1
David Haase
December 6, 2013
ENVS 428 – Final Paper
E-Waste: Impacts and Solutions
Solid waste reduction has long been a topic in this country, as well as globally. With the
creation of the EPA, and a better understanding of the impacts that a heavy waste stream can
have on the environment, the industrialized world has made progress in the treatment and
disposal of solid waste. However, those same countries, and America in particular, still live as a
throw-away society to a great extent. The convenience of putting our trash at the curb and
having it hauled away without having to live with the consequences has made the problem of
waste management and accumulation worse as our population has grown. One particularly
troubling portion of this increased solid waste is the growth of electronic waste; or e-waste as it
is identified today. This is a complicated issue as it deals not only with environmental impacts
in countries that have access to a multitude of electronics, but to developing countries as well,
since they are often required to bear the burden of the final impacts of this type of pollution.
Known as the “digital divide”, people living in poorer countries will rarely have the opportunity
to own advanced technologies available today. The environmental injustice becomes much
more compelling when those who have no access to these devices must sacrifice their health
and ecosystems, so that richer nations can continue to replace and dispose of the devices at an
2
alarming rate. This paper will examine the evolution of e-waste, its current environmental
ramifications, and possible solutions to the problem.
The Tech Revolution
The 1980’s saw an explosion of advancements in electronic devices. Personal
computers were becoming as common in homes as televisions, and the silicon chip allowed
millions more computations than previously thought possible. Devices such as VCR’s,
Walkmans, and the creation of the compact disc, provided people with the convenience of
turning on a device and receiving immediate access to entertainment. The cellular phone, a
contraption as big as a small toaster, came into being. People who could afford them no longer
had to find a payphone or go inside to contact someone. The phone would send a signal that
would bounce off a few towers and either connect to a land line, or with another cellular user.
These advancements made life easier, and ultimately shrunk the world to allow for
globalization and better communication. Ultimately the development of the World Wide Web
accelerated the utility of the computer; a device that was believed should only be seen in the
hands of academics, or nerds. As time progressed, so did the computing power of these
devices. More and more circuitry could be placed on a single chip, not only increasing
microprocessor power, but shrinking its size as well. This led to more advanced electronic
devices that were smaller, more portable, and even more affordable. Platinum, palladium,
silver, copper, and other elements were used in devices to optimize processing power and
minimization in size. Devices such as televisions, printers, copiers, and fax machines all
contained tiny chips to make them work better and easier. By the late 1990’s, someone
3
without a cell phone, a laptop, a PDA, and a personal computer might as well be living in the
stone ages. Knowing how to use a fax machine, a copier, and a printer (usually all the same
device) was essential to working in an office setting and made a person more employable. This
was true also for software that could be used to write, do spread sheets, and even produce
slide-shows. Computer literacy became as important as reading, writing, and arithmetic.
These incredible advancements brought America and other developed countries into
the Information Age. At the same time however, an increasing number of new and improved
gadgetry meant an increase in disposal of the old. While pollution prevention concepts such as
recycling and reduction were just starting to take root, people were bombarded with new
technologies that companies argued they could not do without. The rate at which consumers
switched out the old for the new began to increase exponentially (Luther). Those devices and
components which were not necessarily broken or inoperable began to be replaced as quickly
as the technology advanced. Also, the average lifetime of such devices began to decline. This
combination of increasing obsolescence and decreasing life led to an overall increase in the
amount of e-waste being generated, and initiated the crisis we have today.
Impacts
All waste must be handled and dealt with to some degree. Whether this is at the local
level using sanitary landfills, or the international level where waste too expensive to be
processed in an industrialized country is exported to other countries where it is cheaper and
less regulated. While waste such as aluminum and paper is converted back into a raw material
to be used in the manufacturing process with some ease and low environmental impact,
4
complex devices such as computers and cell phones become much more problematic. From
the plastics used in the casings, to the heavy metals in the circuit boards and other
components, electronic waste is a complicated waste unit comprised of thousands of parts of
differing materials. As such, e-waste becomes much more of an expensive and labor intensive
item to disassemble and get back into the production stream. The recycling process is very
costly and labor intensive. Laws in the United States and other developed countries place
heavy restrictions on the practice of tearing apart electronic devices and separating their
individual components. Most of the plastics in advanced electronics have fire-retardant
materials in them (called BFR’s) which are toxic and hard to separate in a recycling process.
Heavy metals, including gold and platinum which are very valuable, are also very costly to
handle and remove in an environmentally sound manner. Finally, components that can be
retrieved as a whole and are usable do not have a very strong market due to the steady pace at
which technology advances. This begins to shape the picture in which the current after-life
world of electronics exists. As I mentioned earlier, the throw-away mentality of Americans
drives the overall fate of many devices. In addition the relatively low cost to replace these
devices as compared to the per capita income of the average American has contributed to the
proliferation of electronic waste and its detrimental impacts. Many times mobile devices such
as cellular phones or tablets are offered at a greatly discounted rate in exchange for a service
contract. Sometimes the initial or replacement phones are offered to the consumer free to
incentivize continuing business with a service provider.
Let’s use the example of a consumer who has a computer that they’ve owned for about
3 years. The computer has stopped functioning, and the consumer needs a computer to be
5
able to perform their job and stay in touch with family members. The consumer takes the
computer back to where they originally bought it. The manufacturer’s warranty has expired
and the consumer did not purchase any other protection on the computer. The technician
examines the computer and discovers that the cooling fan had stopped working causing the
internal components to overheat and some circuits were destroyed. I am by no means any kind
of expert on computers, so just to make the argument simple we’ll say the estimated repairs
will be about $400.00 plus another $200.00 in labor. While at the store waiting for the
technician to look at his computer, the consumer notices a brand new computer which is twice
as fast as his old one, has four times the memory, and a better monitor, for only $599.00.
Given this information, it would be ridiculous for him to spend the same amount for repairs as
it would be for a computer which is much more sophisticated and powerful. Besides the data
stored on his old computer, the value of it is essentially $0.00, making the decision to buy the
bigger, better product too easy. In this example, the old computer might stay with the store
and the consumer might get a credit for the device. The store might even have a process
whereby they refurbish the old computer and sell it to an organization that needs cheap
computers. The most likely scenario is that any working components will be stripped and the
remainder will go to a landfill. Meanwhile, the consumer goes home happy, thinking he has
received a great deal and no longer has to worry about the old item. There is no responsibility
on the part of the consumer to ensure the electronic device is disposed of ethically and
responsibly.
6
According to the EPA, in 2009 computers constituted the most recycled electronic waste
out of any devices tracked. This amount however was only 38%, compared to cell phones at
8%, and televisions at 17% (citation). Keep in mind these numbers are based on quantity
recycled by weight. Computers with their primarily steel casings and heavy internal
components make up a much more significant portion of the waste stream. Overall, only 25%
of electronic devices were collected for recycling in 2009, with the remainder heading to
sanitary landfills for disposal (EPA (Unknown)).
Recycling of electronic devices is a much more complicated situation. Typically if
anyone uses the term “recycling”, they appear to be one of the good guys; someone who is
trying to make a difference and improve our current environmental situation. However, as you
increase the complexity of the recycling, you also increase the cost. Any increase in cost in a
capitalistic society requires that that cost be passed off onto someone else, or the process is
inefficient and must be eliminated. E-waste recycling as it exists in the U.S. today is extremely
time-consuming, labor-intensive, and at a high cost in capital. In order for there to be a profit
in the recycling of electronic devices, the labor must be low-paid, regulations must be lowered,
or shortcuts need to be made in order to increase profit. In addition there needs to be a solid
market for the recovered materials. The recycling of electronics in the U.S. is a very immature
endeavor. The most recent data shows just over 500 locations in the U.S. that actively recycle
electronic waste in ways c (Puckett, Westervelt and al)ompatible with current environmental
regulations. While the number of sites has increased in New England, the Mid-West, and the
Pacific Coast, other areas of the country have seen a decline in the number of sites (Hai-Yong).
There is still a substantial amount of materials that become exports. Each recycler ends up with
7
either material or components that they can’t, or won’t process. Recyclers can claim to be
environmentally friendly because they keep the items out of American landfills, but in fact they
are just moving the problem elsewhere. These recyclers contract with downstream vendors
who take these materials and ship them to developing countries. In attempting to keep
electronic waste out of landfills, many industrialized nations have instituted restrictions and
guidelines that incentivize moving the waste out of sight and out of mind. What has evolved
over the past 10 years or so is the migration of the business of recycling devices disposed of in
America to developing countries worldwide.
In 1989 the United Nations met in Basel, Switzerland to discuss the problem of
hazardous wastes being shipped to developing nations to be disposed. The convention resulted
in guidelines and rules overseeing the movement of hazardous wastes from nation to nation
with the intention of preventing disposal in an environmentally unsound manner, and
burdening poor nations with the problems of rich nations. The Basel Convention has been
amended and updated, and now includes guidelines regarding electronic wastes. However,
circumventing this rule is fairly easy, especially for the United States which has yet to ratify the
Convention. When a recycler collects items such as computers, TV’s, and cell phones, their
primary goal is to process these items at the lowest possible cost. The items are loaded onto a
ship container and sent overseas, many times to port cities on the Western coast of Africa, or
poor nations in Asia. These items are listed on the bill of lading as items for repair or recycling,
and therefore are not regulated under the Basel Convention (Robinson). When the shipment
arrives there are no questions at the port, as the bill shows electronic devices for servicing. The
broker in the receiving nation picks up the container and takes the items to his village or
8
compound and begins unloading them. What many of these brokers find however, is that less
than 25% of the items are even capable of being repaired (Puckett). The majority of the
electronic devices are so damaged or outdated that the broker has no choice but to throw them
away. As a result these devices get piled up in the open, are burned, or even tossed into local
water supplies. The broker will take the items that are somewhat useful and fixes them or
breaks them down and sells working components. Instead of the devices getting processed in a
country that has environmental protection laws and is more selective in what is disposed, the
items are left to deteriorate and contaminate underdeveloped nations who do not have the
infrastructure or laws to ensure proper processing. One of the most frustrating parts of this
problem is that countries that take in the thousands of containers of devices are actually asking
for them(Schmidt). People in poor countries have a strong desire to have modern electronic
devices just like those in richer countries. This demand creates the market for recyclers who
can increase their profits by simply shipping the problem away, and brokers in the poor
countries pay very little if anything for these discarded items. Many of the citizens in the
receiving countries make a fairly good living and have become very adept at repairing a wide
range of electronics. For them, having one fourth of the shipments capable of making them
money is quite alluring, and they know that there will be no penalties for them simply dumping
or burning the unusable items. As the United States has not ratified the Basel Convention,
there is no reason for American recyclers to stop doing what they are doing. They are turning a
profit and they have a “green” image by keeping electronic waste out of American landfills.
This makes the problem much more complicated and harder to address.
9
Many countries that do receive electronic items actually do contract to recycle and
process the used equipment legally. On the surface it may simply look like another case of
outsourcing; using cheaper labor overseas to maximize profits. What is less known is that these
operations are dealing with a much more dangerous situation than assembling plastic toys or
sewing clothes. As I mentioned earlier, the process to remove valuable materials from
electronic devices and turn them into marketable commodities in an ethical way is extremely
expensive and complex. The infrastructure is so lacking in these developing countries that the
workers are exposed to extreme risk and hazards. Removing plastics from copper wires and
extracting valuable metals often requires the use of caustic chemicals. Conditions in these
processing locations are terrible, and many times young children are exposed to the same
dangerous conditions and chemicals as the adults. Protective clothing and equipment is rarely
used and exposure to toxic fumes for 12 hours a day or more is not uncommon. In 2007, a
team of scientists visited a town called Guiyu, in the Guangdong province of China to
investigate some of the effects of electronic recycling and processing that was occurring there.
According to the study, the city of 150,000 is home to the largest e-waste recycling operation in
the world. Processing of electronics includes acid digestion of materials, open burning and
melting of solder and other metals, and the workers wear no protective goggles or gloves.
Most times, spent acids and other wastes are openly dumped on the ground and into local
waterways (Coby, et al). The investigators tested sediment and water from two rivers that run
through the town near the processing areas. Elevated amounts of lead, cadmium, copper,
nickel, and zinc were found in the sediment, and previous studies have shown elevated
amounts of PCB’s and PBDE’s in wildlife near the area. The heavy metals and contaminants
10
contained in electronic waste are literally being poured into the ecosystem, affecting not only
the environment, but the health of the residents in Guiyu and elsewhere in the region. This site
is only one of thousands throughout the developing world, and as the number of used and
discarded electronic devices continues to grow, the problem will only get worse.
The final option for unwanted e-waste is, unfortunately, disposal. Currently e-waste
comprises 2 to 5% of the overall solid waste stream in America, and 8% worldwide (citation).
Although this does not seem significant, when one looks at the overall percentages of
electronic devices that are disposed rather than recycled, it is quite an alarming amount of
potentially dangerous waste. Earlier I had mentioned that only 8% of mobile devices were
recovered for recycling in 2009, according to the EPA. This means that close to 135 million
phones, tablets, and similar devices made their way into landfills in just one year. Sanitary
landfills in the U.S. are quite sophisticated and well designed to keep contaminants out of local
environments, but they are not perfect. Considering the amount of heavy metals and
chemicals within the plastics of the devices that are soluble, it is only a matter of time before
these contaminants leach out and make their way into the soil and water. The primary source
of this problem is education and culture. For years, Americans have looked to the trash can as
the solution for their waste. The ease at which refuse from American homes is transported
away from living areas to processing facilities reduces the notion of responsibility and
awareness. However, states are starting to recognize the problem and place restrictions on
electronic devices being sent to landfills. Maine, Minnesota, and California have all placed
restrictions on disposal of CRT’s in landfills due to the high lead content. Also, California has
passed a more comprehensive act to curb the disposal of electronic waste in those states.
11
Although the EPA recognizes the growing importance and complications of electronics in the
solid waste stream, they still do not recognize e-waste as a hazardous waste and it does not fall
under their schedule regarding handling. They do, however, allow for and promote states to
use their own legislation to regulate wastes in their respective landfills as they see fit.
Solutions
As we have seen, the increasing problem of electronic waste is not as simple as other
waste stream issues. The complexity of the devices and their components, the slow growth of
an infrastructure to ethically process them, and the ease of which the problem can be pushed
away, are all significant road blocks to solutions. There continue to be increases in awareness
and advocacy on the topic, but it is very slow as with any type of improvement that involves
culture shift.
The first step in curbing the amount of any waste product is to reduce. In terms of
electronics, this means not purchasing the device in the first place. As members of a modern
technological society, it is almost taboo to not have at least a computer and mobile device.
PC’s and cellular phones have made it possible for people to stay connected, informed, and
organized for a fairly small monetary investment. Having and using these devices is not really
the problem. It’s what happens when these devices reach the end of their lives. Although it is
tempting to get the new iPhone when it is released, consumers need to stop and think whether
it is really necessary. Most cellular service providers design their contracts around a revolving
two year set up. At the end of the contract period, providers incentivize renewing by offering a
new device at a discount, or even sometimes for free. Although it is unusual to have a device
12
that is in perfect condition at the end of the contract period, most devices are not completely
unusable. There may be a new device available with improved features, memory, or a better
camera, but what is the environmental cost when you dispose of a working phone to get a new
working phone? Obviously, if you have reached the end of the contract period and the phone is
no longer functioning it makes sense to replace it. But replacing a computer, TV, printer, or
other device in that same amount of time could be considered wasteful. Each one of the new
products represents raw materials that have been extracted to produce it, and thousands of
tons of carbon released in making the device. Reducing in this context does not mean doing
without, it simply means being conscious of the decision to replace an electronic device and
ensuring that the old device is either refurbished or recycled ethically.
Refurbishment would seem the most logical next step as an electronic device nears the
end of its usefulness. Unfortunately, most people choose to go straight to the recycling stage
because they are unaware of the limitations of recycling processes in this country. Refurbishing
involves taking a device that has reached the end of its useful life, and replacing any nonfunctional components (e.g. broken screen, failed circuit board, etc.). The refurbished product
can now be re-sold at a discount to a consumer and used just like it was originally designed,
giving the item an extended lifetime. As can be imagined, these efforts can only go so far.
Sometimes devices are so damaged, or have reached a point of having too much obsolete
technology, that there is no cost effective way of putting it back on the market. The free
market thereby concludes how much can be done for a device to keep it from the final stages of
the P2 pyramid; treatment and disposal. Obviously, as technology has advanced in the
13
production and maintenance of these items, so too has the ability to repair, refurbish, and even
recycle them.
There are organizations and businesses that work towards refurbishment before
recycling, however. One such group, known as Free Geek, works in different communities
accepting laptops and PC’s that might normally end up in landfills. The donations are taxdeductible and the volunteers are very adept at determining what units will be eligible for
refurbishment or will need to be recycled. Once it is determined that a unit is ok for
refurbishment, people who participate with the organization are taught how the different
components work, what needs to be replaced, and end up building their own free computer.
With this set-up, Free Geek spends no money on the breakdown and rebuilding of computers,
and citizens who might not normally have access to computers learn how they work and get to
walk out with a free working device. Any items that Free Geek take in that need to be recycled
are done so ethically and properly, and other items which cannot be integrated into
refurbishment are sold in the community to fund future operations (Fosdick). This is just one
example of how a motivated group of people can get further life out of electronic devices and
keep items from the landfill. By doing just a little investigation, the average consumer can
make an impact on e-waste proliferation by selecting a correct route for their used electronics.
Refurbishment represents the most effective process in reducing electronic waste. A
large number of devices are simply discarded that either work perfectly fine, or need a small
repair to continue their life. Refurbishing an electronic device allows less natural resources to
be used, and allows an extended life for the device, possibly in the hands of someone who
14
normally wouldn’t be able to afford it. Although this process does represent some of the
exportation of discarded electronics, these types of items at least represent something of value
that a developing country could use. If these devices were segregated here in the U.S. and only
those items that could be refurbished were shipped overseas, this would reduce the amount of
electronics shipped by 75%, and allow the brokers there to spend more time repairing and
reselling products instead of sifting through junk to find 1 or 2 usable items.
As bad as it sounds, recycling of electronic devices has become the real problem for the
fate of e-waste and its legacy. Proper and ethical recycling is still in its infancy in the U.S., and
because we are still developing good practices there is difficulty in developing profitable
recycling of electronics. Many of the recoverable materials such as plastic casings and internal
components do not fetch much on the market. There are also so many different types of
materials that no one recycling center can afford to have all of the processes for removing them
and selling them. As long as there is an available market overseas for accepting and processing
electronic waste at a discounted cost, American businesses will continue to send them there.
Our job as consumers is to demand a better system. Pressure on manufacturers of electronics
has resulted in less diversity of materials in the devices, and less hazardous materials. If the
additional cost of proper recycling here in the U.S. were spread out over all consumers buying
electronics, it shouldn’t raise the price all that much. What could be proposed is a surcharge or
tax on electronics, with the proceeds being used to subsidize the recycling industry in
processing the items and developing new technologies. A sales tax of as little as four to six
percent would bring in an incredible amount of money, considering the amount of devices that
are sold in this country alone. Poorer countries would have to find another way to make
15
money, but in the long run protecting their environments from our waste will save them a huge
amount of money in itself.
Finally, simple disposal of electronics needs to be reduced and stopped. Over the past
40 years the U.S. has made great strides in increasing the recycling rates for all sorts of solid
waste. E-waste just represents the next step in that process as education and awareness are
implemented to change culture and habits. Most states have established specific pick-up days
for electronics, placed restrictions on what can be thrown away, or made available lists of
organizations that collect e-waste. The EPA has also worked on public service announcements
and other media that explain the impacts of e-waste, and how to curb its effects. Public
awareness has also spawned groups whose sole purpose is to pressure manufacturers and
retailers of electronics to be more responsible with the production and proper processing of
these devices. It is now beneficial for a retailer to offer to take back used devices and process
them in an ethical manner as it increases return business, and builds trust with their customer
base.
As with most environmental issues, the solutions are not easy or simple. The most
important steps that need to be taken are increasing responsibility and accountability with the
people who are most involved in the production of e-waste: the end consumer. We also need
to incentivize keeping electronic refuse within the borders of our country, and penalize those
who try to send it abroad. Although the markets exist for used electronics and recycling
services in developing countries, the current situation allows for too much abuse and
irresponsibility. As regulations continue to become stricter and require more accountability on
16
the parts of consumers and industries, there will continue to be a desire to circumvent the
system at the cost of another country’s environment and the health of its people. Addressing
the problem with incentives and assistance will do much more than regulations that put a
stranglehold on economic growth. Businesses will tend to do what makes the most profit. By
making it less profitable to shift the problem to another part of the world we can influence the
market and improve the environment globally. Consumers will continue to be the most
important factor in solving this issue for years to come. Continuing to educate and raise
awareness should be the number one priority for government agencies and those invested in
the e-waste recycling and refurbishing businesses. In addition, closing the digital divide will also
ensure a discontinuation of the environmental injustice caused by e-waste.
17
Works Cited
Coby S.C. Wong, Nurdan S. et al., Evidence of excessive releases of metals from primitive ewaste processing in Guiyu, China, Environmental Pollution, Volume 148, Issue 1, July
2007, Pages 62-72
Fosdick, Howard. "Computer Refurbishing: Environmentally Reducing the Digital Divide."
Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology February 2012:
58-62.
Hai-Yong Kang, Julie M. Schoenung, Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S. infrastructure
and technology options, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 45, Issue 4,
December 2005, Pages 368-400.
Hester, R E, and Roy M. Harrison. Electronic Waste Management. pp 76-81,Cambridge, UK: RSC
Publishing, 2009
http://www.epa.gov. 14 November 2012. 28 October 2013
<http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/materials/ecycling/manage.htm>.
Kahhat, Ramzy, Klaus Hieronymi, and Eric Williams. E-waste Management: From Waste to
Resource. London. pp 167-172 Earthscan, 2013..
Luther, Linda. Analyst in Environmental Policy. CRS Report for Congress. Washington, D.C.:
Congressional Research Service, 2010.
Puckett, Jim, Sarah Westervelt and et. al. "The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-Use and Abuse to
Africa." October 2005. www.ban.org. 4 November 2013
<http://ban.org/library/TheDigitalDump.pdf>.
Robinson, Brett. E-waste: An assessment of global production and environmental impacts,
Science of The Total Environment, Volume 408, Issue 2, 20 December 2009, Pages 183
-191
Schmidt, Charles. "Unfair trade e-Waste in Aftrica." Environmental Health Perspectives (2006):
232-235.
Unknown. "Management of Electronic Waste in the United States." April 2007. EPA.gov. 25
October 2013 <http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/materials/ecycling/docs/fact708.pdf>.