![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
| Presidents Letter E-waste By Justus Baird, CEC President Proud of that new computer you just bought? Then dont read this letter. E-waste, sometimes called electroscrap, or WEEE in Europe (waste from electronic and electrical equipment) is becoming a major environmental problem. E-waste is comprised of obsolete electronic devices such as TVs, appliances, VCRs, and cell phones, but PCs are the most high-profile member of this waste stream. Interestingly, experts say that three-fourths of the outdated PCs in the United States have yet to be disposed of. They are stockpiled in our garages and bedrooms. According to estimates, we each have two or three of these obsolete computers at home. With the average useful life of a PC dropping to 18 months, we will soon have hundreds of millions of these quiet boxes hanging around. Although e-waste constitutes only 2 to 5 percent of the U.S. municipal solid waste stream, that number is growing fast. Forty percent of lead found in landfills comes from consumer electronics, and about 70 percent of the heavy metals there comes from electronic equipment discards. Consider these unfriendly contents of a typical PC: 4 to 8 pounds of lead, which is used in the solder throughout the computer and in the cathode ray tube (CRT) that makes up most monitors (monitor glass contains 20 percent lead by weight); cadmium from the circuit boards and batteries; brominated flame retardants used on the circuit boards, cables and plastic casing; PVC coated copper cables and plastic casing; and mercury in switches and flat screens, just to name a few.
What to do? It turns out that our European colleagues are leading the way. In May this year the European Union (EU) Parliament adopted a directive that requires electronics producers to take responsibility for the recovery and recycling of e-waste. This approach, called extended producer responsibility (EPR) or take-backs, places the financial and operational burden of dealing with e-wastes on the producer. EPR should raise retail prices of the electronic products (estimated at 1 to 3 percent increase) so that the consumer is actually paying the life-cycle cost. The producer has both the incentive and flexibility to decrease the negative environmental impact of their product though better product design and smarter material choices. To ensure producers head in the right direction, the EU Parliament adopted a second directive that requires manufacturers to phase out hazardous materials. The EU had good reasons for the measures. They estimate that e-waste is growing three times faster than other municipal waste streams; e-waste constitutes a substantial portion of various pollutants in the landfills even though many of the devices have yet to be discarded; various EU member states have already drafted similar legislation; and the expected price increases are minimal. Not surprisingly, U.S. electronics industry trade associations and the U.S. trade representative lobbied against the adoption of these standards. This differential regulatory climate has caused producers to respond locally. Many computer manufacturers, for instance, offer take-back programs in Europe but not in the United States. The Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC) is the leading U.S. nonprofit involved in e-waste issues. In December of 2000 SVTC published its second annual Environmental Report Card, which assesses the quantity and quality of environmental information provided by high-tech companies on their websites. Forty-four companies were evaluated on nine benchmark criteria. Compaq tied with Apple for 12th place with a score of 35.6 percent and Dell earned 18th place with a score of 21.8 percent. Canon, IBM, and NEC took the top three ranks. If Houston is serious about becoming a high-tech town, the environmental community better prepare itself to educate our high-tech colleagues about the environmental implications of e-waste. Houston has already experienced what lax waste regulations on a booming industry can do to the communities we live in. Lets not do it again. For more information: Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition: www.svtc.org |
|
![]() |