E-Waste

It takes nothing more than a glance at every child and teenager’s holiday Wishlist to recognize our growing dependence on electronic gadgets and technology. Within the course of a few months, if not shorter, a gadget can go from the latest, greatest new technology to completely and totally obsolete. One only needs to look no further than one of the most popular devices, especially among my generation- the iPod. Since the original iPod was released in 2001, there have been over a dozen variations released, averaging a new model produced every six months or so. For those who feel they always need to have the newest and best, this can be costly not only to the wallet, but the environment as well. Until recently the issue of electronic waste, also known as e-waste or WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipments), has not been an important topic in the global consciousness. However, it is quickly becoming a major environmental problem worldwide, affecting not only the environment but the health of millions of less-fortunate people. This is not to say there aren’t reasonable solutions to this problem out there. Efforts are being made by both worldwide governments and corporations who are responsible for the production of these products. The next step towards curbing the negative environmental impacts of our technology is raising awareness and making responsible recycling centers and information more readily available.

To truly understand how large of a problem e-waste has become it only takes one look at the numbers. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) estimates that in 2009, over 40 million metric tons of e-waste was produced worldwide. That number is staggering enough, but even more outrageous is the fact that UNEP also predicts that number will jump 500% to over 200 million metric tons by 2020. That adds up to over 600 pounds of electronic waste per person in the world each year, of which only about 10-15% is recycled. To me, the fact that less than a quarter of this waste is recycled properly is unacceptable. Obviously, big companies and corporations “generate [the most] electronic waste including computers and peripherals, telephones and TVs” (Hennepin County) Another troubling fact is where the majority of this waste is going. There is no definite number, but the UNEP believes that almost 60% of all e-waste is being exported to third world countries rather than local landfills, some of it illegally. This adds to the desperate conditions already found in many underdeveloped countries, as most electronic devices contain at least one of the following harmful substances: lead, cadmium, beryllium, or mercury. The obvious health and environmental concerns to the citizens of these regions should be enough to bring people to action.

However the issue of e-waste, as is the case with most environmental issues, is filled with controversy. Many people believe this is an over exaggerated, over hyped issue that isn’t as bad as it is made out to be. Many scrap industries, and even the EPA, feel that the issue is inflated by groups hoping to gain profit from increased regulation(The Controversy).

There are some groups attempting to do something about this growing problem, and our local government was one of the first. As early as 2000, Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura teamed with the local division of Sony electronics to help reduce the company’s and state’s electronic waste. Sony called it “Extended Producer Responsibility”, and participated in this program completely voluntarily. The idea of this program was that “…if products are designed for reuse rather than disposal and innovative methods of use are developed, cost savings will be realized by manufacturers and new jobs will likely be created” (A Step Towards Zero Waste). By promising the collection of its own e-waste from consumers, Sony forced itself start engineering its products for re-use, and there began to view the collected waste as a source of raw materials, saving them money in production while enhancing their image as eco-friendly. This campaign was very successful and gained popularity nationwide, and within a year was active in 5 more states.

Corporations wishing to gain financially the way Sony did in present day need the approval of one of the two widely recognized programs. E-Stewards and Responsible Recycling (R2) each have standards set, and when a company or corporation complies and meets these standards, they are allowed you apply the stamp of approval on their packaging or logo. Critiques of these programs argue that this is just another form of green-washing; an easy way for companies to cheat their way into being “eco-friendly”, especially because a high stipend is also charged for the stamp of approval. This raises the suspicion that companies meeting the minimum requirements and having the capital to pay are the only ones awarded this stamp, rather than the companies who truly deserve the recognition and rights to the stamp of approval.

The United States EPA (yes, the same EPA that claims this is an over
exaggerated issue) has made its efforts to raise awareness and propose solutions for e-waste, along with countless local governments. The EPA, in addition to backing the R2 program mentioned above, has multiple resources available on its website regarding the proper disposal of e-waste, along with links to local government pages where local depositories can be found (The Controversy).

However controversial and debated the topic of e-waste is, it soon will be at the forefront of the environmental debate. Our dependence on technology, and the increasing speed that each device is becoming obsolete, will force it onto the political scene. While there is debate over its seriousness, there is no doubt that putting these hazardous materials into landfills is not the solution, and will continue to catch up to us.



Works Cited

Scholarly Journals

"A STEP TOWARD ZERO WASTE." Environment 43.4 (2001): 4. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 May 2010.

Lim, Seong-Rin, and Julie M. Schoenung. "Human health and ecological toxicity potentials due to heavy metal content in waste electronic devices with flat panel displays." Journal of Hazardous Materials 177.1-3 (2010): 251-259. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 May 2010.

ZELLER, Jr., TOM. "A Program to Certify Electronic Waste Recycling Rivals an Industry-U.S. Plan." New York Times 15 Apr. 2010: 3. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 May 2010.

Hogue, Cheryl. "GROWING PILES OF TOXIC TRASH." Chemical & Engineering News 88.9 (2010): 15. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 May 2010.

Dwivedy, Maheshwar, and R.K. Mittal. "Estimation of future outflows of e-waste in India." Waste Management 30.3 (2010): 483-491. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 May 2010.

Chancerel, Perrine, and Susanne Rotter. "Recycling-oriented characterization of small waste electrical and electronic equipment." Waste Management 29.8 (2009): 2336-2352. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 23 Apr. 2010.


Internet Sources

"How to Manage Electronic Waste from Businesses — Hennepin County, Minnesota." Home — Hennepin County, Minnesota. Web. 10 May 2010. .

"The Controversy: E-Stewards vs R2." Web log post. http://www.sustainelectronics.illinois.edu/