British Columbia To Charge Recycling Fee

An anonymous reader writes "Next week the province of British Columbia will begin adding a recycling fee to new computers and TVs to pay for their free electronics recycling program. The list of what is acceptable for recycling is short, namely computers, printers, and TVs — you cannot recycle personal audio players or cell phones. What is unclear is whether the definition of 'desktop computer' includes self-built computers, and if so, their plans for adding fees for individual components such as motherboards, etc." The article notes that the recovered e-waste will not be sent to developing countries for processing. But one report says that the e-waste won't be recycled at all, but rather burned in a smelter.

Comments

Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Next week the province of British Columbia will begin adding a RECYCLING FEE to new computers and TVs to pay for their FREE electronics recycling program.

Re:Huh?

[XanC]

It's called Michael Moore logic. If the government provides it, it's by definition "free".

Re:Huh?

[iknownuttin]

It's called Michael Moore logic. If the government provides it, it's by definition "free".

I don't know about Moore (I've only seen "Roger and Me" and "9/11"), but many people have that same logic. I hear it all the time and when you try to explain to them that you really do pay for it from your tax dollars, they give this look that I can only explain by an example:
Go to a dairy farm and start talking to a cow. That's the look you get.

They are also the same folks who think that when they get a Federal Tax refund that they didn't pay taxes for that year.
Really, there are people out there who believe that! I thought it was just rhetoric from pundits, but it's true.

Re:Huh?

[SnapShot]

Good point, calling the recycling program "free" is incorrect. In this case it would be better to call it a deposit on the proper disposal of your electronics. If that $2000 you just spent on your laptop doesn't include the cost to dispose of it then you're basically just assuming welfare from your fellow citizens and/or your descendants to cover the cost of its disposal and cleanup.

Re:Huh?

[Ohreally_factor]

Exactly. What is important about this change is not the mis-use of the word "free", but the shifting of the burden to the purchaser, rather than to the tax payer. That's good policy. A tax funded system is better than nothing and in some cases it's necessary to do it this way, but on the whole, it's better to shift the burden to the purchaser/user. Also good policy is to not shift the burden to the recycler, who you are trying to encourage, not penalize.

The one troubling thing is about how they plan on disposing of the waste. A smelter? He who smelter, dealter.

Re:Huh?

[Mistlefoot]

"The one troubling thing is about how they plan on disposing of the waste."

Yeah. Destroy it.

I still use an older Compaq laptop (333mhz, 128mb of Ram) as a web server for a not very busy local sports league. It runs an Ubuntu lamp install and has a phpbb forum and about 100 unique visitors per day. Speed of the machine is never an issue.

I also use another old Compaq (233mhz, 192mb of Ram) as a web browsing machine. It's also useful for updating the webserver as all my code I change is done via text editors. When my main machine is being used for gaming or what-not this older machine always handles the browsing, email, or chatting fine.

My 70 year old father has another old machine - a P3 that he uses to print PDF's (horse racing forms). He does nothing else with it. He never touches it. I VNC in and output the PDF's to his printer every Friday.

I would be more than happy to see older machines recycled if that's what actually happens. Ever price 128mb or 256mb PC100 ram lately? I imagine it being destroyed instead of actually being recycled.

If machines were actually dropped off and dated and they allowed people to scavenge (even at a fee) and take what's good I'd like this more. Once a PC has been there for, oh, a week or two and no ones taken it's parts then destroy it. Because something is old doesn't mean it has no use. I would love to work at this recycling place because if it is like the other dumps in the area they would rather destroy stuff then let you take it - liability seems to be the reason........

Recycling should mean recycling, not destroying, but I suspect that not very much recycling will go on.

Re:Huh?

[_Mustang]

No, you right-wing retard, it is called common sense. If the government or anyone else provides it for no charge, it is by definition free. Mentioning that a good or service is free to the person receiving it does not imply that the good or service materialised out of thin air or is not paid for at some other point along the chain. I'm not trying to be inflammatory but frankly, with that kind of argument it seems you're more likely the retard than he.
You clearly have forgotten the purpose of government and the manner in which it is supposed to go about doing that purpose.
The basic premise of government is to form a collective which is empowered by "people" to run certain affairs on their behalf, right? And the manner of providing funding is typically through control of the land/air/sea/etc resources and of late - taxation and more taxation. That means that anything, ANYTHING for which tax moneys and government revenues were applied are paid services. Garbage collection, road work or that trip to the hospital - as long as I've paid my taxes then I've paid for those services. Kinda reminds me of my cell phone plan - they charge me for service monthly but I'm always invoiced a month ahead.. That means they have my cash in hand for a month before it is applied to the services it was billed as. And if I use less time you can be sure they do not credit me but heaven help me if I should go over my air-time allowances .
And don't get me started about road and infrastructure. Canadian gas has 50% tax added to the price under laws which speak of road and highway maintenance and such but which conveniently allows for the cash to go into general coffers rather than a road-related account system.

Oh - I checked http//dictionary.com and the most closely related definitions to this thread, of the word "free":
(Not ordered)
1. exempt or released from something specified that controls, restrains, burdens, etc. (usually fol. by from or of): free from worry; free of taxes.
2. provided without, or not subject to, a charge or payment: free parking; a free sample.
3. given without consideration of a return or reward: a free offer of legal advice.

Hmm, so far we're not doing so well. It is common record that if you don't pay your taxes then hello jail cell, and since taxes are the primary source of funding for government projects - number 1 clearly does not apply.
Well, they want a service charge added to fund this above and beyond the basic taxes I already pay - so number 2 is out.
As for number 3 - when was the last time any forward-looking project was undertaken by government without the idea of winning votes? I can't recall any instance of that.

So I see nothing here but proof of the old adage, "ain't no such thing as a free lunch"..

Re:Huh?

[mrbcs]

Here in Alberta, we call it Advance Disposal Surcharge. When you buy a new computer, tv etc, you get charged a fee to dispose of it later. This is brilliant. The stations will accept any electronics for free right now. This keeps all the old shit that hadn't had a surcharge charged, from the landfills. (payment of surcharge is not a pre-requisite to dispose of old equipment)

The collection stations then ship all this electronics to Calgary or Edmonton to be processed. (sometimes, if you work there or know someone there they will let you scavenge)Machines that are still viable are resold to computer dealers like me to be re-used.

Machines that are too old are stripped and the components are sent to the proper place to be recycled. Plastics get melted down, metals get smelted out etc. No, the system is not perfect, but it keeps the old tv's and computers out of our land fills.

Hopefully B.C. isn't re-inventing the wheel and they will have a similar system.

Re:Huh?

[epine]

You've just argued yourself into a puff of non-existence. If you state, rightly, that the concept of "free" (of charge) in the global definition is non-existent in practice, then the local definition of "free" is free to prevail linguistically, and the local definition of free is that there is no cost at the time of transaction (perhaps it was paid for ahead of time). Almost everything in life that initially appears "free" has strings attached. Even sex with your spouse.

The "out of thin air" definition of free has no use whatsoever except when applied to the gullible. Since the medium of television is built on the premise that all viewers are gullible, we're exposed to that definition a lot more than logic justifies. Nevertheless, in any serious discussion, the participants all understand that free always comes with a price.

Once upon a time hauling crap out to the local landfill was free. Only it wasn't free. Free was just a handy synonym for externalization of cost onto society as a whole. You don't have to posit government as a delivery mechanism to point this out. Perhaps the society decides to go light on government and the cost is expressed in reduced life expectancy from drinking really crappy water. Name your poison. Oppressive taxation is but one small slice on the dart board.

I thought the original post was more on track than your response. In the old days, the ultimate cost of all that "free" dumping at the landfill was left as an exercise to the dumpers and local population. With this new program, it's entirely clear who is picking up the tab (the citizenry through the delivery mechanism of government). That does not amount to some magical slight-of-hand in the semantics of "free". In my books, it actually amounts to a clarification.

Some people might prefer the old situation where in the muddle of who was finally picking up the tab, it was possible that government wouldn't be it: ideology before clarity. I personally prefer the new situation. If anyone in the private sector feels strongly enough about putting the government out of this business, please step forward with a viable plan. Only if the mechanisms of government guarantee monopoly profits? Ah, I thought so.

Re:Huh?

[Firethorn]

I suspect that newer "regular" machines (not power user boxes) use less power than they did back-when. Is that actually the case?

To an extent. They usually use about the same amount of power, but newer machines do far more with the power they do use.

For the previous poster - his website could probably be hosted on basic enterprise level machine with at least a thousand other small time websites. I wouldn't be surprised if you could host a hundred thousand with load balancing between five servers. Individual sites would be less likely to be slashdotted as a bonus.

Sure, it might use five times the power, but it's doing a thousand times the work. That and you don't have to worry about a ten year old laptop HD failing without notice.

People do tend to upgrade for a reason. Yes, we could do more reutilization - but after a point trying to deal with older, slower, no longer made or supported hardware isn't worth it. There are reasons why many companies will replace perfectly usable vehicles with new ones - It's actually cheaper to sell the old ones and maintain a limited number of models of vehicles. You don't have to train the techs in as many types of vehicle, keep fewer varieties of spare parts on hand, etc...

Re:Huh?

[the_womble]

The other problem with it is that by forcing the cost to be paid at purchase, rather than on disposal, it removes the incentive to re-use.

The best thing to do with an old PC is to try and find a new use for it (or sell it to someone who can use it). If disposal is free, it will, in many cases, become cheaper to simply let the government dispose of it.

not news

[ardiesr]

This fee is already charged in Alberta for the last couple of years. It was also introduced in Saskatchewan in February.

It could also soon be charged in Ontario:
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2007/06/12/425 4704-cp.html

Re:not news

[RealGrouchy]

It doesn't surprise me that the Ontario Government will want to do this, too.

Of course, whether it makes sense to do so will not matter to the Ontario government. What matters is it doesn't cost them anything, and it makes them look like they've done something for the environment.

Consider, for example, how quickly the Ontario passed a ban on incandescent lightbulbs after the idea was first raised in Australia.

- RG>

Re:not news

[canuck57]

This fee is already charged in Alberta for the last couple of years. It was also introduced in Saskatchewan in February.

While quite true. Why not do a complete job and have the prison system take ALL garbage, sort it into recycle. Aluminum here, paper there, biodegradable here, electronics there in stead of sitting on their asses for release date.

And cut yet another form of taxation. GST+PST+EST is getting tax nuts. Almost 20% not including excise. As it IS about TAXES -- they want more of YOUR money!

Not New

[pipingguy]

Alberta already has something similar for monitors and televisions.

How did they think it would be recycled?

[Mspangler]

"But one report says that the e-waste won't be recycled at all, but rather burned in a smelter."

But dropping it in a smelter is recycling. Junk goes in, refined metal comes out. Smelters do not run on solid fuel anymore, they can't grind up the circuit boards and feed them to the burners.

The organics will burn in the charge, the fiberglass will melt into the slag, the metals will dissolve into the melt.

I forgot how to separate the lead from the copper. (pyrometallurgy class was in 1988, and I went the hydrometallurgy route instead)

Now I'll have to look it up.

The pyro class took a field trip to Trail, neat place if you are into displays of brute power. Sometimes I miss mining. Phys met is so boring; did it corrode .005 in/yr, or 0.010? zzzzzz But it's what pays the bills.

Re:70 places to recycle in the province?

[topham]

Most of the population in B.C. is in the lower-mainland.

The rest is quite low density and, a side from a few hot spots, is quite spread out.

Even if they aren't covered by the program, or choose not to take advantage of it because of distance, etc, it won't be a significant impact.

California Has Done This

[DavidD_CA]

Since Jan 2005, California has been charging an E-Waste Recovery Fee for some time now. Whenever you sell something to a California resident that has a display (CRT/LCD/etc), you have to charge this fee and give it to the state:

    4-15 inches : $6
    15-35 inches: $8
    35+ inches : $10

The fee is not a deposit either, like you have on soda cans. If you take your CRT to the dump later, even if you can prove you paid that E-Waste fee, you still have to pay the dump to take your trash.

More Info: http://www.erecycle.org/

Why do they call it recycling....

[mark-t]

... When they don't actually recycle the product, but apparently only dispose of it?

Re:Why do they call it recycling....

[EraseEraseMe]

How do you think metal are recycled exactly? Does Superman come in and bend broken motherboards into brand new steel?

No, they're melted down and leeched into seperate metals.

Re:wanted: universal translator

[gobbo]

Ah, beautiful Trail, BC, industrial jewel of the soot-and-arsenic laden mountains.

Nightmare for vendors

[mauriceh]

Yes, we are a computer integrator/reseller in Alberta, and have had to charge these fees for a couple of years now.
Then Sask jumped on, now BC, and soon all the rest of the provinces.
But, and it is a BIG "BUTT":
We now have to collect separately for each province we sell into, report each month to each province, remit to each province
The paperwork for this equals one person-day per month for all the reporting and filing.
This is a classic example of what should have been done at the federal level, and now is more of a burden than a benefit.

Mod Parent Down

[p0tat03]

This is nothing but FUD. BC is 357,216 square miles and contains 4.3 million people (note: I did not verify the parent's numbers, but they seem reasonably correct from memory). On the other hand, California, Nevada, and Oregon put together contains 39 million people. That's almost a 10x difference.

Also remember, the population of Vancouver, Victoria, and the next 3 largest cities in BC total 2.8 million. That's 65% of the entire population of the province, with Vancouver comprising 2.1 million of the total alone. I'm pretty sure the recycling program exists THERE.

Given how dense Victoria, Vancouver, and its outlying areas is (after all, the whole region is walled in by mountains), 70 locations is not outrageous, and can in fact cover a LOT of people's recycling needs.

So take the "blatant thievery" and shove it, unless you have some real proof of a conspiracy to steal taxpayer dollars.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Just another "Fear Me!" article from the ignorant.

[GISGEOLOGYGEEK]

Everyone be scared! Everyone scream at the evil things portrayed in the article! ... Or, instead you can educate yourself.

Generally people have no clue what happens in the mining industry, how metals are actually extracted from the ground and refined. I LOVE it when I see people protesting the mining industry in general, while using their cell phones, full of metals, while wearing clothes that were made on metal machines, with their metal car or bike parked nearby. They have no clue. It's great fun showing them the irony of their actions.

This ignorant FUD article is no different.

If it wasn't for smelters, the computer parts being recycled would never have existed in the first place! but people read the headlines and just assume the worst.

What happens when you recycle a pop can? ... it gets melted down in a smelter.
What happens when your car is recycled? ... it gets melted down in a smelter.
What happens when to pretty much any metal product when it is no longer useful? ... it gets melted down in a smelter.

It's about time the same happened to computer parts.

The government of British Columbia used to sell surplus computers and monitors as scrap.

The news media here caused great embarassment to the BC government a few years ago when they exposed the fact that the scrap ended up in the shocking Chinese 'recycle' system we've all seen on TV ... where peasants smash and burn the parts in the open air of their villages and manually stir vats of acids filled with the metallic ashes to recover the metals, where they let all the chemicals run down the streets into the local soils and water sources.

So the BC government actually did something about it.

Smelting it here in BC in a controlled manner where emissions are regulated, where thousands of people will NOT have their lives greatly shortened by the process, where ground water, lakes, rivers, and soil will NOT be destroyed by the process, sounds like a much better system to me.