Report is Critical of US For Dumping E-Waste Overseas

coondoggie writes "In what may be the least astonishing news of the day, some major US companies who say they are environmentally recycling electronic waste — aren't. Rather more startling — they are dumping everything from cell phones and old computers to televisions in countries such as China and India where disposal practices are unsafe to people and dangerous to the environment. Controlling the exportation of all of the e-waste plops on the doorstep of the US Environmental Protection Agency which is doing a woeful job, according to a scathing 67-page report issued by the Government Accountability Office today."

Comments

Re:Other countries to blame

[Anonymous Coward]

The I'm-not-the-only-one-who-does-it excuse is just a shame.

Made in China, dumped in China

[Tyrannicalposter]

Made in China, dumped in China. What's the big deal?

Re:Made in China, dumped in China

[HuguesT]

Ruthless exploitation at both ends is the big deal.

Re:Made in China, dumped in China

[couchslug]

"Ruthless exploitation at both ends is the big deal."

Ruthless competition is how China moved into being an economic powerhouse. The pollution and body count for the US was pretty high too (and so long ago it is largely forgotten) but that was the price of "progress".

Re:Made in China, dumped in China

[hey!]

Ruthless competition is how China moved into being an economic powerhouse. The pollution and body count for the US was pretty high too (and so long ago it is largely forgotten) but that was the price of "progress".

That's the kind of argument that sounds attractive if you don't look too close. But it can be stood on its head with equal justification -- if not more.

Ruthless exploitation has been a permanent fixture of human civilization, and progress has not been its reliable result. I would argue then that ruthless exploiters are not creators of progress. They're parasites on progress. Exploitation in the time of progress is not something new, it's jut the old exploitation robbing a richer bank.

The dire predictions of economic disaster and stagnating innovation have not for the most part come true when society has stepped in to regulate abuses like child labor, food adulteration, inhumane treatment of workers. Rather, progress has on the whole accelerated.

Of course, progressive policies do hurt many exploitative enterprises, but they don't harm innovation. Businesses that require the ability to exploit people or the environment to thrive are fundamentally non-innovative. It's making money the old -- very, very old -- way. First you get some power (in this case capital), and then you look for somebody weaker than you to exploit, either directly or by leaving them holding a very expensive bag.

You can see the architectural proof of the antiquity of this business model in Europe. You find yourself a nice river valley on a trading route and you build yourself a castle to shake down everybody who wants to pass.

Re:Other countries to blame

[Koiu Lpoi]

You mean taking advantage of a situation removes all blame from you? You really think the US companies are dumping this waste without knowing full well what will happen to it? I doubt it.

Then again, we could have another Mattel-lead-paint situation, where they got it done for cheap overseas, without fully looking in to how bad the situation really was.

Re:Other countries to blame

[fabs64]

The US should however be responsible for the regulation of their own companies, ensuring that those companies correctly follow the law of their own country, and ensuring that those same companies do not attempt to deceive the general public.

Re:Other countries to blame

[MrBigInThePants]

Nice try.

Its the USA's waste, it is ultimately the USA's hands that are dirty. (metaphorically of course, the poor B'Stards that get trash dumped on their doorstep are obviously going to have dirty hands literally)

This is yet another example of green washing and corporates (in this case US ones) flushing our environment down the toilet for their own short term gain.

However, it is not just the US that engages in this crap. Lots of others do also! Even here in "green NZ", there are instances of "recycling" companies shipping recycling overseas to the more dodgy chinese outlets.
disclaimer: it appears that the majority of ours do the right thing however. (One retail chain even does it FOR FREE! Not to mention E-day www.eday.org.nz )

And these filthy buggers will moan and complain when regulation is forced upon them to stop being little piglets. Sheesh.

Makes one really feel sorry for mother nature to be honest.

Long term ramifications, even if you ignore morals

[GrpA]

So the US goes and allows (or perhaps worse, is complicit in allowing) it's corporations to keep up profits by dumping toxic products in other countries, where it kills and maims children (which is well proven) who struggle to live by supplying their lives to people who use them as slave labour to recover valuable materials from the dumped items through lethal practices, such as burning plastic from wire.

Then some people argue that if the countries allow it, why is that the US's problem?

And then twenty years later they whine like little babies that they can't understand why the survivors of this situation in those countries hate them so much and want to kill them and everyone else they see as a part of the "Western" world...

And they can't even blame the CIA this time. US corporations are doing a far more sinister job that the CIA ever did.

GrpA.

pressure at both ends

[Trepidity]

If party A is using a service provided by party B that you think is immoral, what's the right way to go about stopping it? Well, at both ends. You try to convince party A not to use the service, and you try to convince party B not to provide it.

In this case, you're right, these countries shouldn't allow unsafe waste-processing, and shouldn't allow importing of waste unless it can be safely processed. That's one place to put pressure. However it's also perfectly legitimate to put pressure at the other end: US companies shouldn't be exporting waste except to safe processing facilities.

Re:Long term ramifications, even if you ignore mor

[Anonymous Coward]

It's what has become the american way. A bit like when US government sends prisoners to countries that allows torture.

Re:Other countries to blame

[MrMr]

So we see countries competing on price of their environment. I understand that one may have ethical problems with the effects, but isn't the current capitalist dogma that corporations must behave unethically if that improves the short term stock price?

US is throwing away opportunity

[WindBourne]

That is a LOT of raw resources. There is oil, lead, silver, gold, copper, Lithium, etc. in these. There are a number of expensive raw earth materials. Sending it elsewhere is basically buying raw materials, mixing them, and then sending them to another country. Instead, we would do well to research what it takes to recycle these. If we can extract these for a low costs, then we can keep these material for future use. May sound hookie, but there will probably come a time when it will be expensive or difficult to get certain materials (say a cold war in which the items are located in russia).

This needs to be turned into an opportunity, not a problem.

Re:Other countries to blame

[Anonymous Coward]

"isn't the current capitalist dogma that corporations must behave unethically if that improves the short term stock price?"

I believe this is more the domain of the misinformed. Maybe you should go back to ideology school, and listen to a lecturer who actually is a capitalist, rather than go to the "Capitalism As Interpreted By Marxists" ones?

"Capitalism" as an ideology is quite like "socialism" as an ideology - it is immensely broad. Socialism does in my view not provide a clear answer to e.g. "Should we have a United Nations", and neither does Capitalism. You will naturally find people who profess to be either Capitalists or Socialists (without being strongly challenged as being something else) and who profess views on that, in either direction.

To take it to the extreme you take it is like saying "Patriotism involves placing a high value on your country, ipso facto patriots say that you should kill and dissect ten million children in poor countries and make the organs into an organ bank for the leaders of your own country. Not to do so is not patriotic." Exaggeration and hyperbole does not make for a good discussion.

On the specific subject - like Patriotism does not say anything about dissecting babies, Capitalism does not say anything about behaving unethically. Google is not behaving "uncapitalistically" for failing to sell person tracking services in every country where the law allows them to - they have simply chosen not to do it. Another element which the discussion here has failed to touch on - if people work in hazardous ways to dismantle electronics and ships, it's probably because they would not afford food or clothing for themself and their families otherwise. Which has to do with a lot of issues again, population size being one of them.

Re:Other countries to blame

[Kharny]

No freaking way.
There is no obligation to shareholders whatsoever apart from the "you can get voted of the board" one.

Many companies have made decisions to not go for pure maximum cash, but take other things into concideration as well.