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."
It is just WASTE. Fuck the E! (Score:5, Funny)
What's wrong with you people?
Re:It is just WASTE. Fuck the E! (Score:5, Funny)
What's wrong with you people?
I suppose its better the iWaste
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.
Re: (Score:2)
The bigger diference isn't the degradation rate...
Because everything will eventualy will be recycled naturally...
The issue is the toxicity of the materials will waiting for the "natural" recycling. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
whereas the e-waste has to go through quite a bit of processing
Still, it contains higher concentrations of metals than many ores that can be profitably processed. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to treat it as raw ore material and just dump it in an ore smelter at a couple of thousand degrees. I guess it might contain problematic compounds that would complicate extraction, but compared to other ores it shouldn't be an insurmountable problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you're being facetious but obviously it is non-organic waste. E-waste is waste from electronic devices and technology. I'm sure you could find it on your own but here is the wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
I think the poster is actually trying to demonstrate that "electronic" is an illogical catagorization of waste. How is the original purpose of the material relevant? I think that the timeline in which the waste breaks down and its toxicity are far more relevant than whether the waste was originally part of a device that performed a logic function with electricity. Classifying it as "technology" is even less sensical; a discarded ax handle is "technology", it just isn't shiny and lacks blue LEDs.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it any crazier than referring to medical waste?
now it all makes sense. (Score:5, Funny)
This lead is then formed into figurines, painted, and sold as toys.
You should see my basement (Score:2)
TV's, old computers, harddrives, broken VCR's... I don't know what to do with the stuff.
If you think one of these so called certified e-cyclers is not simply shipping the stuff of to China, think again. Every report I have seen on these outfits has traced the donated stuff overseas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are always some problems though for instance:
India is the center of modern plastics recycling at the moment, most U.S. vendors are unwilling to take the kind of low grade plastics found in most home electronics.
Resale. Given a standard 2-3 year refresh cycle on computer hardware, most of the equipment companies
Conscientious AC (Score:2)
I know you're an AC and may be just trolling, but that is actually rather conscientious. It's still polluting, but at least in your own back yard.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that is what will probably happen to the stuff.
I do much of this recycling myself.
The steel cases/covers can be recycled rather easily. 15 minutes with a screw driver and hammer. Atleast I can be reasonably sure the steel will probably be recycled when I toss it in the steel pile at the county dump (however that may well be shipped to Japan only to return with a Toyota emblem on it.) Same with the plastics. Batteries in the battery bin. But the mobo's, harddrives, CRT's....
We do have a eCycle
Out of date info (Score:5, Interesting)
China hasn't been accepting E-Waste for at least 18 months. Now it goes mostly to West Africa.
Charities (Score:5, Informative)
Hi,
I am a voluntary sys admin for a mental health charity, Contact, http://www.contactmorpeth.org.uk/
We take in local donations of unwanted PCs, refurbish them and give them away to people with mental health problems, their children or their carers. Some people have told me that their free PC was a life changing event (once they'd got broadband working).
Surely in America you'd be able to start up a similar scheme for charitable donations?
HTH,
Ian
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Surely in America you'd be able to start up a similar scheme for charitable donations?
Yep [freegeek.org] - we do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (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: (Score:2)
true, whilst getting rid of the PC is relatively easy - it becomes a major hassle if you're giving away HDDs too. I'm sure the charities won't be too impressed to start receiving lots of PCs, none of which came with a drive.
Re: (Score:2)
The company I work with works with a lot of donations, and frankly companies that want to donate their equipment are generally doing it for tax reasons and are
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They already exist and have for quite some time, especially out here in California the epicenter for computer development and waste.
Mainly churches have been the center piece for this volunteer business and salvation army.
Some woman in downtown Los Angeles does this on her free time accepting these old computers, they strip them and see what parts still work. They rebuild another computed and sell them for very cheap to people who are poor. It allows a lot of Mexican children to finally have a computer to a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're giving Windows boxes to people who are already unstable? Are you trying to push them completely over the edge???
Charity cell phone recycling scam (Score:3, Interesting)
Cell providers try to get used phones off the market by setting up charity drop boxes for women's shelters with the idea being that the phones actually go to the shelters. In actual fact the phones get dumped overseas, and the charity receives a pittance for use of their name on the side of the box. Cell providers benefit because this forces people to but new phones which are tied to contracts.
There are legit phones for shelters programs, but if it says something like "only put the phone in the box, not the charger" then the phones will just end up overseas, not reused.
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.
Re: (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.
Re: (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
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: (Score:2)
Right, they want it. They want a job so they can make money so they won't starve.
I'm not talking about the people recovering the stuff. I'm talking about the company that dumped it there. The company that is probably paying those people to recover metals from the trash.
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.
Whether they have an understanding or not wouldn't matter if they can't find other jobs. But the point is, would a company in the west be able to dump the trash somewhere and then pay its citizens to do it? There are regulations that prevent them from doing so, there are government agencies that ensure that the work e
Baby steps. (Score:2)
How much of that $75 Million could be plowed back into making the whole process safer?
Re: (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 mo
Willingness? (Score:3, Insightful)
Guiyu's willingness to deal with lead, mercury and other toxic materials...
There's the problem. Don't do that.
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! ;-)
Contact? (Score:2)
How are we supposed to contact you? :(
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I'm sorry, you were supposed to leave a comment to the journal entry. I've added a note to that effect.
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.
Re:I "dispose" of my stuff on Ebay. (Recycle) (Score:4, Interesting)
I used to do that too, but now eBay in their infinite greed, is forcing everybody to take PayPal.. Which means the fact that you put "AS-IS" in your auction description, and the fact that there are NO returns, is ignored by PayPal, who cheerfully refunds the buyers money, and usually you are out your item AND your $$$. When I sold "as-is" electronics, I described the item extensively, took lots of pix, and took checks/mo's only... Worked fine, from 1998 to now... Now with the inmates running the asylum at eBay, I'm steering clear of it until/if the eBay Board of Directors finally say "enough" and can JD..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
60 minutes (Score:5, Informative)
> TIME suggests checking out recycling brokers and accredited e-stewards the
> next time you're ready to toss a gizmo.
I guess TIME doesn't watch 60 minutes [cbsnews.com].
'"This is a photograph from your yard, the Executive Recycling yard," Pelley told Richter, showing him a photo we'd taken of a shipping container in his yard. "We followed this container to Hong Kong."'
350,000 cell phones a day? (Score:2)
350,000 a day? or 127,750,000 per year... as of July 2008 there are 303,824,640 people (adults and children). So these guys believe that if every person in the US has a phone, 1/3 of them toss it out every year?
Maybe someone ought to be doing something to reduce the number of phones we "retire" every year. Since most cell phone contracts in the US are 2 years, and the phone is "free" with a 2year contract, one might be able to assume that most of the US retires their phone every two years.... I know ma
Self-fixing problem (Score:3, Funny)
Blame for everyone? (Score:2, Interesting)
Oddly enough, I did a research paper on this subject my last semester. The problem with e-waste being exported is mainly that there is no real guidelines for exporting electronic waste. Most of the material is considered hazardous because of the metals and BFR's used in manufacturing.
There are companies who say they recycle the products and then just ship the junk over-seas. It's an "Out of sight, out of mind" type of thinking that is impacting other places around the world. Not only that, but most consumer
Re: (Score:2)
Tip number 1: Don't call it waste. If you don't call it waste it's not waste, it's just electronics, and everyone likes electronics right?
It's sickening the lengths people go to to save a buck.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Companies should bear the cost (Score:5, Interesting)
I've always said, companies should be responsible for the entire lifecycle of any product they produce, including its safe disposal. The way things are now, they are allowed to just dump that cost onto the public, and everyone has to pay the price of mass-consumption, which is mass-disposal.
If your company's monitor costs $30 to dispose of properly, that cost should be your company's responsibility. Of course, the company will just pass the cost on to the customer, but that's OK, since it's the customer who's wallet is hit, not the general public. Products that are toxic and cause cancer if they seep into the groundwater SHOULD cost people much, much more, to disincentivise companies from making them in the first place. Maybe higher prices for toxic difficult-to-dispose goods would get people to repair things instead of just tossing them into the bin. At least the extra cost would get them to consider that whatever they are buying is expensive to toss into the Earth.
As it is now, people just buy the cheapest product they can find without regard for the damage it does to the environment, because that damage is done to "those other people somewhere". Make that damage hit their wallet, and you'll see change.
How about an artificial reef? (Score:3, Funny)
Let's just pick an appropriate spot in the worlds oceans, and build one of these with the E-Waste: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_reef [wikipedia.org]
Divers would love to see baby Moray eels popping out of the slot in old VCRs.
I wouldn't worry about the hazardous material being toxic. Many of the oceans' species are millions of years old, they know how to deal with toxic waste.
Probably.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't worry about the hazardous material being toxic. Many of the oceans' species are millions of years old, they know how to deal with toxic waste.
and if they don't, the new Godzilla species will come round and tell you off, well - tell our children off, but who cares about those scrounging parasites anyway :)
Digital TV Switchover (Score:5, Interesting)
Recycling very important (Score:2)
On one hand, it is obvious that criminals are running these recycling operations and there needs to be stronger environmental regulations to make sure it is done safely. The situation in China is shocking and particularly there are technologies avialable to keep the toxins out of the environment, but they are not being used. Recycling done properly can be done safely and cleanly with no release of waste. We should not give up recycling, we desperately need to continue recycling, but we need to make sure it
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I can understand copper, but came-on, iron?! That is a bit too much. Next time you'll be saying we are running out of silicon.
60 Minutes Video about China (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Along with more than a few penguins. And the occaisional little red devil.
Re: (Score:2)
So you are running Fedora 10 on your 486SX?
Didn't think so.
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The leaded part is the front. Manufacturers put metal shields made of iron either inside or outside to stop the soft xrays. To prevent hard xrays they instituted drastic safety features that monitor voltage, current, high voltage, and high voltage current. If a problem were to be detected the device would shut down. The manufacturers who did the monitoring most successfully could then make their CRT's less expensive. Once the patents ran out every manufacturer used this technology. Sony had an internal shie
Re: (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.
Re:7lbs? (Score:4, Interesting)
While I've not been to China, everything I've read leads me to believe that China can't control what's happening. They simply don't have established institutions like the EPA and the regulatory overhead that we accept as normal for business operation in the West. Want to open a manufacturing plant somewhere? Just do it. Pay off the local party chief and set it up. Dump your waste into the local river.
That's why melamine, lead, and God knows what else ends up in food and toys.. because there's nobody to go inspect the plants and see just what it is they're doing. All the central government can do when a scandal breaks is take a bunch of guys, put them up against the wall, and hope everyone else takes note.
So, yes, while it is undeniably China's fault for not having a better handle on what's going on inside their borders, it will take years and years before they have the systems in place to be able to do anything about it.
Re: (Score:2)
While I've not been to China, everything I've read leads me to believe that China can't control what's happening.
You're probably right, but is it can't or won't? Every report I've seen indicates they're completely focused on economic growth at the expense of everything else. They also tend to handle problems after the fact, which is understandable (and also how we usually do it). Every time there's some kind of incident, they set up rules and an enforcement agency (AND threaten to shoot people, as you said). What scares me is the financial markets. What will happen when their first big financial meltdown occurs?
T
Re: (Score:2)
They seem to have the largest land army in the world that has been put to good use suppressing protectors and subjugating disputed territories but they can't direct a few of those 2.3 Million active duty troops to enforce a few environmental regulations? I call bullshit.
I bring this up every time there's one of these stories because there are countries along the west coast of Africa that have the laws and are making every effort to enforce them that simply don't have the
Re: (Score:2)
The lack of a free press means nobody can make a stink when something bad is happening, or to expose the corrupt official allowing it to happen, or to demand creation of a regulatory body.
The position for the media in China is not nearly as dire as you paint it. The media does make a stink. Frequently. It does expose corrupt officials. It does demand things.
The difference being that they are careful about not questioning ideology or the top party brass, so they wouldn't dare expose any corruption at the highest levels (unless sanctioned by the "right" people - which can and does happen when someone has fallen out of favor).
I still agree with you, though. The limited ability they have t
Re: (Score:2)
Sure - a CRT is heavy, and it contains a lot of lead -- the front face (which is thick enough to withstand the near-perfect vacuum inside), at least, is made of leaded glass. It's a radiation shield to keep people from glowing in the dark after they've used the computer.
But, you see, they're not recovering any lead from the CRT itself, which would be a very difficult task indeed. They're only recovering it from the circuit boards which support the CRT. Specifically, they're melting the solder off of the
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly the Chinese should be enforcing their regulations, but we need to take responsibility as well for the results of our choices. Continuing to knowingly send hazardous materials through channels that ultimately lead to birth defects in China is wrong. I don't think that's what you were suggesting when you said that, but I don't think it's a
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: (Score:2)
We have to look past wether or not it is economically viable NOW to recycle and at the long term picture. Iron and copper could be depleted by the end of the century. The results of this will be utterly disasterous as a global economic collapse would begin as it becomes harder to acquire this stuff and vastly expensive. Computers and appliances will become a thing of the past. I am a computer programmer and I have serious doubts about whether there will be a computer industry in 50 years, and about its nega
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Iron and copper could be depleted by the end of the century.
A landfill isn't a blackhole. That's why I mentioned digging it out of the landfill eventually. Besides, as Freefrag mentioned, we're unlikely to run out of iron, while copper is already mostly recycled.
What's actually happening is that as the rest of the world industrializes, they want copper for their infrastructure and devices, so the total tons of copper needed is increasing substantially.
Copper@$1.50/pound might not make it economical to recycle some of the small stuff, but at $3/pound it makes sense
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: (Score:2)
7 pounds is complete BS (Score:5, Interesting)
I sort of gagged on the number 350,000 cell phones (130,000) computers a day? But it makes sense. in 2005 a survey found 69% of americans had cell phones. That's about 250 million users. So if mean replacement time is 2 years, that's 342K a day! Computer's last longer aparently to account for the lower discard number.
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. If we assume that only referes to the computer itself and not the CRT we can still estimate the amount of lead using numbers from various studies:
According to this report [ewasteguide.info] 98% of the lead attributed to computers is in the CRT glass. (interesting the report also notes that 75% of CRTs are stored not recycled). However for a 15 pound computer system, only slightly more than half of that is the CRT. And CRT's are not made of 90% lead.
indeed this pdf article determiened that nearly all the lead in a CRT is not in the heavy panel portion but is in fact in the neck and frit seals.
most of the lead however is bound up. the leachable lead is still considerable however.
The actual [eiae.org] amount of lead in a 27 pound CRT (19% screen) is 2.2 or less than 10%. If CRT's have 90% of the lead in a computer system then a computer is about 1% of it's weight in lead. so a 15 pound computer ought ot have about 0.15 pounds of lead not 7 pounds.
the article is BS.
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: (Score:3, Informative)
yes but my point is still valid. A 15" monitor weighs about 20 pounds and has a 1.7 pounds of lead. not 7 pounds. Most of the lead is neck and frit and can be recovered. The rest is bound in a glass matrix (it can still leach but is a good start on containing it).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I am so sorry. Never knew e-waste was such a problem.
I'll never throw out a pdf again!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (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: (Score:3, Insightful)
What about appliances? (Score:4, Interesting)
Still, I'll note that they go on about this being the 'fastest growing part of the US waste stream'. First, I imagine that it's the fastest growing part of the WORLD's waste stream. Ever considered how many cellphones China has? While yes, 350k cell phones might be tossed every day, and this seems a lot, it's scare tactics. First, the growth is unsustainable. Much longer and you'd have to assume either everybody starts carrying multiple phones or starts disposing of them faster. Not incredibly likely. After all, cellphones are starting to reach the point where they already do everything people want, so they won't necessarily trade out every couple years, plus they've improved battery technology substantially - I'd imagine that a large number of replacement cell phones were because the battery wasn't lasting very long anymore.
Second, consider appliances. How many cell phones does it take to equal a fridge? Figure a fridge lasts 20 years. That means with a 2 year lifespan for cellphones, you'd only toss 10 cellphones per fridge. Maybe 20 if you figure on being a 2 phone family. The fridge is still a LOT more material.
Still, doesn't mean we can't do more by making chargers more universal, remembering that the batteries are replaceable, and get the cell phone companies to stop locking their phones up so tight that poorer people can get a donated phone, maybe spend $20 on a new battery and add a prepaid plan chip. After all, reuse beats recycling in the chart I was taught - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, but that fridge is mostly (70%) easily-recycled metal and some plastic. The electronics are going to be pretty much the same as 2 cell phones or so.
Older fridges have nasty chemicals to provide the refrigeration, but if you have the right facilities [merton.gov.uk] and equipment [edie.net], they can be removed and destroyed safely.
Still, +1 for your idea of universal chargers, but how do we get that implemented? An ISO standard for chargers perhaps?
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2, Interesting)
This village has traditionally been an agrarian society. Therefore these citizens DO have a choice; they have the choice to stick with a traditional farming lifestyle.
They choose to take-apart lead-filled CCAs and CRTs because they have made a *voluntary* decision to abandon their farming culture and become factory workers. I believe in Pro-choice and their right to make that choice.
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: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: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry but honestly why do I care what happens to this village in China? They aren't innocent victums, they willingly bring the toxic crap in and have their citizens work on it. As soon as they want to they can stop taking shipments when they feel the health risks are too great... Until they do that, why should I feel bad for problems they have brought on themselves?
I'm sorry but honestly why do I care what happens to some village in Afghanistan? They aren't innocent victims, they willingly beat their women and their citizens. As soon as they want to they can start developing infrastructure and educating themselves when they feel that our wealth/power disparity is too great... Until they do that, why should I feel bad for problems they have brought on themselves?
It's not like they could get mad at you or anything; and even if they did, it's not like they could do anyt
Re: (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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Most of those cultures prefer to be left-alone.
A schoolyard bully prefers to be left alone too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Flamebait? (Score:2)
I wouldn't consider this flamebait.
I mean, it doesn't really matter what you're recycling, doesn't it make sense to reduce shipping and recycle the stuff where it can go a short distance to a facility to be turned into a user product again? IE recycle paper near paper mills/printers?
Same deal with our electronics.
Re: (Score:2)
I truly appreciate this kind reporting, but this is an update to two older videos, this isn't a new problem, and not everyone is part of the problem regardless of what the news would like to tell you.
Re: (Score:2)
It is yet to see how effective this law will be. Quick research reveals that currently virtually no elextronics adhere to this law, and that it may cause huge reliability issues (tin solder issues).
Tin is also not a great thing to have in your water, BTW.
However it is a good first step.