Slashdot Mirror
National PC Recycling Plan Proposed, Again
ThinSkin writes "Two U.S. Representatives have proposed a bill to resuscitate a national recycling program for electronic waste, following the successful launch of two state-run programs. The bill would create the National Computer Recycling Act, and if approved by Congress and signed into law, would tack on a $10 administrative fee to the sale price of computers and monitors to fund recycling efforts."
Where (and how) do they draw the line? Desktop computer > laptop > palmtop > wristwatch > implant ... maybe it would be better to charge by mass or percentage value (a laptop != a Cray).
I'm not criticising goal of this law, just curious how an arbitrary line is drawn. Arbitrarily is my guess.
What constitutes a "computer"? And do parts count?
That the government is going to pocket the $10 per system, while people continue to throw the computers in the trash because it's not worth their time/effort? I know that's not how it's supposed to work, but that's likely what is going to happen here. Leave it to representatives to find more ways to tax us.
BTW, I have two old monitors that I plan on paying to recycle pretty soon instead of irresponsibly throwing them in the dump. But I don't expect the government to tell me I need to pay a fee upfront to do this.
And really how toxic are the components that are in printed circuit boards anyway? Yes they use lead in the solder (for the next yew years), but there really isn't that much used all together. Most of the toxic stuff is the chemicals that go into production of these boards.
This should be a state-by-state decision and a state run program. We do not need the federal government adding one more program to the laundry list of programs that they already don't run efficiently. For interstate purchases just settle on a standard where the state of the seller or the state of the buyer collects the fee. Heck, set it up like a deposit system. You pay $10 when you buy the computer and get $5 back when you turn the computer in.
Smaller goverments run programs better - more efficiency, less impact due to corruption (on a smaller scale corruption is easier to detect), and more people are able to keep watch and keep the program in check. The insight for a program might start on the federal level, but it's insane having 1/2 the programs that we have running at the federal level.
While you're at it, put deposit on recycleable containers (juice, beer, milk) for god's sake.. it pains me to go to a party in washington (and other states), and see case after case of empty beer cans thrown in the garbage. I understand that unintelligent people can't figure out the difference between deposit and another tax, but thems the breaks. http://www.container-recycling.org/glassfact/decli ne.htm
Gas tax, property tax, federal income tax, state income tax, social security tax, sales tax, tarrifs on goods we purchase, capital gains tax, federal telephone fees, vehicle registration (buy a nice car and now I can't even afford the plates on it) and the thousand other taxes that I cannot afford to pay.
I don't pay enough taxes. 50% of my income just isn't enough. Add it up folks. The government has $150 hammers to buy. Don't try and pawn the blame off on one political party, either. They're both guilty.
Most people have no clue what they're paying in taxes. The pump thier gas and wonder why it's so expensive but don't even see the 50 cent a gallon tax. They pay their mortgage and don't see the thousands of dollars they're paying in property tax because it's rolled into the payment. Their taxes are deducted right out of thier paycheck. I'm self employed, wait until you have to write out all these checks, it works. Are they going to tax motherboards when I build computers? This will be really good for the struggling IT economy.
Okay, I'll bite. Did you read the article, or are you just knee-jerking?
You've listed one or two problems with recycling, but haven't identified related problems with NOT recycling, nor have you considered of the appropriate scenarios which approach would have the most beneficial impact on the environment and economy. Sure, recycling uses extra power (hence requiring more oil/coal/gas) and will also release fumes into the air (from the power and the recycling process itself).
However, not recycling will require more mining and processing to produce more raw materials for new electronic components. Not recycling will result in computers and electronics taking up landfill space. Not recycling will add pollutants to the local ecosystems (eg lead from all solder points and reflow work, PCB's from many plastics, etc).
Which of these two scenarios is worse I cannot say, but it's not nearly as cut-and-dry as you try to make it.
Regarding reusing computers, you could still donate/sell your computer to needy people or willing consumers, just as you can do now. It's the dumping of your mobo and other cards into the trash that they're trying to reduce.
Plus, you say one can "always" find a second-hand market. What about when they're through with the product, maybe a third-hand market. But eventually nobody will want to use your screaming 10 MHz 386 box anymore. Who will recycle it then?
What exactly is the point of this new legislation if not a new way to add another hidden tax?
Well, from the article : "According to the bill, the fees would be used to fund government grants to agencies or individuals willing to recycle the used computers. A maximum of ten percent of the fees can be used for administrative costs, the bill says. The organizations have the right to recycle and/or resell the used PCs, which must be performed in accordance with [sic] in accordance with environmental health laws."
So there you have it, even you (assuming you're eligible under the program) would be able to apply for a government grant, funded by this tax, to establish reselling the used PC's. So if you're really so interested in ensuring used PC's go to second-hand markets then you should be praising this bill, not complaining about it.
make world, not war