Slashdot Mirror

I'm a teacher and I'd like to share some great free teaching lessons on e-waste
http://www.teachchange.org/ewaste

I very much doubt the claim in this report that 70% of our old electronics are "used". Any electronics sent to Africa or Asia are toxic, and 99% will eventually be dumped or burned in countries that have almost no enforcement and few laws.

E-waste researchers made 2 movies, and I created a 10 minute cut of both.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnqvfNstr_4
credit to http://www.ban.org
The movies are "Exporting Harm" and "Digital Dump" 2002 & 2005

A simple and great lesson for classrooms is to have students take apart dead computers and haul off the metal. Then show the e-waste movies or short version. Leave the other parts in the classroom for a few weeks and say you are having trouble finding a safe way to get rid of all the toxic stuff. There is even homework with a prize for students who inventory the most toxic e-waste in their own basements and closets.

I've traveled to Latin America to haul back e-waste others have donated. To use old technology the recipient need lots of electricity, and to safely process e-waste you need money and gasoline to haul it. This report is flawed in thinking that 30% is ewaste and 70% of used computers are "used".

peace out! . . sorry for posting this as anonymous in error.

Any electronics sent to Africa or Asia are toxic, and 99% will
eventually be dumped or burned in countries that have almost no
enforcement and few laws.

E-waste researchers made 2 movies,
and I created a 10 minute cut of both.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnqvfNstr_4

credit to http://www.ban.org

The movies are "Exporting Harm" and "Digital Dump" 2002 & 2005

I'm a teacher and I'd like to share some great free teaching lessons on
e-waste

http://www.teachchange.org/ewaste

A simple and great lesson for classrooms is to have students take apart
dead computers and haul off the metal. Then show the e-waste
movies or short version. Leave the other parts in the classroom
for a few weeks and say you are having trouble finding a safe way to
get rid of all the toxic stuff. There is even homework with
a prize for students who inventory the most toxic e-waste in their own
basements and closets.

I've traveled to Latin America to haul back e-waste others have
donated. To use old technology the recipient need lots of
electricity, and to safely
process e-waste you need money and gasoline to haul it.
This report
is flawed in thinking that 30% is ewaste and 70% of used computers are
"used".

peace out!

The reader comments are far more intelligent than the original false claim here.

- the lower cost of flat screens has created homes with more screens. same toxicity or perhaps worse per pound.
- the light weight screens of today are not built to last as long as the heavier CRT screens
- flat screens are not made to be modular or easy to repair, and it rarely happens
- even in countries that ban exports of dead flat screens under the Basel Convention, significant toxic waste is exported to Asia and Africa
- about half of the states in the USA don't regulate e-waste
- the USA refuses to ban toxic exports under treaties, we also won't ban landmines etc etc.
- Most ewaste is passed from customers to a series of waste traders. Those "safe" drop off spots have almost no laws that keep the waste from going to Asia or Africa as toxic e-waste
- Auctions of Federal computers often get exported as dead e-waste
- Only one city has any statute to prevent the series of waste traders from unethical export
- E-waste is extremely complex, from the birth and assembly of the components, beyond the death, transport and disassembly of the device. The toxins live far longer than most of us would guess.
http://resource-recycling.com/node/1877
http://ban.org/ban_news/2011/110317_call_to_stop_exporting_ewaste.html
http://www.teachchange.org/ewaste

The hypocrisy here is thick enough to cut with a knife. Every minute of every day US corporations (from Microsoft to Monsanto to Chevron and thousands of others) and the US military break the law in over 100 countries, heedlessly and without accountability or redress. Yet the FBI has the astonishing chutzpah to make a statement like, "Foreign firms that choose to operate in the United States are not free to flout the laws they don’t like simply because they can’t bear to be parted from their profits".

The iconic example of US corporate intransigence might be Union Carbide/Dow's all-but-deliberate poisoning of Bhopal, India, where tons of toxic, unstable nerve poison, improperly and carelessly stored in an American pesticide plant, killed 8,500 horribly in one night, and permanently injured 100,000s. No proper reparations have been made and nobody has been held to account.

In the Amazon, Chevron has committed one of the largest environmental crimes in US history - and thousands of US companies are doing the same every day.

More recently, the behaviour of Blackwater has illustrated that indiscriminate murder of foreign citizens is now just an accepted part of American corporate practice. Countless Iraqi citizens killed and injured by Blackwater (and other mercenary firm) employees have not seen justice.

Another example from this morning's timeline.

Here's another: Indonesia is just one of many countries now being flooded by a tsunami of toxic electronic waste from the United States.

Funny thing about karma...

Yeah, they were only 5 years behind the curve too.

Basel Action Network

It's unfortunate that the developed world has put pure profit over ethics in disposal of their waste, but keep in mind that in most cases Africa and China are not simply the cheapest place, they are actually paying to have this waste dumped on their shores. China in particular has laws in place to stop the practice that they chose not to enforce because the value of the commodities is great and the cost of labor and health concerns is absolutely nothing.

I work for a more reputable recycler. Almost nothing leaves the country and those things that do are going to reputable vendors. Frankly it is more expensive to do it that way, but some people actually are interested in doing the right thing and thankfully there's a market for it.

Check it yourself...

It's still fucking incredible that today's people don't consider the amount of soiled water and burnt energies to create the newest piece of shit they'll stare at condescendingly in just a few months.

Guess what? You're fucking iPads are not revolutionary, it's a niche.

Was he also shocked that China signed all 4 of the treaties? What good did it do? BAN photos of an "Excellent" country.

And the US is the "international bad boy". Hmmm. I have a few other questions ... and they ARE questions, not rhetoric.

Who is the Basel Action Network that they should be authoring treaties that other countries should sign? Where is their teeth should the treaty be broken?

Does the US have a policy against signing a "treaty" with a non-country? (let's leave the entire native American issue out of this particular discussion please)

Does the US have any laws in place now that exceed the treaty demands, therefore making the treaties worthless? (Considering China's actions, isn't the treaty essentially worthless anyway?)

I worked in the electronics manufacturing industry for 20 years. We had more environmental controls placed on us during the 90's than flies in a cow barn. Needless to say, I am no longer working in the electronics manufacturing because it became WAY too expensive to build electronics here. We haven't solved the problem, we simply moved it to the third world. CEO's, bean counters and stock owners have by default turned into nimbies.

I am thoroughly convinced that it is impossible to legislate solutions to these kinds of problems, or sign some "feel good" treaty. We must engineer our way out of engineering problems and educate ourselves out of ignorance issues. Who really gives a rats butt whether some politician with a PhD in Belgium agrees with a 503(c) organization out of Seattle, Washington. Ask anyone living around Nogales, AZ what manufacturing is like over the river in Nogales, Mexico.

Was he also shocked that China signed all 4 of the treaties? What good did it do? BAN photos of an "Excellent" country.

And the US is the "international bad boy". Hmmm. I have a few other questions ... and they ARE questions, not rhetoric.

Who is the Basel Action Network that they should be authoring treaties that other countries should sign? Where is their teeth should the treaty be broken?

Does the US have a policy against signing a "treaty" with a non-country? (let's leave the entire native American issue out of this particular discussion please)

Does the US have any laws in place now that exceed the treaty demands, therefore making the treaties worthless? (Considering China's actions, isn't the treaty essentially worthless anyway?)

I worked in the electronics manufacturing industry for 20 years. We had more environmental controls placed on us during the 90's than flies in a cow barn. Needless to say, I am no longer working in the electronics manufacturing because it became WAY too expensive to build electronics here. We haven't solved the problem, we simply moved it to the third world. CEO's, bean counters and stock owners have by default turned into nimbies.

I am thoroughly convinced that it is impossible to legislate solutions to these kinds of problems, or sign some "feel good" treaty. We must engineer our way out of engineering problems and educate ourselves out of ignorance issues. Who really gives a rats butt whether some politician with a PhD in Belgium agrees with a 503(c) organization out of Seattle, Washington. Ask anyone living around Nogales, AZ what manufacturing is like over the river in Nogales, Mexico.

I agree with your sarcasm -- it's amazing how much people "believe" in a free market so much that they assume it is the best system even in economic sectors where it was never proven or even theorized to work. A rational perspective is so often trumped by irrational bindings to the concept of good and evil. It's like saying "look and see how well Newtonian gravity explains the way cars roll downhill and planets orbit the sun! Newtonian gravity is good and just, and all heretical theories like those of that anarchist, Einstein, are evil!"

On the flip side, I stumbled across this page while trying to get a good overview of the toxic waste export issues:
    http://ban.org/Library/ierarticle.html

I was appalled by how much propaganda there is in this report. Every headline and sentence is loaded with manipulative wording. It's really comical! While I'm inclined to agree with the message on the whole, which justifies the Basel ban, every instinct tells me not to trust these wordsmiths. There's no actual evidence presented (that I could find) to support the Basel ban. I'm not saying that the Basel ban was a bad idea or that the US should not now support it, but my search to find a rational argument backed up by evidence is unsuccessful so far.

http://ban.org/photogallery/index.html

Look at the human tragedy. Thank God today you don't live like that.

And it's no one's fault over here, no unsigned treaty, that could create that kind of depravity. Please just for once put down your politics and look a problem square in the eye: China's just got a bad culture and a worse form of government. It's shameful to allow people to live so rotten, period.

NO, before you get all guilt-ridden and try to heap the blame on "us": shameful, rotten, PERIOD, end of story! Good day, sir.

Given the fine article here, I see that China is one of the bad boys in actually doing bad stuff, yet the http://www.ban.org/country_status/report_card.html web site has China listed as "Excellent". So something seems more than slightly fishy. Reading again, the site merely rates how the countries in question perform lip service to a set of 4 treaties and totally disregards how the countries actually act regards limiting pollution.

Sorry people, but this is a prime example of actions speaking louder than words.

One quick example. Do you know were all that CAT-V cable scrap goes when you trade it's copper in for cash? China! Why? Because they will burn off that poisonous jacket with no regard for employee or environment. I know, I made $800 last year with one truck load and asked how they were going to strip the jacket. It was more profitable to just sell it overseas.

I wouldn't do that. It is illegal. http://www.ban.org/country_status/country_status_chart.html

Just as a follow-up ... anyone considering taking e-waste to a recycler should first check to see if the recycler is listed here as having been approved by the Basel Action Network (an anti-dumping group). The list includes "e-Waste recyclers that have agreed to adhere to strict criteria [...] The criteria require that no hazardous electronics equipment or parts (as defined internationally) will be exported to developing countries or be processed by captive prison labor, and that none of it will end up in landfills or incinerators."

As far as I know, it's the only (somewhat) reliable way to know that a "recycler" isn't just exporting the trash to the developing world. Many recyclers talk a lot about the environment, but don't give very many specifics about what actually happens to e-waste you drop off (besides vague platitudes like "in accordance with all State and Federal laws" which means little given how minimal most laws concerning e-waste are). That's because they may just be loading it into containers bound for the other side of the planet.

or does anyone know where Illinois dumps used tech

Since the beginning of the Basel negotiations, the United States has adopted the viewpoint of its industry lobby and not of its public as it strongly opposes the concept of a no-exceptions waste trade ban. The US, even as a non-Party, fought hard against passage of all of the above noted decisions. To date, the United States, in both Republican and Democrat administrations continues to tow the corporate line in opposition to the primary thrust that the Basel Convention has taken -- imposing an OECD to non-OECD hazardous waste trade ban with the aim of ending the practice of dumping hazardous wastes on poorer countries in avoidance of paying the high costs of more appropriate waste management or prevention in wealthier industrialized nations.

Every year Guiyu takes in more than a million tonnes of computer waste, earning its residents, according to mainland press reports, RMB1 billion. All day, every day, mountains of wire and other equipment are burned in Guiyu's streets to obtain copper and other scrap metals. Printed circuit boards are heated over charcoal burners to liberate them of computer chips that might be reusable. The boards are then soaked in acid to extract gold, and the waste dumped alongside or in the nearby Lianjiang River. Printer cartridges are ripped apart for their toner and recyclable aluminium, steel and plastic parts. Cathode-ray tubes are hammered open for their copper yokes.

The result is that the air, land and water on which local people depend have all been poisoned. Local well water is already undrinkable, even after boiling, and fresh supplies must be trucked in from the town of Chan Dim 15 kilometres away. According to the report: "It is extremely likely that due to the presence of PVC or brominated flame retardants in wire insulation, the emissions and ashes from such burning will contain high levels of both brominated and chlorinated dioxins and furans - two of the most deadly persistent organic pollutants. It is also highly likely that cancer-causing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are present in the emissions and ash."

"Compared to the rest of China, this place has more miscarriages," says Doctor Li Fai-ping, who works in the maternity ward at the local Chao Yang Yiu Fai Hospital. "Babies simply die in the wombs. There are several cases a month." She adds that the Government has done nothing to assess the damage being done by the e-waste industry. "No scientists have come here to test the effects [of the pollution on the community]. We are sent to work here, we are scared too." "The fact that nobody knows of the dangers is the most depressing thing," says BAN researcher Jim Puckett, co-author of the report.

But just "recycling" isn't enough - in fact it can be worse than landfilling it in North America!

Why? Much of tech waste sent for recycling ends up in China and other countries where unprotected workers burn material in open fires to separate out the metals from the plastics, and use hydrochloric acid (again unprotected) to isolate gold and other precious metals. It's a horrible practice. Visit the web site of the Basel Action Network for photos of the conditions. Included in the photo gallery are American municipal, hospital and school identification stickers from material at these overseas sites.

In Ontario there is only one company that truly recycles electronics - Noranda's plant in Brampton, Ontario. They have a lead smelter on-site, and you have to pay to send material to them. There are many companies that will take your electronics waste for free, but guess where it ends up. Not at a proper recycling plant in North America, that's for sure.

Always ask the company who is picking up your e-waste where it is going for processing.

Yeah, what is Dell going to do with the electronics they collect?

See the links below for info on what often happens with reclaimed electronics
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,57151-0.htm l
and
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/ 11/0615220
and
http://www.ban.org/

I have to disagree. This system could have its its advantages if Microsoft assumes all of the ecological issues. Just weight the costs, how much do you pay per year for an identically featured machine ? How much would you pay to get this one, guaranted by Microsoft to work expectedly and -if possible- to be kept from obsolescence?
A PC used to mean Personal Computer, now it's just a Packet of Crap and modding is just making it more expensive as well as unstable.
The Swiss have a related system for sharing cars. It just requires more organisation but otherwise you don't wonder about parking, cleaning, refueling, etc. anymore.
Face it: This might be a pun by Microsoft, but at least it could sound cleaner for the environment.
But maybe were you just improvising a First Post?

It's true.

For speech and debate, I researched, wrote, and delivered a speech about electronic waste. To summarize it: we discard 7 million tons of electronics every year (that's 50 pounds from every man, woman, and child in America). Furthermore, e-waste is uniquely toxic: you can't landfill it (lead and mercury tend to leach out of electronics), and you can't incinerate it (plastics release dioxin when burned). So, as it turns out, we export it: according to "Exporting Harm", a groundbreaking exposé by the Basel Action Network, corrupt recycling corporations are illegally dumping electronic waste overseas. In fact, 50-80% of our supposedly "recycled" electronics actually end up in third-world villages, poisoning their land, water, and air.

The proposed solution was:

1. Ratify the Basel Ban on international hazardous waste export (157 other nations have already done so; the United States is the only industrialized nation on Earth that has refused to join.)
2. Phase out the use of 7 of the most toxic chemicals used in PC manufacturing (all of the European Union nations have already banned these 7 particular chemicals, and thanks to the Electronic Waste Recycling Act of 2003, the state of California will do so by 2007)
3. Adopt producer take-back programs (similar to those in Europe and Japan), in order to give manufacturers an incentive to design and build cleaner computers in the first place.* The easier it is for a company to recycle the "taken-back" computers, the more of an edge they have over their competitors.

In the meantime, as a consumer, it's very important to make sure that your local recycler doesn't export. The Basel Action Network maintains a list of recyclers that have pledged to get rid of hazardous wastes responsibly: http://www.ban.org/pledge/Locations.html

*Note: because of this requirement, manufacturers will actually sell the "cleaner" version of a PC (made with fewer toxins) to European and Japanese consumers, and sell the "dirtier" version to US consumers.

As we watch the the world vanish, we should ask ourselfs why... Some may consider how will we explain are doing nothing?

As I share this with the slashdot crowd. . . . . I think to myself (outloud)
Maybe this post will inspire someone to write a letter. (to a political leader)
or. . . .Perhpas this article will inspire someone to write more poetry. (and make me fell better)
Unlikly but. . . it may inspire me to stop posting on slashdot. (which could only be better)
or. . . .possibly I have made a lasting contribution to poetry. (forever)

Conclusion : this article has not improved my poetry :(

Others opinions? RE Article : please no comments on my poetry- unless you would like to sign up for fan club mailing list.

PS : origional post was aborted by the lamness filter (had to make modifactions - even slashdot AI, hates my poetry - honestly it was better.) I for one do not welcome our new AI lameness filter overloads)

Related Article : E-Waste

and prior to recycling there is the impact of resource consumption.

i wonder how many more resources go into the production of e-paper over tree/hemp/etc. paper? anyone feel like doing some back-of-the-envelope calculations?

i feel very concerned when i notice so much focus on recycling and very little focus on consumption. if you are concerned about the earth/your home/"your back yard" ask yourself "how can i consume *less*?" because by consuming less we make the recycling problem smaller.

if this site http://www.weeeman.org/ is at all accurate, we geeks are using quite a bit of our share of the earth's resources with each new computer we purchase. according to this site, if we divide the earth's resources evenly amongst the current population, our individual "earthshare" is equal to ~two football fields. purchasing *one* computer uses ~4.25% of your earthshare. if you purchase six computers you consume 25% of your earthshare. and this doesn't include _any_ of the other things you are consuming (car, house, other electronic devices, etc.).

here's a couple more sites for more information about e-waste:

Basel Action Network - BAN
http://www.ban.org/

Computer TakeBack Campaign
http://www.computertakeback.com/

btw, here's where you can get the most eco-friendly paper i know of: http://www.livingtreepaper.com/products.html

peace

because of the high quality paper we use, they find they can recycle it and print their newspapers on it and it's cheaper than them making their own paper. It's a billion dollar industry for us.

Yet, the Chinese are adopting innovations faster than the western world (like the super speed trains). Will this mean that the trade deficit will tip even further in their direction?

I heard that paper tidbit on the History Channel and can't find any links that specific, but here are some related ones:

http://www.ban.org/ban_news/Junk_Bond.html

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/04/demand_for _us_r.php

Now Jose Worker and Randeep Worker will

Who do you think it was that was doing the work at the plant(s) in question?
It was poor immigrants and low skill workers and yes, of course IBM knew about it. The higher paid managers wouldn't be caught (dead) standing all day be marinated in chemicals.
This is the dirty part of the beautiful, feel-good Open Source world that is never really talked about here.

svtc
http://www.svtc.org/cleancc/pubs/technotrash.pdf
http://www.ban.org
http://www.tufts.edu/tuftsrecycles/more/computers. html

E-Waste recycling is only in very specific cases profitable. Plastics used with electronics usually use flame-retardants which makes it very costly to recycle. Chips are pulled for refurb, but remember that technology goes out of date really quickly. There are still big barrels of chips that get processed for the metals. But this is barely profitable, and only when the chip can be easily removed from other parts. The worst are CRT's, which average about 8lbs of lead a piece. There used to be a couple plants in the States that would pay to melt down the leaded glass, but I believe they went out of business. The vast majority of these monitors end up in China, where they're taken apart by villagers (including children) in extremely unsafe conditions. Check out Exporting Harm, by the Basel Action Network for more info on that. If recycling E-Waste were so profitable, then organizations like StRUT would not be on the rocks. I've visited their warehouse, and I'll tell you they run a tight ship. But they only use vendors who recycle materials responsibly, and that requires lots of money. Beware companies that will take your electronics for free, especially monitors. It's a sure sign they're sending stuff to China.

E-Waste recycling is only in very specific cases profitable. Plastics used with electronics usually use flame-retardants which makes it very costly to recycle. Chips are pulled for refurb, but remember that technology goes out of date really quickly. There are still big barrels of chips that get processed for the metals. But this is barely profitable, and only when the chip can be easily removed from other parts. The worst are CRT's, which average about 8lbs of lead a piece. There used to be a couple plants in the States that would pay to melt down the leaded glass, but I believe they went out of business. The vast majority of these monitors end up in China, where they're taken apart by villagers (including children) in extremely unsafe conditions. Check out Exporting Harm, by the Basel Action Network for more info on that. If recycling E-Waste were so profitable, then organizations like StRUT would not be on the rocks. I've visited their warehouse, and I'll tell you they run a tight ship. But they only use vendors who recycle materials responsibly, and that requires lots of money. Beware companies that will take your electronics for free, especially monitors. It's a sure sign they're sending stuff to China.

The CBC TV investigative consumer news show Marketplace did a story on high-tech trash earlier this year.

They talked to Seattle's Basel Action Network, which made one of the earliest documentary videos of a cluster of villages in Guiyu, China, where 100,000 people live and work in what is essentially a giant computer dumping ground.

You can watch the report in Quicktime or in Real Video format.

You have to admit that the BBC photographs speak a thousand words. BAN has color photos from China here.

www.ban.org

includes photos, a pdf version of the report, and you can even order a 23 minute video.

www.ban.org

includes photos, a pdf version of the report, and you can even order a 23 minute video.

Basel Action Network
Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition

Basel Action Network
Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition

I think two points are worth noting - firstly, for better or worse, the source of the report and its tone are set firmly within the environmentalist camp.

Secondly - this problem is probably the tip of the iceberg, and is certainly a very real threat to the environment in the next few decades. I personally believe we should take significant action now to prevent the need for another Kyoto (where this would be a serious issue) ten years from now.