Slashdot Mirror
Fixing the Final Steps In the Recycling Chain
itwbennett writes "The only way to rapidly and cost-effectively devolve computer products is to know the composition of the products. But we don't, says blogger Tom Henderson. This industry — largely at the behest of COMPTIA members — pioneered bar coding schemes, asset tagging, and inventory control, and could now also add rapid product devolution to its list of credits. We need a taxonomy, a method to affix material markings, and a database access method that tells the devolvers how to make money. Do this and you could be a billionaire and a hero, says Henderson."
How about tagging the components with some sort of ultra-high intensity tungsten/rhenium/carbon chip that allows sorting (probably not RFID, but x-ray detection or such, forming a visible barcode internally), that can be melted down from within the metals/plastics and smashed in the fiberglasses/ceramics, and recovered/recycled?
Or forget about the complexities of a marking scheme that will only be found on a subset of dumped products, many of which will predate any mandatory scheme. Instead, how about analysing the trash on-the-fly? If only there was a cheap open source chemical analyser available...
Somewhat related, but not quite the solution is the Distributed Bill of Materials (DBOM): http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=924533 (and related articles); The DBOM tells the devolvers how to devolve a product and what the resulting parts are made of.
Do this and you could be a billionaire and a hero, says Henderson."
No, this kind of thinking is a result of the lone inventor myth. "If we just had a great idea, we'd be in milk and honey"
What needs to be done is obvious, and already stated. "a taxonomy, a method to affix material markings, and a database access method". Any decent DBA/programmer could design a scheme to do this. The real work is convincing corporations to go along, when there is no obvious quick return on investment. Who would be the first to put their company at a competitive disadvantage in a down economy? (Hard enough in an up economy) The billions that Henderson is talking about have to come from somewhere.
You could set up a company similar to UL labs, that would affix a golden seal to products that met these criteria, then get large organizations on board to set rules that they will give preference to products that have the seal. Not impossible, but the mountains to climb are political (corporate and government), rather than technical.
All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
I wonder if the biggest obstacles aren't political.
1. Manufacturers don't want competitors to know the ingredients.
2. They also want to keep ingredients from public and government scrutiny and oversight.
3. And as usual, everyone fights change, no matter how beneficial.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
The only way to rapidly and cost-effectively devolve computer products is to know the composition of the products
Nope. If you increase the market value of the products you are after, that is another way to make the process cost effective. So it's not "the only way". It's perhaps the most rational way given current commodity prices. I do predict that today's landfills will become the mines of tomorrow.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I'm asking not telling since my english is crap (first and only language btw). Anyway it sounds rubbish to me, the devolvers are having trouble devloving this stuff, we need a better way to devolve things!!
I really don't think the article should keep going on about 'devolving' - to devolve means to transfer power from a government/legislative body to a lower level body. It's got nothing to do with re-cycling or dismantling old electronics!
The article suggests that the problem is how to label the parts. That seems like the wrong question to me. If it were efficient to take the stuff apart then it would quickly become either automated or the people doing it would learn to recognize by appearance which parts are made of what in each kind of appliance.
Isn't the real problem that the electronics are too hard to break up? In some devices it is nearly impossible just to get to the battery - and the devices are purposefully made difficult to disassemble. Making them easy to disassemble to separate out the various materials would make recycling much easier. I don't know if there is money to be made by persuading electronics manufacturers to incorporate this into their designs, but it would sure help the environment and the long-term sustainability of electronics manufacturing.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
Global Resource Corporation (archive.org) had a neat microwave technology to liberate propane and diesel from solid plastics. This invention would be very helpful for refrigerator and electronic recycling, because burning plastic on wires to get to the copper releases a lot of hazardous gasses.
But it's too disruptive to the established energy sector, and they ran out of money. For example, everyone knows the best way to mine coal is to strip mine by taking the top of a mountain off, not drilling a hole and lowering a microwave tube. I wonder what happened - maybe Wall Street torpedo'd them. ?
There are some videos on Youtube that demonstrate the prototype with chunks of used tires...
Oh well.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
Bah never mind, this is about computer recyclilng... not actual final FINAL steps of recycling.
That's pep!