Slashdot Mirror
Recycle Fee For Each PC?
UncleJosh writes: "The New York Times (free reg rq'd) has a story about a $25-30 fee to be added to the price of a new PC to cover the cost of recycling it. Sort of like a bottle deposit, but you don't get the money back." What if I just want to buy the case?
Politicians don't have to pay a recycle tax for each stupid piece of boneheaded legislation they keep recycling from election year to election year.
Does this mean I can take my machine to Michigan and get my $25 deposit back?
Believe nothing -- Buddha
why not goto FreeGeek if you're in portland, ore. area
You mean people throw PCs away?!?
This is a good idea. The recycling is good idea and the only way to get it done is for it to be paid up front. If we legislated recycling but allowed aftermarket payment, we'd find the roadsides littered with abandoned PC's. The EU is trying (rather unsuccessfully) to do the same thing with cars.
I pay a fee for oil disposal when it gets changed. I pay a fee for tire disposal, when I change my tires.
Personally, since I've never had to dispose of a computer (I still have all but one that I've ever bought, the other one I sold) Why should I get stuck with a disposal fee that I may never use?
Why not just make it illegal to throw away monitors, etc. in the regular trash, then have a collection point with a fee for disposal, just like oil and tires?
If that meant I could plunk my old box on the sidewalk and let it be picked up by the recyclers (garbage crew, because it ain't recyclable), sure.
But what do you want to bet that "since there's a recycling programme, we can ban picking it up at the curbside", the way they have in California?
In other words, I pay the tax, and I still can't throw away the boat anchor? The only difference I can see here is that some preferred contractor gets a cushy pork-barrel project.
Personally, I have no problem with this, as long as recycling centers are widely and easily available. I have half a dozen cases and a few boxes worth of broken parts I can't do anything with (and yes, I've tried donating them to a school or non-profit--they are even less able to use them than me) but I can't throw away because its unsafe for the environment. I would gladly pay an extra 20-30 dollars to finance being able to take this crap somewhere and forget about it and not have to worry about poisoning drinking water or wildlife. Look at it this way: at least microsoft (probably) won't see the money.
Given a choice between styrofoam or mercury and cadium, I'd take styrofoam
I like the concept: you put down a deposit on each computer. You get it back when you turn it in. The difficulty is in verification: you have to turn in the computer that went with a deposit. That in turn requires an expensive verification system (for example, checking serial numbers on motherboards). Overall, though, it might work.
Miko O'Sullivan
Heh, sounds like my personal fleet of servers. I've probably parted out about 10 machines to get 3 shell servers up. Most of which were home users who were going to throw away their machines, and I said 'PFFT! I'll take it!'. They thought I was crazy for wanting those 'pieces of junk', but hell, I have machines that work. One mans trash is anothers treasure I guess.
Can all fish swim?
Sigh. The recycler/scavanger companies charge the city to pick up your stuff. The city charges you.
BUT if the scavanger doesn't pick up your recyclables, then the garbage company does and tosses into a landfill. Figuring folks might recycle 30% of their garbage, the city (and you) save 30% off of the landfill fee. Why is that important? Because landfills cost money, and the further the landfill is, the more it costs. And the faster you fill the landfill, the sooner it closes and they have to build another one, most likely farther away.
So recycling means you're not making new landfills further away that are costing you more money to dump your trash.
And by recycling your computer and monitor, you don't have to pay for toxic waste cleanup after the lead and other chemicals leech into the ground.
"I may be Love's bitch, but at least I'm man enough to admit it."
Motor oil is a perfect example of why pay-for-disposal doesn't work. If you have to pay to throw away the oil properly, people will just dunmp it in the sewer and let it get into everyone's ground water. I'd prefer a system where you pay a deposit when you buy the oil, then get it back when you dispose of it properly.
Miko O'Sullivan
Every old machine I've ever gotten rid of, I've done so at a garage sale or swap meet. I don't think I've ever thrown a piece of hardware away into the garbage. Working or non-working.
.
Although I have some old ISA SCSI cards and 48-pin 4-meg simms I'm thinking of tossing. .
(Ironically, I've got about 250 megs worth of RAM in the form of 48-pin simms that are probably all perfectly working, but obsolete to the point of useless. I think they'd make good secondary storage if there was some sort of PCI card to plug em all into - they'd make a great RAM drive - they'd outperform disk).
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
If we try to charge extra at collection then most people will find some way around the approved collection points. Not everyone collects old computers; many people think 1 computer is too many :) If I had the choice of paying $25 to recycle or paying nothing to leave my old stuff in a college dorm parking lot then I would probably do the wrong thing.
Collecting for recycling at the point of purchase makes sense from that perspective. But if we could get some cash back when we recycle then there would be added incentive to recycle computer parts properly.
Does this sound just like our current recycling system? It sure does! Making folks pay for recycling up front and giving them a cash incentive to follow through is the best way to make recycling work.
In the America I live in, we have the means to recycle most of the PC, except the CRT. I once toured a site run by HP (in Roseville, CA) that grinds the things up and sorts out the plastics, metals, etc. You could drive a car into this machine they have and it would be able to recycle it. Among other things, they use the resulting stuff to make flooring, but they have to send the CRTs to Canada to be taken care of for some reason, IIRC. I think they have to burn them up in a highly contained fire of some sort. Sort of like a cremation process for your monitors, I guess.
It makes people say "The environment is expensive to keep. Stuff it!".
:-)
Trust me, anyone who goes through _forced_ environmentalism _hates_ it. A city local to me (Guelph, Ontario) has forced garbage separation. I avoid even eating in the food courts there. I refuse to go trash picking. I ain't no hobo! After asking others outside that city what they think about that rule they usually say "Huh?", then "Oh yeah, that stupid city where I have to pick through my trash. Ugh!".
Same thing here. I'd gladly pay a few extra dollars of tax money for the option of putting the old computer beside the blue box, or even pay a few dollars to get it taken away knowing its going to be reused.
But if you _force_ me to pay directly, without any direct benefit to me (and not seeing my computer in a landfill is not a tangible benefit to most anybody), you've made me your enemy. I don't take being forced to do anything very well when it doesn't harm anyone else, and neither should you!
I believe this is the reason the EU is having a hard time applying this idea to cars? Because people are tired of paying hidden taxes to support a bunch of soft-hearted-and-headed green thumbs?
Oh, there's also the little problem of the fact that recycling certain materials is actually more harmful to the environment (energy usage and byproduct wise) than making them in the first place (eg: Can recycling plan hooked up to a coal/gas power station).
And no, we wouldn't find the roadsides littered with cases at all. Very few people throw anything out like that (speaking from personal experience). Example: Most everywhere you have to dispose of old paint specially. As someone living in the country (which is usually a popular dumping ground) the worst I've EVER seen around here is a set of tires. Never any paint cans. Why? Because the paint cans can usually be left at the curb for pickup, unlike tires. I've never once seen an old computer tossed out randomly here because these can either be left beside your garbage or at a dump.
The answer is to make recyling paletable and easy, never _force_. _Force_ is exactly why you don't get voted in and is exactly why you never get into government in the first place. (ever seen someone choose to vote for someone by choice in a democracy?
Choosing my words carefully to avoid becoming flamebait:
Why is it that when something like this comes along, the first thing we geeks do is complain about how stupid it is? We are a minority, we who keep machines long past their prime, using them to their full capacity as web servers, mail servers, firewalls, gateways, etc... The majority of computer waste comes from major corporations, who dispose of these machines after they have passed the point of obsolescence. The cheapest method of disposal right now is to have it "taken care of" (i.e. put in a landfill in China). See this site for real info.
Giving major corporations an incentive to recycle computers is an incredible step towards changing the way we deal with computer waste. Who knows, maybe the next step will be to device a whole new model for computer sales that generates less waste by creating more interchangable parts; rather than throwing out the whole machine every 1.5 years, companies can purchase core processing units that all machines use... distributed computing... but i digress.
This is the single most important piece of information, and they nearly swept it under the rug in the article. I saw a program about three months ago on one of those TV "news" magazine shows covering this problem.
The used PCs being "recycled" are essentially shipped to third world countries. Peasants there then melt down the boards to "recycle" them. They essentially grab the parts that have resale value and let the other parts seep into the environment.
The video on this program was disturbing, to say the least. A huge junkpile of cases and monitors, everything covered by the soot of the burning fires melting the boards... and the people doing all this completely unprotected in any way. Not even masks. The ground around the entire site had been poisoned beyond any possible near-term use.
This program interviewed a clean recycler in the SF Bay area that said the costs of recycling locally in accordance with California environmental laws was very expensive but that this particular outfit never shipped anything overseas.
Basically, this has to be paid for somehow. Right now we're paying in environmental capital in third world countries. If we want to recover that, then the payment needs to come from the profit margin of the machines, the consumers' payments, or the government (taxes). Your choice.
He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
"Sort of like a bottle deposit, but you don't get the money back"
So in other words, it's nothing like a bottle deposit.
"when life gets complicated, I like to take a nap in a tree and wait for dinner" - Hobbes.
The New York Times had an interesting article a few months ago about the fact that most PCs "recycled" in the US are shipped to Asia, where the valuable metals are stripped out while the rest are left to contaminate the ground and water.
1 EF83E5E0C708EDDA80994D8404482
I think the article can be purchased here:
http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=F509
but I have not paid to view old NYTimes articles yet, and so can't be sure.
(Someday soon I will. Just not tonight.)
it's a toss up between styrofoam and paper though.
its a trade off between paper using 10 times more BTU's to produce a paper cup than styrofoam cup. And having something that will break down and can be recycled.
> You could drive a car into this machine they
> have and it would be able to recycle it.
(grind grind grind) In this bucket, the metal. In this bucket, the plastic. In this bucket, the body parts. In this bucket, the glass...
"Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
Given a choice between styrofoam or mercury and cadium, I'd take styrofoam
Yeah, Minimata disease (mercury) and "itai-itai (cadmium) are horrible diseases.
Don't forget the lead either - the glass in monitors is up to 40% lead.
Spent computers really are bad news environmentally.
apparently, you burn less fossil fuel over time if you "dig more oil out of the ground to make new plastics from scratch" than you do in "melting down old plastics to make new plastics".
Maybe we should make more out of paper than plastic? Much can be done with even recycled paper.
I'm not one to care too much for "the cute fluffy bunnies", but I find many things wasteful. And in the tradition of hackers and punks (I'm neither, but admire both) I think that waste is bad.
Thus I take canvas bags to the grocery store, and use plastic bags obtained elsewhere to dispose of my trash. My coke I buy in Aluminum cans, and my beer and wine in glass bottles. (which I recycle in the convenient bin in the basement)
It just makes sense to me. As does this recycling fee. You know they'd only apply it to complete systems. That's the majority of what's sold. And the amount of pollution it would prevent would be extrordinary. PCs are something that middle-class families in the States replace every 2-3 years. I say let'm pay an extra 5% on their PC purchase; it'll save more than that in landfill cleanup costs later on.
As I understand it, there are enviromental nasty stuff in several of the components that constitute a typical pc. So pc's aren't so easely, and inexpensive disposed of.
So there is a problem.
A short digression:
Almost all enviromental pollution are caused because, those that pollute finds it cheaper to dump their pollution where others must pay the bill, usually taxpayers or property owners, or just live with the consequenses.
Another factor regarding pollution, and its cleaning up, is, that it is cheap to pollute, but expensive to clean up. And since most pollution is done with a economic motive, those that pollute, rarely pays the bill.
So I believe, that economic incentives, like enviromental fees, is a good way to reduce pollution (which may benefit us all), is fair (since it should payed by those causing the pollution, not by the public at large), and most importantly; may cause a shift from manufacturing and consuming enviromental harmfull stuff, to, at least, lesser harmfull stuff.
Back to the topic:
So if such a fee should be imposed on pc's, it should be done in such a way, that it "hurt" components, that are the most envorimental damageing (eg. cadmium etc), but not those who aren't.
Lets suppose CRT's are enviromental nasties, so lets "fee" them. But if some new CRT technology is not, remember not to leverage a fee on that.
Or else there will be no economic incentive to change behaviour. It is important to keep that goal in sight.
On most motherboards, there sits a tiny battery. I really don't know whether it is enviromental damaging or not, but lets assume it is, but a slightly more expensive battery technology is not.
One can shurely predict, that all motherboard manufactures will use the polluting but cheap solution.
But if the polluting solution becomes more expensive by fees, all the manufactures will turn on a dime, and start using the more enviromental friendly, and cheaper solution.
Eg. At least older Compaq pc's had ATA-IDE cables, that were way shorter than the industri standard.
Alledgely this was because, that when somebody really produces something in bulk, it pays of to save even a few yuans per produced unit.
Maybe you should just have to pay for it when you throw it away.(Not the item - the recycle fee).
I'm all for conservation. But why pay for an item to be thrown away, when you buy it(new)?
...is to encourage manufacturers to develop PCs that can be efficiently recycled. If someone figures out how to build a PC that can be recycled for less than the deposit amount and makes a profit, cool, the system works.
Same idea behind the European car recycling deposits. It's more-or-less the same market principle behind the pollution credits program President Bush announced today, which is based on an existing successful program.
Personally, I think this is great. I mean, while I don't exactly relish having money tacked on to my computer, I'd rather pay $25 now than be drinking leaked chemicals down the road.
Some of you Germans can verify me on this, but I understand that in Germany they've got a law that forces venders to take back packaging and recycle it (not allowed to incinerate/dump it). This has taken down their excess waste a lot. I'd love to see that be put into place - think how much foam and plastic crap comes with a moniter, much less with a computer (especailly if you put it together yourself and buy everything seperately). Less solid waste is always a good thing.
It didn't work. Maybe they caught on.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Then maybe we need to set up a recycling system that makes sense ... one where if you pay for recycling with the purchase of an item, you get to recycle it without paying it all over again.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Maybe we should have a better place to throw them. If we're going to pay a recycling fee, then they should use the money and set this up. Besides, I just take my computers apart. I use the parts for various things.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
The only way, and I do mean the only way, to successfully implement recycling of anything is to require manufacturers to use recycled components.
If you did that, the private sector would find a way to get old computers. If they had to buy them from you, they'd do it. You'd see the same fee of about $25 per computer (since this would raise costs) but you'd know where your money was going.
Unfortunately, in the new global economy, this is not possible, since the US guvmint hasn't the power (well, it has the power to crush anybody, economicaly if not militarily, but not the wherewithal) to enforce such a requirement on foreign manufacturers (it'd be restraint of trade, or somesuch.)
We end up dumping the stuff in Asia where it's manufactured, anyway. From whence it came, it returns. The best we can hope for is that the governments in Asia will do the sensible thing and start recycling it. Unfortunately, the PRC doesn't seem to be moving in that direction.
Anything we do in the states, that doesn't effect what happens during the actual manufacturing process (which happens over there) is just to make ourselves feel better (except in this case it is a cynical ploy to avoid regulation) it accomplishes nothing.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
This type of recycling fee is already built into the cost of rechargeable batteries.
http://www.rbrc.org/licensee/
According to this web site, 90% of rechargeable battery manufacturers are members of this organization. They recycle the batteries and they are funded by the battery makers, which means that a recycling fee is built into the cost of any battery bearing the RBRC symbol.
old RAM fits wonderfully on a keyring.
Good idea... how about we make all taxes voluntary? That way people who want to support their government can do so, and people who don't give a rat's ass don't have to.
Oh yeah, because IT WOULDN'T WORK. If we're going to be serious about getting something accomplished, it has to be made hard to avoid. Otherwise, enough people would "free-load" on the system to make it ineffective.
Interesting note - apparently, you burn less fossil fuel over time if you "dig more oil out of the ground to make new plastics from scratch" than you do in "melting down old plastics to make new plastics".
Assuming your recycling plant is getting all its power from fossil fuels, of course. In a sane world, we'd also be working on switching to renewable power sources. Once that is done, recycling would take no fossil fuels at all, just lots of sun/wind/waves/etc.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Because that way it is certain that you do pay for the recycling fee. When the time comes to get rid of your old machine, you want to have an incentive to recycle the machine (i.e. a deposit refund), not an incentive to bury it somewhere (i.e. a recycling charge). In this way we can avoid spending $$$ on "recycling enforcement" trying to watch everybody all the time to make sure they recycle properly -- if they can get money back by recycling, they will do it on their own! (hell, even when they don't, you'll have other people going through the garbage to pick out the PCs and get the deposit money)
(Note: the above assumes that you actually do get a deposit refund when you recycle your old PC... from the article, it's not clear that is the case. But it should be)
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Here's what you do...take your old system, the one totally devoid of anything you may possibly ever use. After dark, set it outside beside your car near the trunk. Arrange it to look like you just took it out of the trunk, set it down and forgot to carry it in. It will most likely be gone in the morning. If not, just leave it there a day or two, eventually someone will make it disappear.
A while back there was a story on The Screensavers,(I looked I can't find it) where someone took a case filled it with concrete, and set it on their front porch. As I recall it sat on his porch for about 3 days, then it disappeared during the night. They found it about 3 blocks away, in a ditch.
people like me might be the cause of that (though i live in california... just people *like* me)
;)
you see my blue recycle can does get the garbage segregated for it, i do my part, i throw all my paper and plastic in there. same for my green yard can, with grass clippings and leaves.
but when it comes to those allmighty beer cans, i haul a van full down the street every couple weeks and get some cash for em, even manage to cover the cost of my whole garbage bill per month off em...
Note: i sure have to spend a WHOLE lot on beer to accomplish this "free garbage service", but it sure is fun
No, having everyone pay for the actual costs is the answer. For the "good people", it makes little difference, since they would have paid the recycling fee in either scenario. For the "other people", it makes sure that they have an inncentive to recycle.
having a 5c bottle tax is just fine, most people don't bother to collect that even when they do recycle em. but $30 is something altogether
Well, let's see... a bottle of soda is around $1.25 around here, so a 5 cent deposit is 4% of the purchase price. If your new computer systems costs you $750, then $30 is... 4% of the purchase price. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
I don't think this model precludes a "capitalist" model, but the waste disposal corps client would need to be the PC vendor, and not the customer.
Linux boxes don't go obsolete because they get incrementally upgraded, and the old parts are kept for emergency repairs or recycled into units for friends or schools which, because even a 486 runs a decent Linux Webserver, don't end up on the curb like M$ OS idiot boxen. M$ OS users also upgrade incrementally, but toss the old parts, and by about when they've replaced most of the box they upgrade the OS. So put the tax squarely on the M$ OS license. Further two social goods at once.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Touche. :^) However, I think there is a difference... in this case, there is a good chance that the up-front recycling deposit would be both enforcable and fair to the consumer. In the mp3 case, there is no reasonable way to keep people from copying any mp3 they like, so we might as well fall back to a voluntary system that has some chance of working and also provides significant benefits for the consumer.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Classic article
http://www.uoe.dk/csworld/security-.html
Real Computer security
what was that about plastic bad for the environment? and how come I actually see more and more plastic being used?
....... modularity in hardware is in order.
maybe improvements in the way electronics, such as computers are designed and used is in order.
Rather than building in obselesence (sp?)
"....Same thing here. I'd gladly pay a few extra dollars of tax money for the option of putting the old computer beside the blue box, or even pay a few dollars to get it taken away knowing its going to be reused.
But if you _force_ me to pay directly, without any direct benefit to me (and not seeing my computer in a landfill is not a tangible benefit to most anybody), you've made me your enemy. I don't take being forced to do anything very well when it doesn't harm anyone else, and neither should you!..."
1st you say here its better to finance recycling through hidden taxes.
"...I believe this is the reason the EU is having a hard time applying this idea to cars? Because people are tired of paying hidden taxes to support a bunch of soft-hearted-and-headed green thumbs?..."
Now you are saying its bad to pay for recycling with hidden taxes.
Make up your mind.
Its just a matter of throwing the household garbage in the right bin.
The rectangular black bin for bottles 'n cans.
The yellow wheelie bin for paper 'n cardboard.
The green wheelie bin (or compose heap) for garden refuse & foor scraps.
The grey bin for everything else.
The grey bin goes out once a week, the green bin with it every fortnight, the yellow 'n black bins every other fortnight. The black bin is designed so it can sit inside the yellow bin for transportation. So it just means wheeling out 2 bins one night a week instead of 1 bin.
Doesn't matter, there were some good comments in this thread about the matter:
California Considering Recycling Fees on PCs
StarTrek.org Free Webmail
It doesn't make sense:
I would expect to get *paid* to recycle something. Getting paid for recycling means that the effort which went into recycling has value to society - when you do something that creates value for society, you expect to get paid.
When you do something that costs the society resources, you expect it to cost you something. Now, if it *costs* the consumer money to get the computer case recycled, it means that it costs more resources to recycle the case than what the product produced as a result of recycling is worth.
Which means that, on the balance, recycling *costs* the world resources. Which means that (in this case at least), recycling is a bad idea.
The other explanation is that the consumer is providing a subsidy to a company somewhere in the food chain...
Here's a link to their general recycling program for laser and ink cartridges and PC hardware: http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/community/environment/rec ycle/index.htm.
HP is a bit expensive - to take a single PC, monitor and inkjet printer they'll charge US$59. For more than 10 pieces (say 5 old PCs, 3 old monitors, and 3 old printers) they have a custom quote page, so I assume prices get lower from there.
fencepost
just a little off
this is exactlly what i was talking about. that machine that HP has costs more than the product it produces (sorts) is worth. and just throwing the product away is hazardous. so we ship it.
now they are going to make me pay for the difference of operating costs and value of product. that is NOT fair. i am all for preserving the earth and shit, but companies just can do this shit. it is the same thinking that lets sports team TAX their state, so they can buy a new stadium. they are a PRIVATE business funded by public tax money. why doesn't my business get tax funding?!
again: america is retarded.
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E