HP Wants Manufacturers To Bear PC Disposal Costs

Makarand writes "The Mercury News is reporting that HP, which had earlier persuaded the Governor to veto an innovative e-waste measure, has changed its mind and is throwing its weight behind California's e-waste bill which would require PC manufacturers to bear the cost of PC disposal. This reversal by HP is close upon the heels of a a series of articles, carried by the Mercury News, detailing how the industry relied on cheap overseas labor to make a profits and at the same time distanced itself from the responsibilities of dead PC disposal."

Comments

Sure...

[lightspawn]

Anything that increases the barrier of entry is a good thing to a huge business competing with many small ones.

Oh, and can I please do one of those soviet russia lines again?

"In Soviet Russia, PCs dispose of YOU!"

Re:Sure...

[Jason Earl]

Well said. Here on /. we tend to think that HP competes with Dell and Gateway in the PC business, but the fact of the matter is that most PCs are white-box specials built by some guy in his garage.

HP simply is trying to cut the little guys out of the picture.

Sad

[Apathy costs bills]

The world's largest PC maker had persuaded Gov. Gray Davis to veto an innovative e-waste measure in October. Encouraged by HP's shift, state Sen. Byron Sher, D-San Jose, author of the defeated bill, resubmitted e-waste legislation Monday, the opening day of the new legislative session.

How sad is it that this hugely important piece of legislation is not swayed by the voters but rather by the money required to buy them.

It makes me ill.

raising barriers to entry

[havaloc]

The real reason they are doing this is because they want to raise the barriers to entry for new competitors. It doesn't require much of an investment to become a PC manufacturer (anyone can assemble the parts and sell them online out of their house). The HP/Compaq juggernaught can afford this, smaller manufacturers cannot.

Re:Recycling

[Waffle Iron]

Laws like this do nothing but raise costs for consumers.

But I don't want to pay hundreds of dollars per year to get filtered or bottled water because of toxic chemicals that leached out of your PC. You should bear the cost for its proper disposal.

Lifetime of PC components (reduce, reuse, recycle)

[Gothmolly]

Am I the only one who remembers PC components with a near-infinite lifetime? I just threw out, not because it died, but because my S.O. complained about the floor space, the very first Linux box I ever built. A 386sx with 8MB of RAM, ISA NE2000 clone NIC, and a 420MB Seagate disk. It still booted. The motherboard dated around 1990. Nowadays, it seems that stuff is replaced within a few years, NOT because of the endless MS upgrade treadmill, but because things simply crap out...
With a spate of recent PC component reliability problems (HD warranties, bad capacitors, etc.), we're shifting to a more disposable PC market (ever wonder why a whole system, incl. monitor, can be had for less than $500 ?)
The solution is to purchase quality components, avoid the "upgrade your HW or die" FUD, fight off PHBs who want shiny new P4-3GHz boxes, and instead concentrate on value.
THAT'S the solution to PC recycling costs - stop throwing so many away!
I'm still using a box I built from components thrown away by various clients, it suits me perfectly.

Re:Manufacturers bear the costs?

[ewhac]

Can't have the lifetime costs built into everything - that would make just about everything price-prohibitive.

Which is more price-prohibitive?

• Paying the disposal/recycling costs on your consumables up-front; or
• Paying them after the municipal dump heap has already poisoned your ground water?

Schwab

Re:Simple reason why

[Thanatopsis]

I can't believe the litany of responses on slashdot.

"It will put the white box manufacturers out of business, that's why HP is doing it"

"doubt that companies that get their PC's manufactured in Taiwan will have to pay the fee."

If you guys had bothered to read the article you would have noticed that recent coveraage over HP's practices in China were one of the motivating factors in making this decision. And yes it's much easier to pass a cost on to a customer when it's law. Let's remember that computers are highly toxic Your average 19 inch moniter have 9 lbs of leaded glass to prevent radiation exposure. Here's my favorite quote

aws like this do nothing but raise costs for consumers. Does anyone in their right mind think HP, etc., will simply eat the cost of this? No. The only reason they're doing it is because it's in California (home base of American liberalism), and if they don't, they'll be totally demonized by militant environmentalists and human rights activists playing on your emotions rather than hard, scientific data.

Hard scientific data?Here you go
Here

I mean really to be conservative, means to conserve. Being a conservative means that you actually want to leave a cultural and environmental legacy to your children. When's the last time you were able to go fishing in Silicon Valley and eat the fish? Certainly not in the last 20 years due to the high heavy metal content of the fish. Every state in the union has health advisories on the heavy metal content in rivers. Take a look here at the US governments own studies
>EPA Maryland for example. Notice that every ssingle pollutant is an industry pollutant. This even impacts the land of a Thousand Lakes (Minnesota)Fish Consumption

I love posters that can't think about the consquences of their actions. Once you have kids you begin wondering about the type of legacy you leave behind. I guess we can just tell our kids "Sorry the environment is toxic but some slashdotter wanted to save $35." Get real

I suspect competition elimination

[IPFreely]

I'll bet they (HP) specifically want it to apply to Bob's garage.

If all the small PC stores were required to put these requirements and costs in place, they would have a harder time competing with the big boys. This type of law would drive out a lot of the smaller competition. Keep the cost of business up and the barrier to entry high. Keep the smaller competition down and out.