ECycle (Recycling)

The term e-cycling refers to the process of recycling the components or metals contained in used or discarded electronic equipment,² otherwise known as electronic waste (e-waste). E-cyclable items include, but are not limited to: televisions, computers, microwaves, vacuum cleaners, telephones and cellular phones, stereos, and VCRs and DVDs. The need for e-cycling facilities has been increasing recently due to technology’s rapid rate of obsolescence.

Pros of e-cycling

Some people support e-cycling for ethical reasons. This stance can be traced to the fact that much of e-waste is dumped in developing countries, and people disagree with the environmental and human health hazards that this presents. As an example, groundwater has become so polluted in areas surrounding China’s landfills that water must be shipped in from 18 miles away.⁶By this token, e-cycling helps the environment by avoiding pollution and being a sustainable alternative to disposing of e-waste in landfills. Another benefit to e-cycling is that valuable materials are retrieved from e-waste that otherwise would have been thrown out. Supporters argue that e-cycling saves taxpayers money,¹ as the financial responsibility would be shifted from the taxpayer to the manufacturers. In taking part in e-cycling, companies would be motivated to use fewer materials in the production process, create longer lasting products, and implement safer, more efficient recycling systems.⁹

Criticisms of e-cycling

The critics of e-cycling are just as vocal as its advocates. According to the Reason Foundation, e-cycling will only raise the product and waste management costs of e-waste for consumers and limit innovation on the part of high-tech companies.⁸ They also believe that e-cycling facilities could unintentionally cause great harm to the environment. Additionally, critics claim that e-waste doesn’t occupy a significant portion of total waste. According to a European study, only 4% of waste is electronic. Another opposition to e-cycling is that many problems are posed in disassembly: the process is costly and dangerous because of the heavy metals of which the electronic products are composed, and as little as 1-5% of the original cost of materials can be retrieved. A final problem that people find is that identity fraud is all too common in regards to the disposal of electronic products.⁴

Where does e-waste really go?

A hefty criticism often lobbed at common recyclers is that people think that they are recycling their electronic waste, when in reality it is actually being exported to developing countries such as China, India, and Nigeria. It has been estimated that 90% of e-waste is not being recycled as promised.⁶ For instance, at free recycling drives, "recyclers" may not be staying true to their word but are selling e-waste overseas⁶ or to parts brokers.⁷ Studies indicate that 50-80% of the 300,000-400,000 tons of e-waste is being sent overseas, and that approximately 2 million tons per year go to U.S. landfills.⁶

What’s happening now: Policy issues and current efforts

Currently, pieces of government legislation and a number of grassroots efforts have contributed to the growth of e-cycling. The Electronic Waste Recycling Act was passed in California in 2003³. It requires that consumers pay an extra fee for certain types of electronics, and the collected money is then redistributed to recycling companies that are qualified to properly recycle these products. As of September, 2006, Dell developed the nation’s first completely-free recycling program,⁵ furthering the responsibilities that manufacturers are taking for e-cycling. Another step being taken is the recyclers’ pledge of true stewardship, sponsored by the Computer TakeBack Campaign. It has been signed by numerous recyclers promising to recycle responsibly. Grassroots efforts have also played a big part in this issue, as they and other community organizations are being formed to help responsibly recycle e-waste.⁵ Other grassroots campaigns are Basel, the Computer TakeBack Campaign (co-coordinated by the Grassroots Recycling Network), and the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition.

Many people believe that the U.S. should be following the European Union model in regards to its management of e-waste. In this program, a directive forces manufacturers to take responsibility for e-cycling; it also demands manufacturers’ mandatory take-back and places bans on exporting e-waste to developing countries. Another longer-term solution is for computers to be composed of less dangerous products.

These communities can connect with each other by means of various websites.

References

1. “About the Campaign.” Computer TakeBack Campaign. Accessed 28 October 2007. < [http://www.computertakeback.com/about/index.cfm] >. 2. “ECYCLING: The Closed Loop Solution.” 2006. eCycling Technologies. Accessed 29 November 2007. < [http://www.ecycling.com/] >.

3. “Electronic Waste Recycling Act of 2003: Covered Electronic Waste Payment System(SB 20/SB 50).” 1 November 2007. California Integrated Waste ManagementBoard. Accessed 28 November 2007. < [http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Electronics/Act2003/] >.

4. “The Importance of Responsible Recycling for Used Electronics.” 2007 ElectronicIndustries Alliance. Accessed 29 November 2007. < [http://www.eiae.org/why.php] >.

5. Moore, Elizabeth Armstrong. “Momentum Builds for ‘Revolution’ to Recycle ElectronicWaste.” 31 July 2006. The Christian Science Monitor. Accessed 29 November 2007. < [http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0731/p13s02-stct.html] >.

6. “Most U.S. Electronic Waste is Pollution-and-Worker-Danger Shipped Overseas.” 19 November 2007. Ethical Shopping. Accessed 29 November 2007.< [http://www.ethicalshopping.com/electronics/cell-phones-service/most-u-selectronic-waste-pollution-and-worker-danger-shipped-overse] >.

7. "Much toxic computer waste lands in Third World." 25 February 2002.USA Today. Accessed 27 September 2007.< [http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2002/02/25/computer-waste.htm] >.

8. Scarlett, Lynn. “E-Waste Politics.” Reason Foundation. 4 October 2000.< [http://72.10.40.168/commentaries/scarlett_20001004.shtml] >.

9. Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. Accessed 30 October 2007.< [http://svtc.etoxics.org/site/PageServer?pagename=svtc_work] >.