Slashdot Mirror


Inside the Fake PC Recycling Market

snydeq writes "OSNews' Howard Fosdick reports on the fake recycling market — one in which companies exploit cheap shipping, inexpensive labor, and a lack of safety and environmental law to export computers and other e-waste to China and Africa where it is 'recycled' with a complete lack of environmental and safety rules. 'This trade has become a thriving business. Companies called "fake recyclers" approach well-meaning organizations — charities, churches, and community organizations — and offer to hold a Recycling Day. The charity provides publicity, legitimacy, and a parking lot for the event. On the designated day, well-meaning residents drop off their old electronics for recycling. The fake recycler picks it up in their trucks, hauls it away for shipping, and makes money by exporting it to Chinese or African "recycling" centers. Nobody's the wiser,' Fosdick writes. Of course, the international community has, in fact, devised a set of rules to control e-waste disposal under the Basel Conventions, but the US — 'the international 'bad boy' of computer recycling — is one of four countries that have not ratified and do not adhere to these international agreements."

31 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. Meh by sznupi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Market will sort it out.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Market will sort it out.

      umm... not when there is a price distortion due to a negative externality coupled with information asymmetry.

    2. Re:Meh by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Shhh. Those are just a commie conspiracy to discredit the Free Market. Any failure by the real world to precisely replicate the predictions of an Econ 101 student with a B or better average is caused by government meddling and could be solved by cutting taxes.

    3. Re:Meh by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As opposed to what? Before people were "forced" to recycle? When old equipment almost always ended up in a landfill or was dumped into the ocean, as New York used to do with all of their trash?

    4. Re:Meh by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The landfills are full. They're overflowing, and it's getting into the groundwater. We're also using much higher amounts of fascinating and previously very expensive toxins such as mercury and chromium in the manufacture of household goods, and creating fascinating and useful toxins such as PCB's (which are mostly outlawed in the US but heavily used in manufacturing in India).

      This isn't merely a "recycling to preserve resources" issue, although copper, gold, platinum, and varous rare earths used in transformers have become increasingly expensive and valuable to recycle. It's a poison control issue, and while humanitarian concerns make it wise to consider the fate of those who handle these toxins, it's also important to remember that they grow food we buy in some of these places, and they will _lie_ aobut the toxin levels of what they sell.

  2. No surprise... by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course here in my home province, they recently added a ECE tax which is supposed to before recycling home electronics and such. Which means that the money goes right into the coffers. Of course I can never find anywhere to drop off my electronics, except at the same places which already did it.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  3. 60 Minutes did this story in 2008 - pointer by clem.dickey · · Score: 5, Informative

    Pointer to an old 60 Minutes story on just this. The U.S. recycler in question was shocked that his dumpster-full of CRTs ended up in China.

    1. Re:60 Minutes did this story in 2008 - pointer by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Was he also shocked! shocked! that gambling was occuring in his establishment?

  4. For the record by TwiztidK · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I held a computer and electronics recycling day in my town. We were able to collect over 50 used computers and many other things. Several of them were refurbished and given to people who could use them, but the majority had to be recycled. We didn't ship them to China or Africa either. I'm sure that there will always be people out there trying to game the system to make a quick buck, but there are a lot of people who are just trying to help out (by reducing "ewaste" in my case).

    --
    Sent from my iPhone 5
    1. Re:For the record by TwiztidK · · Score: 5, Informative

      It went about 5 miles down the road where me and several volunteers helped disassemble, sort, package, and ship the components to somewhat local refineries to complete the recycling process. None of it even left the tri-state area during the whole process.

      --
      Sent from my iPhone 5
    2. Re:For the record by 400_guru · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I pick up several thousand pounds a year of old computers from my customers. My family and I pull them apart and recycle as much as possible. Batteries, Steel. Copper, Aluminum are the primary money makers. By weight at least 95% gets recycled and once broken down is worth money. Last trip to the local recycler was several hundred dollars US. Some lessons learned from this activity. 1) IBM is the very best at building computers that come apart. Few different fasteners mean fewer tool changes. Most materials also separate quite easily. Even their hard disks come apart quite easily yielding their substantial aluminum content. 2) Compaq was pretty good at this as well. 3) Dell PCs are HORRIBLE to get apart with nothing standard whatever. Every model different, every fastener unique. 4) No matter what the brand, power supplies are the worst. Lots of copper and aluminum in them but also lots of capacitors - the number one contaminate in PCs. 5) There is a lot of labor in proper recycling so once old enough to get a real job the kids lose interest quite quickly. Better design for recycling would make the process much more cost effective.

      --
      There are two rules to success in life: 1) Don't tell everyone all that you know.
  5. Re:Of course we haven't ratified... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please, sir, cease your slander. The invisible hand is colour blind. It would be just as happy for white and asian children to wallow in toxic waste, assuming it is profitable enough. Only a racist, and one with insufficient trust in the market, would apply affirmative action policies to the booming "informal disposal" market...

  6. Money by lymond01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was talking with one of my friends who works in the oil business. He was going off how the cleaner energy technologies will never really take off while oil is 3-5 times less expensive. And sadly, I have to agree: efforts are, of course, being made but considering the amount of money that could be put towards green energy (or nuclear fission or fusion), it's very half-hearted. Cheaper is better in our society. And that applies to NIMBY projects too. It took about 20 years for people to really come around to attempting to recycle anything on a regular basis. It surprises me not in the least that people are tossing environmental concerns for cash.

    I hope, someday, that we will learn that protecting our natural resources are part of the cost of doing business. Right now we're like a bunch of teenagers wondering how trigonometry is ever going to be useful in our lives. So we're being taught, but we're not really taking it in.

  7. Re:Use an active volcano by JustinRLynn · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Should We Throw Hazardous Waste Into Volcanoes?". Heavy metals and nuclear waste would just get dispersed into the atmosphere.

  8. Looks like the BAN site rewards hypocrites. by jcochran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Given the fine article here, I see that China is one of the bad boys in actually doing bad stuff, yet the http://www.ban.org/country_status/report_card.html web site has China listed as "Excellent". So something seems more than slightly fishy. Reading again, the site merely rates how the countries in question perform lip service to a set of 4 treaties and totally disregards how the countries actually act regards limiting pollution.

    Sorry people, but this is a prime example of actions speaking louder than words.

    1. Re:Looks like the BAN site rewards hypocrites. by Kreigaffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is one of the things people usually overlook when bashing America.

      We rarely sign on to treaties and accords and fail to honor them; more often, we fail to sign on yet still follow the rules as if we had.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
  9. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Pick more than just one! by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Informative

    'This trade has become a thriving business. Companies called "fake recyclers" approach well-meaning organizations -- charities, churches, and community organizations -- and offer to hold a Recycling Day. The charity provides publicity, legitimacy, and a parking lot for the event. On the designated day, well-meaning residents

    ...who figure that one big pile of garbage is better than two little piles of garbage, bring in perfectly-functional equipment and sing it with me the next time it comes around on the guitar.

    You can get anything you want at Natalie's Restaurant. (The punchline, half a decade later, is that the 21" CRT I salvaged from a dumpster still works, yet I've gone through one LCD monitor due to a failed inverter and a lack of easily-available spare parts since then.)

    The only thing I've noticed in the five years since I wrote that parody is that it's getting increasingly hard to find surplus equipment these days. Product lifecycles are shorter, so consumption isn't reduced. It's sure as hell not getting reused. And it's only getting "recycled" in the sense that it's being dumped into the homes of people so poor that they melt solder off printed circuit boards over an open pit fire.

    Recycling hardware for which you have no further use is a good idea, but if you're going to recycle your old electronics, do some research and find an organization that's doing it right. ACCRC turns the scrappy scrap into scrap, turns the interesting scrap into art, and the non-scrap into computers that go directly to people in its own neighborhood.

  10. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did the author of this article, just blame the US, for the fact that China and Africa allow their citizens to poison the environment and dump hazardous chemicals into the water ? He should stop buying computer equipment, or call the African government with his complaint.

    1. Re:Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...or call the African government with his complaint.

      I'm sure the President of Africa will be very interested to hear this complaint.

    2. Re:Anonymous Coward by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Funny

      He emailed me quite recently, so I know for a fact he a is pretty approachable and down to earth fellow. His English is not very good though.

  11. Fake PCs? by DWMorse · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who recycles fake PCs? I've seen them at Ikea and other furniture stores, I suppose most of them ARE cardboard...

    --
    There's a spot in User Info for World of Warcraft account names? Really?
  12. Linux could save the World by AnonymousClown · · Score: 4, Interesting
    One of the reasons these computers are being chucked out is because they can't run the latest software - Linux is just as bad. You have to upgrade the OS to make it secure because after a while, the OS isn't patched for vulnerabilities. ex: I had a machine with RH 8 on it and I wanted to upgrade to Fedora for a more stable release and I couldn't because, the processor being too and lack of memory. I couldn't find any memory for the damn thing - at least reasonably priced (New memory is actually cheaper than the old shit)

    Windows will continue to bloat up and so will Apple's OSes. Why doesn't the Linux community make a nice slim and secure distribution that will run on a 486/586 with only 256M of memory - or less?

    I've been thinking about a non-profit for recycling these machines. Many many poor people could use them.

    --
    RIP America

    July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    1. Re:Linux could save the World by natehoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why doesn't the Linux community make a nice slim and secure distribution that will run on a 486/586 with only 256M of memory - or less?

      Some of the lightweight distros, like Peppermint, Puppy Linux, and several XFCE-based distros, would run quite nicely on a 486 with 64MB memory. If you insist on a heavyweight distro like Fedora, you've already made your feature/performance decision, and you haven't chosen performance.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:Linux could save the World by Neoprofin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The sad reality is that honestly, there isn't any market for equipment beyond a certain capacity. Yes there are people with no computers, but they actually don't want 486s, in the developed world it's because a 486 still can't run modern software or provide what they consider a satisfactory experience, in the developing world it's frequently a matter of infrastructure. People with no drinking water and no stable electrical grid don't see 486s with Linux as a solution to their problems and frankly with the glut of PIII/Athlon machines that were long since throw into corporate storage closets there's no point for even the stingiest of non-profits to buy up old 486 for charity because for pennies more they could have machines five times as capable.

      I work in electronics recycling and resale, and frankly we go through this every day looking at old CRTs and PCs that still function, but quite frankly no one wants them, and even if they did the expected lifespan (especially on monitors) is so short that one has to ask the question "We can recycle this responsibly now, or we can send it to someone for 1 year and pray that they'll do the right thing".

  13. Re:Not the free market... by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a fine example of the government fucking with the free market where the electronics would probably just be traded via garage sales and thrift stores for a few decades until technology improves to easily recycle them.

    People so ignorant and so determined to foist their "me, me, me, I, myself, mine, all mine, fuck you!" world-view onto everyone else should be exhibits in some sort of "museum of insanity" where researchers into mental disorders could at least get some use out of you.

    I mean, you really suppose that people would "trade via garage sales" all that junk which they actually pay money for to be hauled away into massive, monumental, all-consuming land fills that keep growing year after year around any major city in the developed world? Really?

    The natural state of affairs in the consumer distopia is to, get this, consume without any regard to the consequences. People buy plastic crap, they use it until it breaks (a period usually measured in months) and then they promptly throw it out, followed by a new purchase of cheap disposable crap. And this model is a pivotal element of all the so-called "industrialized economies". Recycling occurs in the fucked-up model of "free market" only if some material in the waste is somehow worth extracting, at a minimum effort possible, which is precisely why it is shipped to China and Africa where children can have the privilege of wallowing in toxic shit to extract traces of raw materials. That is an unregulated "free market" at work. It works as long as the children are disposable and dying of toxic exposure tomorrow beats dying of hunger today. "Freedom" of choice in the "free market", as long as it isn't spoiled by all these "evil communist gubmint" types trying to do meddle doing evil things like trying to stop impoverished kids from inhaling toxic fumes and mountains of toxic crap from growing. The glorious "freedom" to pollute as long as it is somewhere else then you, cause "you got yours and the rest should go get theirs", you mendacious fuck, no?

  14. ...and of course by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 4, Funny
    Lawrence Summers, back when he was chief economist for the World Bank, wrote and infamous memo where he said he'd "always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted, their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City" (verbatim).

    As his comments about gender and intelligence as President of Harvard demonstrate, the guy has a talent for sticking his foot in his mouth.

  15. Re:Governkment Meh by rsclient · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. "Regulations" are the mechanism society has for enforcing a common concensus. As a society, "we" decided that cholera was bad. The solution (alongside education and convincing, of course) is regulation: all houses in area "x" must have sewer connections and must not have an outhouse. And there's a team of people to take water samples. And there are regulations on how to test the water.
    2. Laws are created by congress. There's too many to talk all at once; the solution they and every other large organization in the world have picked is to make smaller groups. These groups are called "committee"s. Are you objecting to dividing into smaller groups and attacking problems in-depth? Or is your object to the word "committee"? Did you know the libertarian party has a committee?
    3. There are no "czars" in this government. Some people are more senior, and have more authority; other people are less senior and have less authority. Are you in favor of everyone having the same authority? Or do you object to the word "czar"? Heaven knows it's an objectionable word, but it's one that the media uses to describe otherwise boring titles.
    4. I don't understand your problem with agencies. One of the agencies, for example, is the Presidio trust (I picked them at random). Do you object to a group of people, experts in the Presidio, from managing the place? Or is your objection that this group of people has a common name, "The Presidio Trust". Would you be happier if we called them group 184? Perhaps you think that we should simply sell off this land -- does this mean that you think there should be no parks at all?

    Really, I don know why you got moderated as "insiteful". It sounds more like "thoughtless".

    --
    Want a sig like mine? Join ACM's SigSig today!
  16. Must see movie by cjjjer · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you want a good glimps into the whole recycling of electronics in 3rd world countries check out the movie Manufactured Landscapes. Some pretty incredible shit...

  17. Re:So what real and true PC recyclers are there? by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you have a FreeGeek near you, take it there. The Columbus one charge a fee of $10 per monitor.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
  18. Re:Recycling is extremely expensive by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everyone should know about paper recycling - it costs more to use recycled paper than new. The quality is questionable as well. The result is that most paper is dumped into an incinerator or a landfill by recycling centers because it is pointless to attempt to recycle post-consumer paper.

    Plastic bottles can be recycled... except if one tiny little bottle cap or ring gets into the mix the entire batch is worthless. Since this happens most of the time again plastic bottles are not generally recycled.

    Fortunately, this being Slashdot, you can make a bunch of off-the-cuff, bullshit claims with no support whatsoever, and bam! +5 insightful.

    Really, it's an excellent Slashdot-style karma-whore-post:

    1) Derides environmentalist/"green"/liberal ideas,
    2) Has an anti-establishment bent, with a "the people are stupid" twist,
    3) Heavy dose of smug superiority.

    You couldn't have played it any better. Kudos!

  19. Re:Alternatives? by arth1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have been seeing stories like these for several years. Although this situation is clearly undesirable, I have still to see anyone proposing a realistic alternative. The bottom line is doing proper recycling costs money, people do not want to pay.

    The realistic alternative is to force people to pay.
    Mandatory bottle refunds actually work, despite the dire warnings from the soda and beer industry, and fierce opposition from the reactionary right.
    Similar with wreck deposits on cars. Likewise, when car buyers are forced to pay $500 extra, and get that back when they turn it in, far fewer wrecks will be found at the bottom of a lake with the VIN filed off.

    We have governments and laws precisely because people are selfish bastards who can't be trusted to do the right thing unless forced. We can intellectually agree with many things, but when it comes to putting up, we aren't all that good at it unless forced with an incentive we can't refuse.