Slashdot Mirror
Texas Makes Green Computing Mandatory
athloi writes to mention that Texas legislators have passed a bill that would require computer companies to provide free recycling services to their customers for hardware purchased. "The bill (HB 2714) requires computer manufacturers to provide a "reasonably convenient" recycling plan that requires no additional payments from consumers. Dell and HP provided some model legislation that was used as the basis for the bill, which will only affect computers purchased for personal or home business use, but it could still encourage manufacturers to adopt efficient recycling programs that might then be applied to all machines sold."
I guess that just means prices for new computers will go up $50 or so, and recycling services are, as promised, free.
Companies might even see a better profit margin unless recycling is also forced upon consumers.
Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
Why single out computers?
I mean, what about all the other appliances that tend to hit landfills, such as refridgerators, dishwashers, washers&dryers, televisions, radios, etc...?
With the newer controls and electronics many of these contain, I would tend to argue that there aren't any materials found in computers that aren't in these.
I think that Dell's got a cheap recycling program figured out(ship them to china?), and is trying to use this to muscle out the competition, which can't arrange disposal of old machines as easily.
Then there's the whole issue of what happens if the retailer is out of business when the customer goes to recycle his or her computer...
I don't read AC A human right
Are smaller system builders considered "manufacturers"? That would explain why the bill got so much support from HP and Dell; it raises the cost of doing business.
Dell and HP provided some model legislation that was used as the basis for the bill
I'm not naive--I know it happens all the time, but I still get the shivers every time I read things like this. Am I the only one uncomfortable with the concept of corporations drafting laws?
I wonder what our country's founding fathers would have thought of the newspapers of their time reporting "This bill, drafted by the Honourable East India Company, and passed by Congress..."
Hey, we *need* those plants to provide surplus generation capacity for the next time there's money to be made taking a plant (or five) offline in California and then selling them our electricity at triple the market rate!
0 1 - just my two bits
I hate to be cynical, but living in Texas, I know how things work here, and that is the most likely explanation. Texas government is about as business-friendly as it gets (that's regarded as a virtue around here by many people). Plus, you should ask yourself where Dell is headquartered, and the answer is Texas. Then you should also ask yourself where Compaq was headquartered before HP bought them, and the answer is also Texas. So, the world's two largest PC manufacturers have a big presence in Texas, and "coincidentally" those two companies just got the Texas legislature to pass a bill that makes life hard for their competitors.
Coincidentally, AMD and Intel also have a huge presence here in Austin, the capital city of Texas, and I guess they could've/should've opposed this on the grounds that stifling competition is bad for the industry, but there is no chance they would've for two reasons: fear of pissing off Dell and HP, and fear of looking like they're anti-environment.
From what I read, the California energy situation had more to do with Enron than with poor planning. When we've privatized something the public absolutely has to have and scarcity is profitable, scarcity is what you get. By design.
1) The environmentalism is environmental wacko ("Wind power? Those towers are ugly!")
2) Your competitors invest in technology but you don't
One of the problem the U.S. has is that we decided not to invest in battery/hybrid/flex fuel vehicles because it was considered too expensive. That would only have been a sound economic decision if everyone else made the same decision. But Japan did. So now, the only battery/hybrid/flex fuel vehicles are made outside the U.S. and U.S. auto-makers are scrambling to catch-up or they go out of business. This is a case where environmentalism and economies were 100% in line.
Same goes with power plants. You can't regulate power prices and refuse to build new power plants. That has nothing to do with environmentalism, it's just a stupid economic decision. And now that oil prices are on the rise, we see that building other forms of power plants is not only environmentally friend, but it is also becoming economical.
This isn't a case where California made the choice to be "green" -- it is a case where California, like much of the U.S. chose not to be green, and they are paying the price. But at least they don't have those ugly wind farms blocking the beautiful views.