Electronic Retailers In Europe Now Required To Take Back Old Goods

Qedward writes with this excerpt about the EU approach to E-waste: "A European Union law that will require all large electronic retailers to take back old equipment came into force yesterday. The new rules are part of a shake-up of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive and will gradually be implemented across the EU over the next seven years. Waste electrical and electronic equipment, or WEEE, is one the fastest growing waste streams in the EU, but currently only one-third of electrical and electronic waste is separately collected and appropriately treated. Systematic collection and proper treatment is essential for recycling materials like gold, silver, copper and rare metals in used TVs, laptops and mobile phones."

Comments

Yeah but

[rullywowr]

Who needs to upgrade? 64k ought to be enough for anybody.

All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

We just need to recycle them. Think of the markets being created here for reclaiming technologies.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

We just need to recycle them. Think of the markets being created here for reclaiming technologies.

As long as the fucking Chinese have a stranglehold on most of the rare-earth production then we're stupid not to recycle what we have.

Unless you really believe being beholden to and dependent on a foreign nation that really doesn't like us is a great idea. It's a bad idea. It's bad for national security and it makes no sense.

Re:All our resources are still here

[JDG1980]

As long as the fucking Chinese have a stranglehold on most of the rare-earth production then we're stupid not to recycle what we have.

Contrary to what the name implies, rare-earth metals actually aren't that rare. They are just found in very low concentrations, which means that refining them is energy-expensive and environmentally unfriendly. This is why most production takes place in China: they run coal-fired power plants (with lots of cheap coal to run them) and don't give a crap about the environment. We could refine rare-earth metals in the US or European Union from domestic ore supplies, but it would be much more expensive because the production would have to be compliant with worker safety and environmental protection standards. Should a true emergency situation arise, we could make ends meet.

Re:All our resources are still here

[O('_')O_Bush]

I'm not sure you can make the argument they have a stranglehold. Some estimates are that China has 95% of the world's rare earth metals on land, so unless you expect China to give away land to other countries, it really can't be faulted for having almost all of them.

But you could always get them from the bottom of the ocean, at considerable expense.

Re:All our resources are still here

[vlm]

We just need to recycle them. Think of the markets being created here for reclaiming technologies.

Lets look just at indium, a LCD screen component also a "rare earth". I'm having serious difficulty figuring out the "ore value" of indium. If anyone can do any better please post.

First of all lets not argue decimal places when I'm just trying to get a handle on orders of magnitude.

So Indium sells for about $200/pound. The cost has been cratering as the economy has collapsed (don't give me a quote for 2007, OK) Some site claimed the cost of indium to make a monitor is about 50 cents. So each monitor contains about 1/400th a pound of indium. Or if we assume a monitor weighs 10 pounds, the monitor recycling bin at my local health food store contains "ore" around 250 ppm

Some USGS website claims that pretty good indium ore (real ore, as in dug out of the ground) contains a couple ppm of indium. And the separation and refining process is extensive, complicate, elaborate, and expensive so you can't argue monitor recycling costs are worse.

So a recycle bin full of monitors, treated as an "ore" is a better source of indium than any mine on earth by about two orders of magnitude. That's before you recycle the copper, tin solder, aluminum frames, and plastic case.

Since we don't recycle LCDs for the indium, as far as I know, some numbers above must be wrong. Can anyone find the mistake?

Re:All our resources are still here

[thedonger]

Can anyone find the mistake?

LCDs are so 2008. Is there any indium in LED monitors?

Re:All our resources are still here

[ledow]

I think your assumption that it must be "easier" to get the ore out of a monitor than a raw material is probably very false.

Indium in what form? How processed? Combined with what? Integrated into what component? It's used to form electrodes in LCD screens, but does that mean that each pixel has a coating of it three-or-four coatings deep? And only covering that pixel? How many pixels on the screen to deconstruct to get to that? How much per pixel versus much work? What if it's in a form that now requires more energy to separate it (e.g. rust contains iron and oxygen, but you don't see a market for your old rust)? What if it's next to and mixed with other chemicals that you can't filter without health hazards, or where your process has to sacrifice one for the other?

All things that wouldn't affect raw-ore refining (Who cares what happens to the other rock in the ore? Almost certainly indium will be found among heaps of junk that's easily dissolved in acid and then disposed of etc.).

It's also a bit like "uncooking" food. Yeah, my cake has eggs in it. You can try to take the eggs out after I've baked it if you like. The collatoral damage, energy, precision, processing and just sheer time involved mean that it's just not worth it.

Now if we're talking discrete components, e.g. a PCB track made of gold or copper, or a magnet in a hard drive, then you can just extract those components, burn the residue and get some value if the raw material is valuable enough. Like people stealing catalytic converters for their platinum. Who cares about what else is there, the platinum alone is easily extractable and worth the effort.

Just because it says "indium", it doesn't mean "raw indium, in the same format as it was dug out of the earth in." And, as you point out, even extracting from 1ppm is extensive, complicated, elaborate and expensive when you don't CARE about what else is in the rock and you're not paying for the rock. Just multiplying it up by even 250 doesn't mean it's any easier to extract than from the raw ore.

By the same token, extracting gold from seawater should be incredibly easy and profitable. It isn't. Because gold ore is much nicer to handle and extract. Just because it's "1ppm" doesn't even mean it's spread as dust throughout vast rock formation. It might meant just that you have to dig up a mountain to find one block of it in a lump (e.g. diamonds, gold, etc.)

Re:All our resources are still here

[gl4ss]

it would be easier IF you could find a mountain of monitors stacked in a pile. then I'm sure it would be cheap and easy enough to take them with a truck to a separation line.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

Basic reading comprehension is definitely on the decline.

Yeah, but who would read Basic these days anyway? You should care more about the Python reading comprehension. :-)

Re:All our resources are still here

[jimbolauski]

The problem with recycling electronics is first that the process to remove the metals from the recycled oar will be different then getting the material from the ground, the cost to refine those materials is more expensive. It's no so simple to say just refine the precious metals from the pile of waste the refining process of one material might make refining the waste from another impossible so pulling out the gold and indium may not be possible. Then there are the environmental concerns too these products contain lead, arsenic, and mercury that must be handled properly along with the chemicals needed to refine the metals you have a lot of costs in managing the toxic chemicals. A material is only called oar if it can be mined and refined for a profit, it may well be that the electronics waste are considered oar for only one or two of the metals and that the waste from the 1st round of recycling has caused the material to no longer be considered oar.

Re:All our resources are still here

[fridaynightsmoke]

Can anyone find the mistake?

LCDs are so 2008. Is there any indium in LED monitors?

With the exception of a couple of OLED smartphones, 'LED' monitors and TV sets *are* LCD. The 'LED' part is the backlight, instead of fluorescent tubes.

Re:All our resources are still here

[noh8rz7]

Yeah but you can go to your indium mine and extract 100 million tons of ore tomorrow. As opposed to monitors, where you need to collect each monitor and ship it to whatever processing plant on palates. Much worse economies of scale!

Re:All our resources are still here

[vlm]

LCDs are so 2008. Is there any indium in LED monitors?

Indium "wets" glass so any screen with LCD pixel elements uses indium as some form of mask/plate/wiring. I'm not involved enough to know further details. Its not in the florescent tubes or LED or whatever your LCD screen uses for illumination. Even a reflective non-backlit display like an old fashioned wristwatch from the 80s would still have indium... I think.

From a marketing perspective LCDs with LEDs used to backlight seem to be marketed as "LED" whereas monitors using individual LEDs as pixels are marketed as "OLED" so a LED monitor uses indium but a OLED monitor probably does not.

Everything I've read about OLED is it really sucks, low res, short lifetime, UV fading, extreme cost. Maybe someday it'll be competitive and no one will use indum anymore.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. The indium is part of the grid of electrodes deposited on the glass of the panel. It's in the form of indium-tin oxide. It has nothing to do with the backlight.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

He obviously didn't think what you said was clear enough and he chose to add to it. Your bulldog attitude and your lack of detail (also a communication problem) are why his post got +5 and yours stayed at 0. His is the one with the actual information in it, and the more correct opinion (that if we couldn't get the materials from china, we could always make them here). In short, I can understand your frustration, but it's completely misplaced. Finish your thought and you won't have that problem next time.

Re:All our resources are still here

[cayenne8]

Screw it...I just set them out with the rest of the trash.

If someone doesn't come in the night and grab it (usually happens, there must be tons of dumpster divers in the NOLA area)...then, the garbage man conveniently hauls it away for me, and I have room to buy new stuff.

But seriously, I've almost never had an old computer or monitor (even the old, broken 21" Sun CRTs I used to have) ever last in the trash piled out front long enough for the trash guys to get. I guess you could call that a form of recycling.

Re:All our resources are still here

[TheLink]

So what we need to do is throw stuff into really large landfills until one day there's enough to mine (or the tech improves so that it's cheap enough, or things get expensive enough so that we're desperate enough)?

Re:All our resources are still here

[noh8rz7]

i'm not sure if you're trying to be snarky or not, but umm... yes, that's a good solution. to the extent that we can disaggregate the landfills into different piles, the better. bonus points if the landfills are in africa.

Re:All our resources are still here

[jpmorgan]

Yup. Most rare earth minerals came from the Mountain Pass mine in southern California, until the Chinese priced them almost out of the market in the 1990s.

Re:All our resources are still here

[ShanghaiBill]

Yup. Most rare earth minerals came from the Mountain Pass mine in southern California, until the Chinese priced them almost out of the market in the 1990s.

Then the Chinese raised their prices, and the Mountain Pass Mine reopened and is due to reach full production latter this year.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

So it is economically worthwhile for the west to recycle these thngs for these expensive atoms. Fair enough.

Why hasn't some greedy capitalist taken advantage of this if it is truly profitable? Why does there need to be a law?

No disasterbatory haterages of capitalism, please. Real observations only. Why?

Re:All our resources are still here

[ShanghaiBill]

and don't give a crap about the environment.

On a per-capita basis, China produces about one quarter the pollution that the USA produces.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Luckyo]

While true, that is because of level of life of average citizen as well as significant amount of people living in extreme poverty in China.

Pollution per production would be a far more fair assessment here, and in that regard China is unfortunately off-scale.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

If they are so valuable then don't toss them into the dump when you are done

Re:All our resources are still here

[jader3rd]

oar != ore

Re:All our resources are still here

[ShanghaiBill]

Pollution per production would be a far more fair assessment here, and in that regard China is unfortunately off-scale.

Not when you consider all the sources of pollution. A Chinese factory may emit more smoke than an American factory, but the American workers commute to the factory in 4 ton SUVs, while the Chinese workers arrive on bicycles.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you understand the difference between "rare-earth production" (y'know that thing I said) versus "rare-earth raw materials"?

Yes, it's clear from JDG1980's post that he understands this distinction. Maybe you are the one who is lacking in basic reading comprehension?

There is a reason I said one and not the other. But thank you for playing.

He had no way of knowing that. It seems entirely reasonable to believe someone might have written your post word-for-word without knowing that we could ramp up rare-earth production in the US/EU if we so desired. In fact, I was not aware of this myself, so his post was valuable to me. The knowledge that we could ramp up production certainly weakens your argument about being "beholden to and dependent on a foreign nation", so I can see why he might have thought you didn't know this either.

Basic reading comprehension is definitely on the decline.

That's a complete non sequitur, as JDG1980's reading comprehension is fine. Fellow slashdotters read your posts, not your mind. Consider focusing on your own communication skills, as well as your anger management...

Re:All our resources are still here

[ShanghaiBill]

Some estimates are that China has 95% of the world's rare earth metals on land,

I love factoids like this. Logically, it is almost certainly true, since "some estimates" can mean almost anything, while the underlying implication is complete nonsense (China has no where near 95% of economically viable rare earth ores).

Re:All our resources are still here

[Palamos]

In a similar vein, the richest source of platinum is now the surface of major roads in the western world, the ppm count is higher than high grade ore.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Mashiki]

Only $200/pound? Really? I was looking a few months ago and the price was still up around $800/kilo. If you can get a bead on that price and put it on the market you'd be doing pretty well. The ore value is much more difficult, because it depends on "what" it's coming from, and how much you need to work to get it a non-ore state. Just like you said. It's actually cheaper to get it during mining/refining production than it is to get it from recycling from everything I've learned the last few years. Getting it from recycling is just too bloody expensive, and would probably drive the price up around $2-4k/kilo.

To be honest, Indium isn't considered a rare earth in the metal markets, it's considered a minor metal with low demand(you don't need much of it, and when you do use it a little bit goes a long way), though I am a metal market newbie(only been playing it off and on for the last two years, I make my bread and butter in currencies). It's plentiful, and large amounts of are available in storage and on demand. But really, where there's iron or zinc mining, you can get indium. And two of the worlds largest sources of it are in Canada.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure Shanghai Bill. A 8000 pound car. Right. Reminds me of the Hard Drive you sold me.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. They just live there on factory campus, within walking distance. Something like that would never fly in the west.

Re:All our resources are still here

[Anonymous Coward]

Its an exaggeration, of course, but not an entirely outrageous one. At the height of the SUV craze, the diesel Ford Excursion weighed 7,725 lbs, while the V10 gasoline model was a nimble 7,230 lbs. Add another 308 lbs for 44 gallons of diesel, or 264 lbs for gasoline. Granted, it was never a common daily driver, but it wasn't unheard of either.

Re:All our resources are still here

[timeOday]

I would be shocked if future generations are not reprocessing our profligate waste as a concentrated source of natural resources within just a couple generations from now. In the meanwhile, the least we can do is keep it IN the landfill instead of seeping into the groundwater or outgassing into the air. But sorting the garbage on its way out is almost certainly more efficient.

Re:All our resources are still here

[geekoid]

even when you compare all source that are off the scale. There horrid coal emissions more then make up for there bicycles.

If their polluter where held to the same pollution goals as the US, then you would have a point.
But they don't and neither do you.

China produces 500Million more tonnes of CO2 per year then the US.

Re:All our resources are still here

[xaxa]

Yeah but you can go to your indium mine and extract 100 million tons of ore tomorrow. As opposed to monitors, where you need to collect each monitor and ship it to whatever processing plant on palates. Much worse economies of scale!

At the household recycling sites in the UK, the monitors and TVs are simply stacked into a standard container. When the container is full, it's taken away in a lorry/train/barge (for the latter, I like the irony of "Smuggler's Way" in south London being the recycling site).

Remember the alternative is still to collect the monitors, still to transport them, but then to deal with the problems of heavy metals leeching into the groundwater.

Re:All our resources are still here

[noh8rz7]

Example of commodities of scale. Shipping container = 20 tons. Mining operation capacity = 100 million tons. I one day you could mine as much ore as would be 5 million shipping containers. To understand that number, a reasonably busy sea port will handle 1 million containers in a year.

Re:All our resources are still here

[mikael]

My bets are on "promession". Freeze a sealed tub full of old electronics using liquid nitrogen. Shake and pound the tub until the only parts remaining are dust, then seperate these using magnets (to attract metals) or a centrifuge (seperating metals from light plastic).

Re:All our resources are still here

[rev0lt]

Its not in the florescent tubes or LED or whatever your LCD screen uses for illumination.

Actually, it is. Indium is used in the production of low-power led devices, and has been for decades (long before modern led-based screens). You can find a lot of information on Wikipedia, but also check http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/futures/LF-LEDs/index.asp for an overview (they specifically mention white leds)

Re:All our resources are still here

[jpmorgan]

Which frankly, is as it should be. If the Chinese can mine and produce rare earth metals at prices that can put all the competition out of business, that's good for them. But that doesn't mean they should. The world is hungry enough for these metals that they can sell at the same price as Mountain Pass without running out of customers... and at those prices their mines will be incredibly profitable.

Re:All our resources are still here

[jimbolauski]

But how do you separate out the different metals?

Re:All our resources are still here

[AdamWill]

" I guess you could call that a form of recycling."

It's not, but it's better!

Aside from just recycling there's a concept you see a lot of called 'reduce, reuse, recycle' - those three are in *order of preference*. Better than recycling something - i.e. sending it through an industrial process to reclaim some raw material components from it for re-fabrication later - is just to re-use the finished product as is. So, your example of TV 're-use'. Or returning beer/milk bottles, which are usually just washed/sterilized and re-used, not smashed and re-processed into some other form of glass. Better than either of these is 'reduce' - don't buy the Shiny New Thing at all unless you really need it.

Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Viol8]

If manufacturers have to go to the trouble of recycling their goods they might be tempted to make them more reliable rather than having 10K TVs that died 1 day after their warranty ran out sitting in their warehouse. Or alternatively perhaps we'll go back to goods that are designed to be repaired more easily instead of being junked just because 1 capacitor blew that could be replaced for pennies.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

If manufacturers have to go to the trouble of recycling their goods they might be tempted to make them more reliable rather than having 10K TVs that died 1 day after their warranty ran out sitting in their warehouse. Or alternatively perhaps we'll go back to goods that are designed to be repaired more easily instead of being junked just because 1 capacitor blew that could be replaced for pennies.

Bit of both. Electronics that will die one day after the warranty runs out but consist of otherwise usable parts that can be put in a shiny case and sold as new. Training consumers to give them back all the equipment when it fails is the next step in planned obsolescence; planned obsolescence AND RESALE.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"If manufacturers have to go to the trouble of recycling their goods they might be tempted to make them more reliable"

How is this logical? State mandated processing of waste will be taken as a cost and passed on to the consumer, like it always is. Why do you believe this legislation will somehow change the fundamentals of economics?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Teun]

Indeed, one might hope...

But already for many years similar legislation has been in place in a couple of EU member states and I've yet to see a turning of the curve to more sustainable equipment.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[gbjbaanb]

alternatively make them easier to recycle. If the components weren't a complete mismash of every type of rare metal known to man, they might be a lot easier to melt down and reuse.

There are a lot of places that you can drop off metals for recycling - metal recycling rates are so high I can take an old copper heatsink (from a 1U server) and get £4 for it's scrap value. Steel chassis and parts are also valuable. Its the cost of recycling the circuit boards that has a negative value, so you don't get to drop an appliance off and receive a bit of cash. If that was different, you can bet people would be doing it a lot more.

Having breakable equipment provides jobs in making and selling new ones - I'm ok with that, but I'd like to make even more jobs in easily breaking up the bits of old stuff to make the new stuff with.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Doubt they will last longer. There is too much money in new purchases. Repairs are a tiny amount of income. Refurb is bigger, but still pretty small.

Easier to do the latter 2 cases will likely be true, more so the last.
Likely things might even become more modular so one system could be easily swapped out for another and bam, works.
No setup, no nothing, just a simple interface between the boards that works.
This would also make it easier to swap lesser systems with more advanced systems to be sold as better units. (such as a TV with picture in picture support, and one without)
This is both a good and bad thing. Good because this is the way things SHOULD be already. Bad because you know companies will abuse the hell out of it considering the current economy.

"Why repair an old TV when you can get this brand new one, with super hifi turbo HD and shiny screen, at just double the price for the repair?"
"TAKE MY MONEY!"
Little did they realize they lived... ON THE SUN. Enjoy your glare buddy, I'll enjoy my bubbly and steak.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Since charging the customer when the customer returns the item would be illegal, they would have to add the cost to the price of items when initially bought. Most likely the recycling cost would be spread across all the range of items, regardless of durability.

Wouldn't this make the long-term profit on more durable items larger?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

If this is done right, it can still be beneficial. If the manufacturer has the burden of paying that cost and they have to build it into the price, then devices that will last longer can be priced lower and better quality devices will be able to compete. (I know there are other influences, like how well the owner treats the device, but the quality of a device and the reusability of the components should have more of an impact).

I don't think we do enough to include the intangable costs of products in their prices. When consumes shop on price, and most do, manufacturers focus strictly on the up front cost, completely forgetting that their is a cost to the environment.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Producing a quality product that will last a long time usually costs more money - and there is a market for these types of products. Of course mandated recycling costs will be built in to the base product and the manufacturer will seek ways to make this recycling more efficient whenever possible.

However none of that changes the motivation of the producer - to sell product, and high quality expensive products and the exception not the norm. Cheaply made failure prone products encourage customers to purchase more of them. Mandated recycling costs will again be built in to the base product and the manufacturer will seek ways to make this recycling more efficient whenever possible.

I fail to see how any of this leads to 'long-term profit on more durable items larger'.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"If the manufacturer has the burden of paying that cost and they have to build it into the price, then devices that will last longer can be priced lower and better quality devices will be able to compete"

Excuse me, you are just re-stating the OP statement that "If manufacturers have to go to the trouble of recycling their goods they might be tempted to make them more reliable", so again I ask how is this logical?

The state is not incentivizing efficiency, it is simply adding a cost to production. That is all.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[vlm]

Its the cost of recycling the circuit boards that has a negative value, so you don't get to drop an appliance off and receive a bit of cash.

Electronic appliances, yes. For some weird reason the local scrappers would pick up an old/broken kitchen oven and give you $25, at least that was the case a couple years ago. All other appliances were merely picked up for free. So buy a new "whatever", put the old one out, make a call, and in a couple hours or less a truck picks it up and hauls it away for free.

If you own a $50K pickup truck that gets 8 MPG you can load the appliance in the truck bed and deliver it yourself for a couple bucks, but its a financial loss if you only do one appliance at a time so...

I do know for a fact that you can make money by renting the home depot $19/hr rental pickup and packing it full of old apartment building appliances. The problem is the remodeling contractor made my buddy do all the removal himself, so his revenue minus expenses looked great but his profit per hour for the entire task from start to finish looked pretty miserable. Still, if you're a starving college kid looking for beer money your weekend time is kinda free/worthless so why not. I do not recall how much money exactly, but a truck bed full of avocado green kitchen appliances was high two figures. Home depot was angry because they prefer you use their truck to haul purchases from their store... whatever. Basically he disconnected appliances and hauled them out all morning and then around lunchtime rented the truck to take his daily haul to the dump. The fridges with food left in them when they disconnected power were pretty gross. Supposedly the freon in the fridges was worth extra money... individuals don't get paid for "donating" freon but he was bringing a hundred or so fridges, so he had a special deal I donno about.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[vlm]

Isn't there some left coast electronics store famous for taking broken returned items and putting them back on the shelf for resale?

I find it extremely likely that if you return a "broken" TV someone else will be buying it. Maybe as a "display model" as-is for 5% off.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[jimmy_dean]

"Wouldn't this make the long-term profit on more durable items larger?"

No, this is a tax and thus is a net drain on society. Morality can't be legislated, even if recycling is a good thing. This is nannying the general populous in a very large way and will result in more special treatment for special interests. When these companies can no longer compete with the rest of the world, they'll either move out of Europe or seek special favors from the EU politicians to help keep them afloat. This happens again, and again and is nothing new.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[DerekLyons]

Or alternatively perhaps we'll go back to goods that are designed to be repaired more easily instead of being junked just because 1 capacitor blew that could be replaced for pennies.

Pay your labor force pennies, and buy the cheapest possible crap capacitor... and you'll get your replacement costs down to a few nickels.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their free credit, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations!

And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works."

Claude Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

I fail to see how any of this leads to 'long-term profit on more durable items larger'.

It's not a guarantee, but consider the following two scenarios:

1) You own a business selling cheaply made electro-widget for price $X. New law gets passed mandating that you must bear costs of recycling. So you figure out, based on predicted lifetime of your widget, the steady-state recycling costs will be $A per widget. So you increase the price of your widget to be $Y = $X+$A, all the while maintaining the same cheap quality

2) I own a similar business at that same price point and quality of $X. New law gets passed mandating that I must bear the costs of recycling. But I determine that I can increase the quality and lifetime of my product by increasing its cost by $B, and by doing so, my steady state recycling costs would be $C per widget, which might be lower than your steady-state recycling costs. So the price of my higher quality widget would become $Z = $X+$B+$C.

As long as my increase in costs, $B+$C, is less than or equal to your increase in costs, $A, then my approach would in theory be a better business model because who in their right mind would want to buy your more cheaply made product at the same price point as mine. I would sell more electro-widgets than before and my profits would increase. The real question, of course, is whether my steady state recycling costs on a per widget basis will be lower than yours, and if so, whether that savings can offset the cost of the higher quality component and the one-time expense of transitioning to a new manufacturing system. Maybe it will, maybe it won't.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Still, the total profit margin (not at the time of sale, but throughout it's life i.e. including the recycling) would be made slightly smaller for a less durable product than for a more durable product, thus the motivation to sell more durable products would increase slightly (perhasps not much, but still). No?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

But again, this comes down to simple economics, if the specifics of your theoretical set of two manufacturers represents a reality - then that reality exists irrespective of the mandated recycling legislation and the company that takes advantage of this will succeed without any state interference. No law is needed.

You cannot fight economics, it's like gravity. State interference in the market can only reduce efficiency and increase costs.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[MickyTheIdiot]

Yep.. that is EXACTLY what is happening in the U.S. and Europe. No differences there. None at all.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Viol8]

"When these companies can no longer compete with the rest of the world, they'll either move out of Europe or seek special favors from the EU politicians to help keep them afloat."

If the rules apply to all companies why shouldn't they be able to compete? Or are you suggesting that all companies are going to suddenly stop selling all electronics in europe?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

An important point, but a complex one. What is the market? The UK? The EU? We have a global market where "the rules apply to all companies" is not and will never be reality.

"Or are you suggesting that all companies are going to suddenly stop selling all electronics in europe?"

Perhaps, at the minimum you can count on prices increasing. Look at Detroit to see how interference in the market has reduced one of our largest cities nearly to a smoking pile of rubble.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[TheLink]

The problem you miss is who is going to pay more for your product? How do they know in advance it's not expensive crap as opposed to your competitor's cheap crap?

Nowadays a lot of stuff that used to last longer, no longer last as long even though they are the same brand, and sometimes even look the same as the old stuff.

I've a bunch of Byford socks that are still usable after 20 years (they're a bit thinner now, but no holes, and the elastic stuff is still fine), and I've 1 year old Byford socks that are loose due the the elastic band failing. I can understand why cheap socks no longer last 20 years - doesn't really make good business sense (despite supposedly socks going missing after a while).

Not long ago I paid a premium for Hush Puppy formal shoes and they failed early[1] (and I was told by someone that quality has dropped, too bad I wasn't told before I paid for them). So instead of paying a premium, I now buy USD10 shoes that I know won't last, but they cost USD10, so even if they only last 6 months they are cheaper in the long run. Plus they are even more comfortable than the Hush Puppy pair I bought (soft PU is softer than leather).

[1] Heel came off. I glued it back, but some months later the sole split near the ball of my foot.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that the fact that recycling is now mandated creates a huge recycling industry that otherwise might not have happened (or would have happened, but taken decades to get there), driving down $A and $C due to economies of scale and increased research into recycling efficiency.

Ultimately you might not be able to win against gravity, but you can do useful things by fighting it. You can also use gravity to get useful work done. Saying "Everything ends up on the floor anyway, there's no point building aircraft / tables / ramps / dams" is kind of stupid.

Posted AC for obvious reasons.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Taxes don't end up in a black hole, they actually pay for shit that benefits a lot of people.
2. It's not a tax according to the definitions on Wikipedia, it merely mandates corporations to reduce their effect on the environment.
3. This is the law that benefits consumers and the environment, and the people wants the law. If this is nannying, I don't mind it.
4. I doubt electronic retail stores will move leave the EU.
5. Most richer countries actually have waste collection (including e-waste) managed by the government, i.e. largely funded by tax payers. Which is something everyone agrees is a good thing. This laws makes it better because it moves a little amount of the costs of this waste collection from tax payers, to the retail stores (and thus only the consumers of such goods, in proportion of the amound of goods they buy) instead.
6. Sweden has very strong consumer and environmental laws, very high taxes, and is a nanny-state if there ever was none. And you know what? We're just fine.
7. "Morality can't be legislated"... Corporations are not people and does not follow moral, they operate within the boundaries of the legislation to extract as much money as possible from consumer's wallets. A single consumer CAN use his powers to push a corporation to act in a certain way, but sometimes it is a lot easier for all consumers to vote for politicians to create laws which in a larger scale forces all corporations to act in this certain way.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"it is simply adding a cost to production"
But it adds a different amount of cost to production of items, depending on their durability...

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[mcgrew]

No, this is a tax and thus is a net drain on society.

First, you believe all taxes are drains on society? You can't have government without revenue, and anarchy always leads to monarchy. Some things, like roads and bridges, are best done by governments and paid for by taxes. But this isn't a tax; a tax goes straight to government. This is no more a tax than my city mandating that I hire a private waste disposal company to take my garbage.

Morality can't be legislated, even if recycling is a good thing. This is nannying the general populous in a very large way

So, you're against murder, rape, and theft laws? Either I'm completely misunderstanding you, or you're insane. This isn't nannying any more than laws against dumping your oil in the river are. Marijuana laws, prostitution laws, sodomy laws -- victimless crimes -- are nannying. Environmental laws, like laws against other assaults, protect you from me.

When these companies can no longer compete with the rest of the world, they'll either move out of Europe or seek special favors from the EU politicians to help keep them afloat.

So, you'ld like London or Brussels to look like Mexico City? This is simply another environmental law. I wish they'd impliment it here in the US, I see it as a good law. As it is here, the onus is on the consumer to recycle the equipment. Your EU law puts the onus on the manufacturer (or possibly seller?). I have junk in my garage I'd love to throw away, but I'd have to cart it ten miles to the nort part of town.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"How do they know in advance it's not expensive crap as opposed to your competitor's cheap crap?"

How do they know that today?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[RabidReindeer]

"If the manufacturer has the burden of paying that cost and they have to build it into the price, then devices that will last longer can be priced lower and better quality devices will be able to compete"

Excuse me, you are just re-stating the OP statement that "If manufacturers have to go to the trouble of recycling their goods they might be tempted to make them more reliable", so again I ask how is this logical?

The state is not incentivizing efficiency, it is simply adding a cost to production. That is all.

The cost is there, regardless, and the consumer will pay most of it in various ways. If the manufacturer has to pay it up front, there's at least some incentive to make it more efficient from the start, since there's only so much you can pass on before people start complaining.

On the other hand, the traditional way, where factories spew out goods and someone else ends up paying for the waste disposal and/or toxic waste cleanup doesn't give the manufacturer any incentive. So unless you get "free" garbage collection (and I don't, since they made it a separate bill now so that they could "keep my taxes low"), you're going to pay either way and you might as well get value at the end of product life as well as at the beginning.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[franciscohs]

Why do you feel, as a consumer, that you wouldn't have to pay for it?, if you're the one using the product, why wouldn't you be responsible for the entire lifecycle of the product?

There's one point where we have to start to understand that we need to make responsible use of what we buy. Products should be much more expensive and durable, and should be manufactured and dumped responsibly.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Money that is not taxed pays for "shit" that benefits a lot of people too. What does this have to do with anything? In addition there is no organization less efficient, more corrupt and more wasteful than a government. When you are spending money that you have to work for you have an incentive to make wise purchases and not waste your money. When you are spending money confiscated from someone else it's very easy to be wasteful as you can go out anytime and confiscate more.

2. Wikipedia is not an authority on anything. This is a state mandated cost, call it whatever you want, it is a form of tax.

3. You have not proven any benefit to consumers or the environment, sorry. I am happy for you and your nanny, just stay the fuck away from us free people.

4. Whatever.

5. You say "everyone agrees", I say "everyone does not agree". Happy?

6. I'm happy for you.

7. "it is a lot easier for all consumers to vote for politicians to create laws"

Brings me to think of the name Benito Mussolini. Here is a quote for you to think about statist; "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[cpu6502]

>>>10K TVs that died 1 day after their warranty

Ya know..... I've heard this complaint my whole life. Yes people have been complaining, "They don't make things like they used to" for decades. And yet I have a Sears TV built in the 70s that still works.

A Panasonic 80s radio that still works (though the cassette player runs too slow). An XP-PC that is ten years old and still runs. A N64 that still plays games. A PS2 that is eleven years old and still plays games. A cellphone I bought in 1999 that still makes calls. A 1990 Dodge that lasted til 360,000 miles and a 1997 Mitsubishi that is still going strong at 150,000. Point: All MY stuff seems to last a long, long, long time with very few issues.

What on EARTH do you people do to your stuff that it dies so early? Maybe the problem isn't the manufacturer but the user being abusive: Dropping the phone, piling books on top of the console, going 0-to-60 in 10 seconds (and then slamming on the brakes) at every redlight. Stuff is meant to be used with care and gentleness.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[cpu6502]

>>>No, this is a tax and thus is a net drain on society. Morality can't be legislated, even if recycling is a good thing.

By that logic we shouldn't have filters on car exhausts, stop people from littering, or have centralized sewer disposal in cities. We should just let people live in filfth, like how Paris was circa 1800. (It is said that place was so full of manure and waste that visitors could Smell the city before they could see it.)

People have basic rights. Among those rights is the right to breathe clean air and drink clean water. That means forbidding people from polluting & violating those basic rights. The government is simply doing its job to stop these violations of individual rights.

As for "shipping jobs overseas" there would be no advantage. Chinese companies if they want to operate in the EU also must abide by these recycling rules. Else they will be barred from entering & selling to ~500 million citizens.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[cpu6502]

BTW when my stuff does eventually die, I dispose of it through selling on ebay. There's always someone who is a hacker who wants to either repair it to restore functionality, or use it for parts.

And also: I thought the EU Parliament does not pass laws? The summary calls this a "law" but Europeans on /. always claim the EU does not have that power. Only the States can pass laws. (confuseD)

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

So your argument is 'China is less moral than us, so why bother?'.
Everyone knows the earth's resources are limited. Kinda the best a country (or body like Europe) can do is set a policy to re-use these resources internally, and not deal with others who do differently. Hopefully they have enough sway for their views to spread.
Kyoto failed for exactly this reason. America wouldn't commit, because why limit themselves if India and China weren't going to follow suite.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Corrupted and wasteful, perhaps. Still, in many ways that is better than what corporations are.

2. By every definition ever, tax is a cost collected by the government. This is not. You just can't redefine words all of your own like this.

3. Do I actually need to prove that making it easier for consumers to recycle e-waste is good for the environment? Also, your freedom seems to be working out very well for you.

4. ...

5. Well, there's always the emo anarchist sitting in the corner. Also, whatever.

6. Thanks!

7. Your don't make any sense.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Lonewolf666]

I believe that would require a lot more standardization and designing for reusabilty than what is common today.

I'm one of those guys who like to tinker with old electronics, and what I get to see is a wild jumble of one-off designs that are made to fit one particular device, but have little chance of fitting into next year's model.
There is one notable exception. The computer industry (in particular desktop parts) has mostly exchangable parts, and except for stuff getting obsolete, many parts could in fact be reused and resold. But guess what:
Technically inclined consumers wordwide understand this, and tend to reuse stuff themselves. That even happens in some companies. At my current place of work, old computers go to the dumpster minus their RAM. So someone collects those things. Either one of the IT guys is running a business with used parts on the side, or the company must be sitting of many gigabytes of old DDR1 RAM ;-)

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[tlhIngan]

Actually, the people who do the actual refining disagree - doing the meltdown is actually far easier on an electronics waste stream than extracting it out from the ground - the concentrations are much higher and the usual extraction processes work just as well, except generating more product.

And yes, they also consider mining landfills for the same reason - a rich resource of raw materials.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

1. How better? A corporation exists to make a profit, therefore waste will serve to defeat that end. A government has no such motive - and no competition. I don't call that better.

2. Really? When you pay your VAT who is it you pay this money to?

3. You didn't say making recycling easier is better... your statement was that this law is better for the consumer and the environment, this there is no proof that this is true. ...

7. It's pretty clear to me. Don't you know who Mussolini was? Do you know who George Washington was?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Posted AC for obvious reasons.

Not as obvious as you think.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

It is only the retailers in europe which are directly affected and retailers have to be where their customers are. But the EU is a big enough market to influence manufacturers on the whole earth. When the EU finally banned various hazardous substances in electronics after a long transition period practically every electronics components or device manufacturer was forced to offer rohs compliant products. For many components or devices due to economics of scale and logistics it is cheaper to only offer a rohs compliant product worldwide than a compliant one for europe and a slightly cheaper traditional variant for the rest of the world.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

A 1990 Dodge that lasted til 360,000 miles

No it didn't, and here's why.

From this post, we are informed that you have owned at most two cars, and the 1990 Dodge mentioned in this post was your first car.

Then from this post we learn that your first car lasted 30 years.

1990 was twenty-two years ago, eight shy of your claimed thirty years.

So somewhere between the two linked posts, and this one, you are nothing but a liar.

Also, what happened to the Honda Insight?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[geekoid]

"No, this is a tax and thus is a net drain on society"
No. A tax is not a net drain. Unless that tax money is put in a pile and burned.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[geekoid]

NO it isn't, please get the fuck out of your echo chamber.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Something NOT driven by profits can do things that actually do things that benefits everyone - e.g. run schools. The slight increased risk of corruption compared to private facilities does not outweigh the benefits FREE UNIVERSITY FOR EVERYONE has on society (like in Sweden). Another example, our public, tax-financed television (based on the british BBC model) is when it comes to diversity and objectivity superior to any other Swedish channel, AND to pretty much every american channel. It doesn't fullfil anyone's entertainment needs of course, but for that there is the commercial crap channels which shows all the CSIs and sitcoms.
I've never said government are best at running things though, in fact I vote for publically *financed* and *controlled* healthcare, not publically *driven* healthcare. Best of two worlds IMO.

2. Ok, so english is not my first language and I probably used the word "collected" wrong, but still the VAT I pay is passed on to the tax collection agency. The VAT is intended for the government, and will end up there.

3. WTF? You have more places to leave your crap when you don't need it anymore. when you don't need it anymore. How is it NOT better?

7. Yes. Still not clear. Your saying something I wrote reminds you of Mussolini is like me saying something you wrote reminds me of soup.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[geekoid]

ah, I remember a time when I could make a nice response like that..but these days I have no patience for those morons who have no really clue and thing taxed money somehow disappears.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[xaxa]

In my experience, if an item fails during the warranty period (which is quite long, by law, in the UK) the company will replace it very quickly, often with a refurbished item. Presumably, they then attempt to fix what you send them.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[didroe84]

The EU passes directives which states are bound to implement as law. A directive is a set of goals and the member states can implement whatever laws they wish to in order to meet the goals. I guess it's done that way to allow all the different legal systems and existing legislation of each member state to carry on functioning. But it's pretty much a law. They can also create regulations which require no state laws to enact because the powers they require are already granted to the state under existing laws.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude chill out, I thought we were having a polite conversation - I understand you are not a native speaker of English. I have a direct way of speaking I suspect you are mistaking as attacks.

1. There is a need for government - you are correct there are things that for profit private industry just cannot effectively do for a society. Educational institutions however are a horrible example. Roads, law enforcement, national security, things like this. I agree with this of course, I am not an anarchist. But your discounting of the nature of the potential for corruption is naive. The amount of money that is lost into the black hole of the state is obscene, graft, corruption, payola, favoritism.

All governments are corrupt, more or less in proportion to their size. You seem to have an innate dislike for corporations which is misguided - private industry is normal and natural, seeking profit is good, free enterprise supports efficiency and makes the economy work and allows people opportunities that they would otherwise never have.

What I think may be confusing you is what we term 'crony capitalism' which has nothing to do with capitalism whatsoever; that is when industries and states collude to manipulate markets, crush competition and operate outside of the rules of the society, e.g., for example (simplified of course) Obama purchasing ownership of an automobile manufacturer and then rigging the market to favor that manufacturer over another with for example tax breaks, targeted regulations etc. This is corruption and has nothing to do with free enterprise.

2. Fine you want to call it an indirect tax then do so. It is still a fee mandated by the state that would not be paid otherwise.

3. I don't think you are understanding my point. You state "This is the law that benefits consumers and the environment". This is an assumption that the implementation of this law will in the end result in a benefit to consumers and the environment. As you may have noted other posters mentioning phony recycling operations where money is paid but the product is just dumped unprocessed in some remote location resulting in pollution and in the end harming both consumers and the environment. I am not saying this is what will happen in this case, what I am saying is that the benefit from this legislation at this time is theoretical, and may never materialize. Thus this statement is unproven. Do you understand this?

7. This is exactly the point I have been trying to make all along in item 1. Some government is necessary, but all the state (the collective state) does in the end is to limit individual liberties and freedoms. Government, if not controlled will continue amassing power and eventually devolve into tyranny. History proves this time and time again, this is what our founders understood and is the primary purpose of the Constitution of the United States. Hence the reference to Washington. You live in Sweden which I will suggest to you is somewhat of an isolated case, a highly socialized country with a rich heritage, very successful affluent people and to make a long story short a rather successful welfare state. I hope you understand what I mean when I tell you that this is usually not the case, in fact in most all cases socialism is but one stop on a path to tyranny and eventually a police state. Many would argue that this is the inevitable course of collectivism - it certainly seems to be for the vast majority of the planet.

You sound like an interesting person, I will leave you with this quote:

--Whensoever therefore the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society; and either by ambition, fear, folly or corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and, by the establishment of a new legislative, (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own safety and security, which is the end for which they are in society.

John Locke, Second Treatise of Civil Government, Ch. XIV, sec. 222

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[roman_mir]

First, you believe all taxes are drains on society?

- yes, under ALL circumstances.

Of-course all gov't is inherently evil but we need to fund minimum of it even under libertarian or minarchist ideology (not anarchist though), so all taxes are a drain on society but we have to live with some minimum amount of waste allocated to the government.

You can't have government without revenue

- obviously.

and anarchy always leads to monarchy

- not true, in Ukraine in the beginning of the 20th century and up to the late twenties there was a very strong anarchist movement. This didn't lead to monarchy, it was a fight against a different type of totalitarian system and that system won, it had more power on its side. If you care you can look up Nestor Makhno.

Some things, like roads and bridges, are best done by governments and paid for by taxes

- that's a false statement. Those things are not 'best' done by gov't, they are done by gov't because gov't takes over that function and pushes the private capital aside.

There are plenty of private roads in USA, the Ambassador Bridge was built privately back in 1929. There is no reason why bridges and roads cannot be built privately (and they are and they were and they will be) because somebody sees an opportunity where money can be made and provides customers with another product.

Why shouldn't there be more private bridges and roads? They are better maintained, they are better and faster constructed (407 in Ontario is owned privately, though it started as a public road, it was sold and it's been a success, it is constantly expanded, lanes are added, people take it rather than 401 and other busy roads.

In fact why should the people be paying taxes so that gov't can build unprofitable bridges and roads with union labour, which is clearly more expensive, takes longer, it's clear that this is not about performance and efficiency with the gov't, gov't isn't in a hurry to do the job well and start generating money, so public roads are closed all the time.

Construction signs. Who likes construction signs? And there are many of them and they never end, it's because it's public, the money never ends, the company makes more money the longer it takes, it's not about profit and it well should be about profit. If there are no profits in roads and bridges, then building them with tax payer money is a waste of resources and growth of gov't.

This is no more a tax than my city mandating that I hire a private waste disposal company to take my garbage.

- and why should the city mandate something like that? What are going to do with your garbage, sit on it? Sure, the neighbourhood can have ordinances - you can't collect garbage on the back yard.

When in Ontario (or was it just Toronto) there was a huge garbage strike a few years back, the city was stinking to high heaven, and if you hired private contractor to pick up the garbage, the police and the striking garbage men would assault the contractors! They attacked their trucks, broke some of them, the police was on the side of the union workers, big surprise. The people liked the private garbage collection. 5 bucks, they picked up ALL garbage, you didn't have to sort anything, and they even swept the sidewalks.

So, you're against murder, rape, and theft laws?

- this has nothing to do with federal gov't, this is a State issue. I would go further, I don't think it's any of gov't business at all. This should be handled privately, private courts, private prisons, private security. The prison time should be paid for with private liability insurance and there shouldn't even be jail time for theft, you should be forced to pay money back, maybe 3 times the amount or whatever. Clearly gov't shouldn't even have a role in any of this and there shouldn't be

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Darinbob]

I agree here. Too many companies treat their products as disposable. Especially Apple which goes out of its way to make their cult followers throw away their gadgets in less than a year, or purchase a new replacement if the battery dies, or have them "recycled" where they get sent to poor countries to be broken apart and put into landfills.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Darinbob]

I suspect only 1% or less of products get recycled that way by having someone else repair it. Most of the products are trashed instead.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Darinbob]

In the Libertarian True Believer world, living in a world full of trash and pollution and sick citizens is a utopia as long as there are no regulations or taxes.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

> 2. Fine you want to call it an indirect tax then do so. It is still a fee mandated by the state that would not be paid otherwise.

Really? I would say it is removing a tax (as in "cost to society", paid by everyone). The tax the the private company imposes by producing something that will harm the environment. The government has decided that companies (which benefit from it) now must pay this cost themselves instead of spreading it on to all of society, whether they profited or not.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[mikael]

I've worked for a number of companies who used to design their own circuit boards. As memory chips tended to "fry" under testing conditions, everyone tried to grab as many as they could. So old PC's were cannabalized of useful bits before they went to the recycling center. When somebody left, the vultures would circle, gather round their desk picking and making off with cables, memory chips and manuals.

Even my last university would pre-salvage all damaged PC's being sent back to Dell. Whatever working parts in one machine would be swapped with the broken parts of another.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"companies (which benefit from it) now must pay this cost themselves instead of spreading it"

Another economic genius here.

Yes, these companies, all owned by rich cigar smoking Republicans no doubt, will just go out back to the money tree and the birds will sing and puppy dogs will weep with joy.

Is that about it? /sarc - why is this necessary? Are most of you all high in class during economics lessons?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"those morons who have no really clue and thing taxed money somehow disappears"

Care to speak English?

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

"Unless that tax money is put in a pile and burned."

A large part of this money is basically burned away.

Your dollar that is confiscated by the state goes to pay graft, union dues (which are funneled back into Democrat campaign funds - speaking about the US here), bribes, hookers, outright theft. And this is not to mention the plain and simple waste and abuse that occurs when spending Other Peoples Money - money you did not earn and feel no compunction to use wisely and sparingly. Yes, for example in the food stamp program a small percentage of this money does eventually find it's way into the hands of a consumer again.

Most of it however is pissed away like so much rainwater. And down the drain.

Here is but one handy an example. Note drone, this is a fact, these numbers are from real accountants and represent real tax dollars confiscated by the people of Massachusetts and passed out like so much candy to unionized employees as perks. You understand what facts are?

http://www.bostonherald.com/projects/buybacks/earning.DESC//

Go ahead and support your argument that tax money is not a net drain. We are all waiting.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe any such statement was made here by anyone. I agree with this.

The point of the discussion however was the method in which this "do-gooder" activity has been implemented. State interference in free markets invariably leads to unintended consequences.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

At my place the scrap PCs generally get stripped of their ram and hard drives. While the hard drives are understandable, I've seen the giant anti-static (motherboard-sized) bag full of SD and DDR1 ram they are keeping for some reason. You would think that at least they would run around and max out the old DDR1-era machines that are still in use, but noooo....

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Ohh, another handy timely link. Remember drone, these are facts, have you any facts to support your position?

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/08/13/gm-recalls-over-38000-police-impalas-in-north-america/?test=latestnews

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120813/AUTO01/208130392

"Washington -The Treasury Department says in a new report the government expects to lose more than $25 billion on the $85 billion auto bailout. That's 15 percent higher than its previous forecast.

In a monthly report sent to Congress on Friday, the Obama administration boosted its forecast of expected losses by more than $3.3 billion to almost $25.1 billion, up from $21.7 billion in the last quarterly update."

Awwww, looks pretty much like a DRAIN to me, but that's just me. Sorry, forgot the analogy, pile of burning money. There's your hope and change.

Actually it's more of a drain 'cause a big bonfire might be kind of fun... for a while.

I've got more drone, I just don't care to spend the time supplying you evidence as I don't expect you are smart enough to understand it anyway.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't that's why it makes sense to buy cheap crap unless you are sure the expensive stuff is not crap.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[the_arrow]

Also, the headline says "Europe", and there are still many European countries that are not members of the EU.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, the headline says "Europe", and there are still many European countries that are not members of the EU.

You seriously expect /. to get that right? They cant get UK/Britain/England right.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, i actually live in México city, i dont like that image of dirt and i dreamed since far time ago for a law líke this that put social responsability in manufacturers and commerce agents. I think i should be able to drink water from a faucet on the street líke romans or japaneses or americans do, but because of bad quality public services, i have to pay for bottled water. This, the same that electronics, produces a lot of waste and polution in beautiful paradises líke Cañón del Sumidero o Riviera Maya, where sea current bring all the plastic bottles from the caribean islands. This is not consumers responsability, but goverment and manufactures only think in business.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[jimmy_dean]

I have to reply to #7. The idea that getting enough people together to get a certain "majority" of a vote to enact something doesn't make it moral or just. It doesn't make it wise, nor does it make it good. It just means, some people want something, and they're too lazy to enact change through their personal spheres of influence (i.e. their daily relationships). No corporations are not people, but they are made up of people, just like governments are. However, here's the key differences. Assuming that a company has no special monopoly from a government, if they mess up, they cease to exist. If a government messes up, they will not cease to exist until a revolution happens. Let's review what a revolution is: it's a way, with people being killed, women and children being raped and pillaged, and other horrible things. So given that juxtaposition, doing things through the private realm versus doing it through government is morally preferable. You may see this as a giant leap, but there's not enough time or space to explain the entire libertarian philosophy of live and let live. Since you quoted Wikipedia, I suggest you spend some more time there learning about this concept: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

Also, the next time you assume that rights can be taken away from groups or individuals just because you prefer something, I'll propose taking away one of your beloved rights and see how you like it. Mind your own business and live your own life without trying to change the lives of others.

Re:Perhaps stuff might last longer now

[jimmy_dean]

It is only the retailers in europe which are directly affected and retailers have to be where their customers are. But the EU is a big enough market to influence manufacturers on the whole earth. When the EU finally banned various hazardous substances in electronics after a long transition period practically every electronics components or device manufacturer was forced to offer rohs compliant products. For many components or devices due to economics of scale and logistics it is cheaper to only offer a rohs compliant product worldwide than a compliant one for europe and a slightly cheaper traditional variant for the rest of the world.

That doesn't justify what the EU does. If the EU imposes a law (hypothetical law) that says all companies must hire 100 women to every man hired, that doesn't make it right even when companies around the world start having to do that same practice to do business in the EU. Just because something appears to be moral and then enacted through a law doesn't make it so. There are still plenty of people who disagree on the morality of any given subject, and to force them to do something they don't want to do on all but the most basic of things (the tenets of a society, do not kill, do not steal, etc), that removal of choice is the thing that is, in fact, immoral.

Already in place in Sweden?

[cycler]

Now I might be wrong here but memory serves that in Sweden the retailers are forced to accept a return of old equipment of the same kind when you purchase a new one. My google-fu right now has failed me so I can't find a reference.

I might be that what was optional now will be mandatory and different countries could already have this in effect.

More googling suggests that this is how it is. /C

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[Nick Fel]

The difference here is that you won't be required to make a new purchase. Many UK retailers will also dispose of your old stuff free if you buy something, although they're not required to.

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[jones_supa]

Yes, I believe something like this has been place in Finland for quite a while. Many big computer stores do also receive and recycle electronics without cost already.

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[vlm]

Now I might be wrong here but memory serves that in Sweden the retailers are forced to accept a return of old equipment of the same kind when you purchase a new one.

Where I live if you sell oil you must accept returned oil. No charge, no asking for ID, no debate. They are allowed to whine and complain and try to convince you to buy stuff, but they are none the less legally required to accept oil. So yes, you can carry bottles of used motor oil to a 15-minute quick lube place, or a dealership, or service station, or even walmart, and demand they take it, and they will. Supposedly they can deny if you're "obviously" a business, so 4 quarts of 5w30 is obviously OK but I donno what happens if you walk in with multiple full 5 gallon buckets. Supposedly the amount of oil dumped in the environment has dropped to darn near zero since this was enacted decades ago. I haven't seen a oil sheen on the local river since I was a kid... so I tend to believe it.

Can a /.er verify for me if this is a state or federal law?

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[larppaxyz]

Now I might be wrong here but memory serves that in Sweden the retailers are forced to accept a return of old equipment of the same kind when you purchase a new one. My google-fu right now has failed me so I can't find a reference.

I might be that what was optional now will be mandatory and different countries could already have this in effect.

More googling suggests that this is how it is. /C

Mandatory in Finland also, can't recall how many years already. But it's not just that, you can also take your old electronics to local dump and recycle them for free. This also works for all other household item's that can be recycled, like old car batteries. No reason to throw them into river or park at night.

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[Anonymous Coward]

Although, most Swedes probably have a recycling station (accepting e-waste) closer than to ANY retail store so not many people know or care about this law :)

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many many many years ago there was a very funny "Shoe" cartoon strip (possibly the only one...) where the old bird takes his old car in for an oil change, and asks the mechanic bird what he does with the old oil.

Acting upon it, he says, "Well, I just take it out around back..." and is confronted with a U.S. Coast Guard ship pointing a large gun at him, continuing, "and drink it."

AC

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[AlexCommPeak]

Unfortunately, it may be too little and too late. If someone were to force Apple globally to accept and recycle their old equipment, perhaps they wouldn't have released so many intentionally underdeveloped models to sell a new one a year later on. Same goes for a lot of manufacturers. Prices will definitely go up, but quality will go up as well, as no one would want to get their "junk" back.

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[xaxa]

The difference here is that you won't be required to make a new purchase. Many UK retailers will also dispose of your old stuff free if you buy something, although they're not required to.

They are required to either accept the old stuff when you buy something, or pay a general fee for stuff to be recycled (and you take it to the recycling site, or the council collects it).

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WEEE#Member_state_implementation

Re:Already in place in Sweden?

[gl4ss]

oh they would.. they would just refurb it and sell it again. you can still buy iphone 3gs..

Good news everybody

[SkunkPussy]

This is a really important step forward for the environment.

this has been in effect for years in Belgium

[tommeke100]

They now charge a 'recycling fee' on new electronic appliances. This goes from a couple of cents for small electronics to a couple of euros for fridges.

Re:this has been in effect for years in Belgium

[Anonymous Coward]

The same in the Netherlands. Except it was something around 9 euros for a TV I thought.

Re:this has been in effect for years in Belgium

[CrashandDie]

France has been doing the same thing, but that's not the same WEEE. The one you're talking about is this one, dated from 2003. The "eco-tax" has been applied since 2005, IIRC.

The main difference, as I understand it, is that the 2003 WEEE left it up to the member state to define which scheme to implement, in order to recoup the costs of recycling electronic goods:

From this website:

It is important to note that the WEEE Directive does not stipulate how its aims should be achieved and the system therefore currently varies between member states. A new WEEE Directive is proposed for publication in early 2012 that should solve this problem, among others.

Re:this has been in effect for years in Belgium

[Intrepid imaginaut]

Likewise, but while a laudable intiative, its important to keep track of the whole process. A lot of that e-waste, maybe even the majority, gets smuggled out and dumped into developing countries where villagers burn the stuff in their fields to get what they can out of it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/science/earth/27waste.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/electronic-waste-developing-world

Re:this has been in effect for years in Belgium

[Mashiki]

They now charge a 'recycling fee' on new electronic appliances. This goes from a couple of cents for small electronics to a couple of euros for fridges.

Ah that's just great. Of course, I've had old computers refused here in Ontario because they were built by me, instead of nice and you know made by a manufacturer. Until I pointed out that under the OERF that's illegal. Yep, places here were very happy to start collecting that fee.

Re:This will be sure to help

[Anonymous Coward]

The financial crisis in Europe really is a convenient distraction from your own domestic challenges, isn't it?

Indeed

[MRe_nl]

I am a Jobs-Creator and my new venture in the Congo will surely suffer due to this Communist legislation. Think of the little black employees!

Gabriel Mzungu,
senior VP Heart of Darkness Recycling Technologies

Re:Indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, our blue-eyed Randian libertarian will surely swing the election away from the Communist Muslim Dictator currently ruining this country.

Jeebus will protect your sacred right to employ slaves in dangerous occupations while profiting from their tears.

apples and oranges?

[1800maxim]

How is this the same? This bill is forcing retailers to accept your old equipment for recycling. As in, you have an old laptop that works or doesn't work, you want to throw it out. Now you can take it to the retailer and deposit it there.

Environment fee is not the same thing, though both apples and oranges are fruit.

Re:apples and oranges?

[thedonger]

How is this the same? This bill is forcing retailers to accept your old equipment for recycling. As in, you have an old laptop that works or doesn't work, you want to throw it out. Now you can take it to the retailer and deposit it there. Environment fee is not the same thing, though both apples and oranges are fruit.

Correct. And since they can't legally charge to accept your old equipment they add a fee on to the new equipment they sell. Sounds like apples to apples (or PCs to PCs) to me.

Re:apples and oranges?

[gl4ss]

retailers have been forced in most areas of eu to already take your old equipment and gather a fee associated with that..

you have been able to dump your old electronics at any electronics store in finland for the past.. dunno, 10+ years.

Re:apples and oranges?

[h4rr4r]

It is not, but in that case it is no real problem for the retailer either. Have a pallet in the back for this stuff, when pallet is full call recycler. I have this done at work all the time, they pay 1 cent per pound for that sort of unsorted electronics. The pickup fee is normally covered by that.

Let the free market take care of this

[cryfreedomlove]

There are 2 Ace Hardware stores in my town. One of them recycles CFL bulbs for free, no matter where you buy them. The other does not offer this service. Therefore I refuse to spend money at the non-recycling Ace Hardware. I take my money to the store that does the recycling. The market of 'me' is demanding recycling services of retailers.

Re:Let the free market take care of this

[isorox]

There are 2 Ace Hardware stores in my town. One of them recycles CFL bulbs for free, no matter where you buy them. The other does not offer this service. Therefore I refuse to spend money at the non-recycling Ace Hardware. I take my money to the store that does the recycling. The market of 'me' is demanding recycling services of retailers.

I simply refuse to buy CFL in the first place - horrible technology, from the poisons inside it to the "brightness" of the bulb.

Re:Let the free market take care of this

[Khashishi]

The idea that the free market can take care of this assumes that a meaningful fraction of customers give a shit about this kind of stuff.

A lot of electronics "recycling" is a fraud

[JDG1980]

In many cases, electronics that are supposed to be recycled really aren't. Instead, they are dumped in the Third World where they cause all kinds of environmental problems.

Even when some actual recycling is done, it is likely to make the impact on the environment worse, not better, than if it was just dumped in a landfill. See this article for some details (with photos) of how an electronics "recycling" operation in China threatens both the environment and worker safety. Of course, it's all about the Benjamins: "Sending a monitor to China costs about ten cents. Actually recycling it costs several dollars."

If the European Union wants this regulation to have a positive impact, they need to stipulate that the equipment be recycled locally under EU safety and environmental standards – not just exported to Ghana or China and down the memory hole.

Re:A lot of electronics "recycling" is a fraud

[delt0r]

Find the shiny!

Re:A lot of electronics "recycling" is a fraud

[bazorg]

Hi.

I have been involved in this reverse logistics business for a while and was responsible for getting a few hundred thousand mobile phones back from consumers' hands to where the devices could be processed.

There was not a big conspiracy or mistery around what happened with the phones. Despite some envious consumers disaproving or it, those phones good enough to have a market value were wiped out and sold as different grades of "used". Some would get new covers and looked new, while other were B grade and sold for less. Those at the the bottom of the pile were disassembled and sent to different recycling facilities.

Since this all happened within the EU, one of the rules was that once someone made the decision to dispose of the device, it needed to be handled as waste. In practice the phone was a phone until it got to the triage, and the triage needed to be done in the EU. I think that in terms of legislation, it was as close as possible to being useful without being impractical.

As a consumer you may be interested in finding out who the recycling partner is for your favourite brands and favourite retailers. On occasion, this will be treated as a secret because there are auctions going on for the used product and the companies are open to bids from different parties. Hopefully they will have requested correct credentials to be presented by those bidders, and that's difficult to find out.

Re:A lot of electronics "recycling" is a fraud

[timeOday]

In many cases, electronics that are supposed to be recycled really aren't. Instead, they are dumped in the Third World where they cause all kinds of environmental problems...

If the European Union wants this regulation to have a positive impact, they need to stipulate that the equipment be recycled locally under EU safety and environmental standards

I hate to spoil the article for you but...

The revised directive also includes a clampdown on illegal exports of waste electronic equipment. Equipment that is no longer under warranty can only be exported to non-OECD countries if it has been certified to be fully functional and sent properly.

The French

[guttentag]

Waste electrical and electronic equipment, or WEEE, is one the fastest growing waste streams in the EU, but currently only one-third of electrical and electronic waste is separately collected and appropriately treated.

The French had no arguments with this proposal, "Oui! We have been recycling our WEEE for some time now, and selling it to the Americans as 'eau de toilette.' We find this is a very profitable arrangement that also supports our sense of national pride. Now go away or I shall spray it on you a second time!"

Re:The French

[Anonymous Coward]

Waste electrical and electronic equipment, or WEEE, is one the fastest growing waste streams in the EU, but currently only one-third of electrical and electronic waste is separately collected and appropriately treated.

The French had no arguments with this proposal, "Oui! We have been recycling our WEEE for some time now, and selling it to the Americans as 'eau de toilette.' We find this is a very profitable arrangement that also supports our sense of national pride. Now go away or I shall spray it on you a second time!"

And the Americans have been selling it straight back as "Budweiser".

WEEED

[Anonymous Coward]

Brought to you by Bill and Ben, The Flowerpot Men!

Weee

[future assassin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6A0p-U1LBbQ

The free rider problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming that accepting recycled goods actually costs the retailers more than they can get in return (and it probably does), Amazon, newegg and other online retailers would be getting a free ride on yet another cost born by bricks and mortar merchants.

What a waste..

[Anonymous Coward]

Having to drive your stuff all the way back to the retailer? Putting the burden to collect on retailers to be recyclers. Stupid. Do you bring old clothes back to the mall? Do you bring your old fruit back to the fruit stand? Just make another recycling stream and collect with other wastes. Recycled electronics still bring in value, especially computers. The worse one is CRTs, but will all be gone soon.

Oblig...

[Anonymous Coward]

Think of the Wi-WEEE

Pay to return? or get a discount because of return

[BetaDays]

I wonder if they will charge for the waste disposal fee like they do with tires here in the USA. I buy a new tire and they bill me a dollar to dispose of it or the dollar they charge me to get rid of the oil when I do an oil change. OR will it be more like Best Buy where you bring in your stuff and they will tell you how much they will give you for it since you have to buy a new item, or will take it off your hands for free. Although they don't take back certain things.

This is Just Buck Passing

[nukenerd]

It is because councils, who (in the UK) are/were responsible for dealing with waste, don't want to be bothered. Now the retailers will have it on their hands.

Such goods are already treated separately. Ever tried to get a TV or washing machine into a wheelie bin with the rest of the rubbish?

Landfill

[ThatsNotPudding]

Our county landfill has a covered drainage sink connected to a large oil tank; you just bring in your used oil and dump it yourself. I think they're supposed to at least check your car has plates from the same county, but I can't recall anyone even looking at them. Plus, I think most dealerships / car repair places will accept it too, but I prefer the landfill (one mile out of town) rather than interrupting folk during their work, which has to get old rather quickly. And this is all in the heart of a virulently Red state, too! I guess even troglodytes can learn new tricks.

Retailers in the UK are paid by the weight of WEEE

[SeanDS]

Retailers in the UK have, I think, had to collect WEEE goods under law for a while now. I guess the EU ruling is making it mandatory across the continent. Anyway, I do know that retailers in the UK are paid by the weight of their electronic goods recycled, and not by their value in terms of rare earth metals and so on. This means that they are all too happy to collect your old washing machine when they deliver your new one or take your old desktop when you buy a new laptop. The heavier the better. Not sure if the fact that they pay by weight will bite them in the behind at some point.

Canada has electronics recyclers

[flyingfsck]

In Canada, every half decent city has one or two places that recycles electronics, and if you want a cheap computer, then you can go there and buy one for about $50. The city dumps also accept fridges, batteries, tyres, computers, paint, chemicals and whatever for recycling/safe disposal. Best Buy, Staples and others will also take old electronics and toss it in a corner, then call the recycler when there is a truck load.

The American Fool

[Anonymous Coward]

Your sense of "humor" is awful and you should feel bad.

It's shit like this that makes Americans look bad, and I'm not even remotely French. Heck you can't even spell Guten Tag!

Shh, the Americans are looking the other way

[Anonymous Coward]

Shh, the American public has already forgotten about their bank crisis, housing market and massive unemployment. The TV news has more details about the Kardashians instead.

It's much better if they think it's "Europe" that's failing... Even that coverage is hopelessly centered on the tiny economy of Greece! Don't mention why Germany's footing the bill (an actual, working economy).

barely even getting started...

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you're against murder, rape, and theft laws?

roman_mir also supports human slavery and child labor. murder and rape don't mean shit when human beings are sold on the open market like livestock.

Either I'm completely misunderstanding you, or you're insane.

he is, indeed, completely nuts. this is your brain on ron paul, any questions?

What genuine companies do

[Anonymous Coward]

Here, what genuine companies do is offer to take your old machine when buying a new one. I.e. an incentive to return a maybe-not-quite-knackered (or even knackered but only recently) bit of kit to THEM as opposed to some other company who isn't offering this.

Re:Retailers in the UK are paid by the weight of W

[rev0lt]

Retailers in the UK have, I think, had to collect WEEE goods under law for a while now

Retailers have to collect items they have sold, not items sold by others. From what I've depicted from the titlle (no I haven't read the article)m now retailers are obligated to collect an item, regardless of the origin.

I do know that retailers in the UK are paid by the weight of their electronic goods recycled, and not by their value in terms of rare earth metals and so on

I think you are mistaken. Retailers/manufacturers/importers pay by the weight and reciclability of what they sell. Additionally, you must pay an "importer fee" (it was 500 GBP, but may have changed) to then be able to pay per item sold. REEE regulation in EU is an absolute mess, because - long story short - there is no global market in electronics. As a retailer, you must be registered in every country you sell to, and - while the base law is the same - every country implements their own version, with their own fees, taxes and bureocracies. Small distributors are f**cked if they try to stay legal, and everyone else but the big importers just ignores it.

Re:Retailers in the UK are paid by the weight of W

[SeanDS]

Ok, I was basing this on what a manager at a large electronics retailer I worked in told me. Certainly while I worked there, the company was absolutely happy to accept any WEEE goods from anyone, including those who hadn't bought anything from the shop. We had people coming in and giving us WEEE goods and then leaving without looking at anything. It seems to me that such a policy would only be in the company's interest if they were being paid by weight to do it.

Maybe companies are fined based on the weight of products sold minus WEEE collected? That could be construed as paying by weight as well as earning by weight, so perhaps we're both right. I'm happy to admit my ignorance on the matter though - my knowledge is just based on what a manager once told me.

Re:Retailers in the UK are paid by the weight of W

[rev0lt]

Certainly while I worked there, the company was absolutely happy to accept any WEEE goods from anyone, including those who hadn't bought anything from the shop. We had people coming in and giving us WEEE goods and then leaving without looking at anything. It seems to me that such a policy would only be in the company's interest if they were being paid by weight to do it.

Yeah, here in Portugal that is common practice too, but not in all stores, and not all items. We also have large recycle bins at the entrance of large shopping areas for small appliances, batteries and lamps. (And used kitchen oil too, but that's not relevant)
I was quite familiarized with WEEE regulations in my previous job, and the specifics of some of the EU countries (UK, Portugal, Spain, Germany, Italy and Czech Republic) - specially because I had to educate our (not-so-big) suppliers - and even some of our competitors - regarding the costs and obligations of warranty, WEEE/REEE taxes and the assorted requirements to be met when importing from Asian countries.

And, they prosecute you for removing em again!

[KreAture]

Not only are they forced to take old electronics back for free, they also report you to the police if you try to remove anything from their forced junkpile.
There is really big money in this received hardware, both in it's recycle and on getting it out of circulation so you buy the new products.
If you head off a guy who is about to throw away some old hardware however, they get really unsure about how to treat you. They want to claim you are stealing, but at the same time they are unsure about from whom...

(Yes I like to take a peek and see what is in the bins, I once "found" 20 boxes of fiber patch cable giving me a nice kick for my home fiber project.)