge???
Re:I "dispose" of my stuff on Ebay. (Recycle) (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Federal controls in place? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is it, that during the election....people were saying "Oh...you shouldn't vote for/against him due to his color", or if you did you were racist one way or the other.
Now that he's elected....why are new now singing praises to the US people that we elected a black man?
C'mon people, if you want a color blind society...at least try to stay consistent.
Stuff goes home to die. (Score:2, Insightful)