Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

E-Waste and iWoes

By ZP Heller, AlterNet. Posted August 15, 2005.


Computers and their accessories contain toxins such as mercury and lead, causing massive environmental damage worldwide. But not all of the major computer companies are serious about reducing waste.
E-Waste and iWoes
E-Waste and iWoes
Advertisement

When Apple CEO Steve Jobs took the stage to deliver a candid commencement speech at Stanford this past June, a plane flew over the stadium with a banner that read: "Steve -- don't be a mini player -- recycle all e-waste."

This was the latest stunt by the Computer Take-Back Campaign (CTBC), an environmental crusade supported by activist groups who have criticized Apple for lagging behind the rest of the computer industry in its recycling efforts.

The plane's banner referred to Apple's recent announcement that it will now accept iPods for free recycling at all of its stores in exchange for 10 percent off the purchase of a new iPod. Until June, organizations like the CTBC and the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC) roundly denounced Apple for charging $100 to replace the battery in its highly successful mp3 players.

While Apple's latest attempt was seen as a small step toward greener pastures, it didn't assuage activist concerns. "We're glad to hear that Apple will accept its problematic iPods for free recycling," said Robin Schneider, vice-president of CTBC, "but we are calling on Mr. Jobs to offer free recycling for all of their old products."

Electronic waste, or e-waste, refers to all consumer electronic products that are ready to be discarded into the waste stream. Once these devices are deposited into landfills, toxic substances leach into the earth and into the water supply. According to a recent study from the Government Accountability Office, 50 million computers become outdated each year, and studies suggest that between 315 and 600 million desktop and laptop computers will soon be obsolete.

In its semiannual report [PDF] to Congress from November 2004, the Environmental Protection Agency concluded that the piles of e-waste are growing three times faster than normal municipal waste. Our ever-growing reliance on computers makes them particularly dangerous as e-waste, then, because their cathode ray tubes, circuit boards and monitors contain toxins like mercury, cadmium and lead. The CTBC claims that e-waste accounts for approximately 40 percent of these three toxins that end up landfills, noting that "just 1/70th of a teaspoon of mercury can contaminate 20 acres of a lake, making the fish unfit to eat."

Unfortunately, the EPA estimates that only 10 percent of e-waste is recycled annually. Even more upsetting, though, are the conditions in which some of these materials are recycled. While some firms operate under strict environmental regulations with adequate protocols to protect workers' health, many do not.

E-Waste Goes Global

In 2002, the Basel Action Network (BAN) along with the SVTC released a groundbreaking, heartrending investigation called Exporting Harm: The High-Tech Trashing of Asia [PDF].

BAN found that 50 to 80 percent of e-waste collected in the western U.S. for recycling is actually exported to countries like China, India, and Pakistan. The investigative team witnessed the toxic dumping of lead-laden cathode ray tubes in open fields and rivers not far from populated areas, the open burning of plastics and wires, and exposure to toxic solders from circuit boards. They also documented hundreds of thousands of migrant workers (men, women and children), who were forced to break apart and process obsolete computers, completely unaware of the health and environmental hazards involved.

The startling findings of BAN's investigation explain why the CTBC and SVTC have been so vocal in protesting Apple's recycling policies. "We want Apple to be a leader in our take-back campaign," said Barbara Kyle, CTBC campaign coordinator. "It's surprising they're so resistant as a 'Think Different' company." At a recent Apple shareholders meeting at the Apple headquarters in Cupertino, CA, their concerns were finally heard. With protestors outside, Steve Jobs broke from his comments to refute SVTC's allegations one by one, adding, "To say we're insensitive or irresponsible is just bullshit."

But while environmental groups have been squeezing Apple from the outside, non-profit organization As You Sow has been working on Apple and other industry leaders from within. Dedicated to promoting corporate social responsibility, As You Sow represents shareholders, engaging in dialogues with companies on social and economic issues. In a memo on Apple's computer recycling performance, As You Sow stated, "We have urged Apple, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM to take responsibility for most or all of the cost of product recycling; to reach an industry-wide agreement on infrastructure for efficient product take-back; and to develop better systems for safe, transparent breakdown and recycling of products."

Tons o' Fun

As shareholder advocates, As You Sow asked these tech giants to adopt better environmental policies that prohibit the dumping of e-waste. Dell was the first corporation to step up to the table, soon to be followed by HP. After working with these two companies between 2002 and 2004, Dell recovered computers and peripheral equipment weighing a total of over 15,500 tons. HP recycled well over 100,000 tons. On the other hand, Apple did not make a similar pledge to As You Sow, and only managed to recycle about 1,500 tons of e-waste in 2002 and a comparable amount in 2003. IBM has also pursued their own recycling methods, and processed 68,831 tons of e-waste worldwide in 2003, sending 1,112 tons of that total to landfills.


Digg!

Zack Pelta-Heller is a freelance writer living in Astoria, NY. Currently, he's an assistant editor for Dell Magazines. (Full disclosure: This article was written on an Apple computer. The author is a longtime fan of Apple, which made their environmental agenda that much more disappointing.)

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Waste equals food
Posted by: knitter on Aug 15, 2005 5:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In his book Cradle to Cradle, William McDonough examines cycles of nature as a way to design cycles of industry. In nature, microbes, soil, plants and animals nourish and replenish one another. What is given off as waste by one, feeds the next. When computers and all electronic devises are designed with their eventual breakdown and remake into the next product in mind, then we will not have toxic waste dumps polluting poor regions (and increasingly everywhere). Instead, the refuse of out-moded technology will be seen as a valuable resource to mine for creating the next product design.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Elephant in the Middle of the Room
Posted by: ? on Aug 15, 2005 5:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for holding Apple's feet to the fire. I am typing this on my iBook, the latest in a series of Apples to grace my desk since the late 1980's. BUT -- not a single mention of the Behemoth. Where does Microsoft fit into this picture???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about donations?
Posted by: brunowe on Aug 15, 2005 5:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I actually donated my last computer and monitor to charities that were looking for old, but functional, software which I found through http://www.sharetechnology.org. Perhaps activists could push computer companies to set up programs to link customers with those as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Happens To Collected E-Waste?
Posted by: bernardo on Aug 15, 2005 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You mention the problems w/ e-waste being shipped off to Asia but I don't seem to see information about how Dell is dealing with the e-waste that it collects. Casting about the internet, I found that in May of this year it was noted that Greenpeace slammed U.S. and Japanese electronic manufacturers, including Dell, for using harmful items in their computers. I would have found this current criticism interesting. Also, I learned that Dell had in the past been criticized by SVTC and for using prison labor to carry out the recycling -- enviros had dressed in prison uniforms w/ chains. This, as an Alternet reader, I would have found an amusing example of the past protest by enviros that has led Dell to take action. You the author humorously "disclose" your use and like of Apple computers, but the more obvious conflict is the employment by Dell Magazines, which I assume is a subsidiary of Dell Computer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Dell/Dell Posted by: zph
» RE: Dell/Dell Posted by: Katzya
looneu
Posted by: looneu on Aug 15, 2005 8:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does anyone know where the nearest place is that I can recycle a printer? My zip code is 56303

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: looneu Posted by: yally04
MS$
Posted by: csetzer on Aug 15, 2005 2:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The difference between MS and Apple in this area is that Apple is a computer manufacturer, whereas MS only supplies the software (and some branded products manufactured somewhere other than Redmond). Perhaps Dell or HP would provide a better comparison?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bad use of statistics
Posted by: yally04 on Aug 15, 2005 10:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The statistics in this article paint a very bad picture of Apple, with its paltry 1.5k tons of recycling a year versus 5k/year from Dell, 33k/year from HP, 68k/year from IBM. But consider these back-of-the-envelope calculations:

Dell shipments: 18% of total computer shipments 2004
HP: 16%
IBM: 6%
Apple 4th quarter 2004 x 4: 2%

Using the numbers from the article, Dell actually is worse about recycling than Apple is, given its shipping volume: In 2004, Dell sold almost 10 times as many computers as Apple, but only recycled 3.5 times as much e-waste. Plus, Dell's revenue in 2004 was 4 times that of Apple ($51 billion vs. $12.6 billion).

IBM puts everyone else to shame. HP comes next, but still only recycles half of what IBM does despite having nearly 3x the shipments. IBM's 69k tons in one year is 13 times what Dell recycled, although IBM shipped 1/3 as many PCs. Granted, IBM is a much bigger company and part of that must come from other businesses, but IBM's revenue was only 2 times that of Dell, so that doesn't account for everything.

Dell is getting praised to the skies for it's mediocre recycling program and oh-so-valuable "pledge" to As You Sow, while Apple is getting slammed. Apple could certainly stand to improve its environmental stance, but this article just goes to show how important it is to be the first major polluter in an industry to do something environmentally friendly: Whatever the program costs, the PR you get is worth far more.

Kudos to IBM for doing the right thing, and for not being a publicity fiend.


p.s. The writer also failed to note that Apple computers have a much longer useful life than Dells, HPs, and IBMs, and sell for more in the used computer market. This suggests that there are simply fewer Apple machines going to the dump. My parents still have theirs from 8 years ago, still going strong. I don't know anyone who has dumped Macs in the garbage. There's always someone who will take one.


Sources:
http://www.cw360.com/Articles/2004/04/16 (cont. next line)
/201795/CorporatebuyingboostsDellPCsales.htm
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2004/oct/13results.html
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=DELL
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=aapl

(Putting actual links in my comment didn't work when I previewed it. What's going on?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Computers only part of the problem
Posted by: acemoab on Aug 16, 2005 6:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is no one mentioning discarded TV's, VCR's, and other "disposable" electronics here? I used to make a good living repairing these, but now struggle on a pittance because of the likes of Wal-Mart selling new (and grossly inferior) items at prices so low that no one repairs old ones any more. Further exaserbating this waste stream is the conversion to digital TV, which no one needed or wanted, and was, in reality, a resource grab by large corporations hoping to gouge us with fees for wireless itnernet service that elimination of ten more TV channels will provide the spectrum space for. Remember UHF channels going to 83? They only go to 69 now due to the cellphone industry's grab more than a decade ago. Well, they will eventually go only to 59 after the conversion to digital TV. Spectrum space is a public asset like water rights and should not be given away to corporations, but where is the left when more of our property is given away to the super rich? As for the waste the digital TV conversion will cause, this is a problem much more dire than computer waste, as there are a lot more old TV sets and the like, and they contain MUCH more lead and other pollutants than computers, for various technical reasons. TV sets and other electronics should cost A LOT MORE and include a deposit for proper disposal in their original price, refunded when ANYONE takes them for recycling. ALL consumer products that can be, should be completely serviceable for at least fifteen years with guarantees of parts and support availability. Many good American companies (Whirlpool and National Presto Industries immediately come to mind) still do this as a practice of good business. Someone needs to make it the law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Current Env. Legislation
Posted by: ls on Aug 17, 2005 10:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article missed a great opportunity to share current Legislative Directives that are impacting how technology companies are changing their practices. 2 powerful directives coming out of the European Union address the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (ROHS) and the Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) that requires companies to take-back their products when they reach the end of their life. Both of these Directives are changing the way companies design their equipment requiring new solders, designs for reuse, etc. The WEEE Directive also has strict guidelines on the percent by weight of the product that needs to be reused, recovered, etc. so sending to Asia where it will end up in a landfill is not an option. California also has SB 50 and SB 80 Directives which mandate companies to also provide "take-back" options to the consumers. Another article on these directives would be interesting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How do I contact Zach?
Posted by: bsmall99 on Aug 17, 2005 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Zach,

Great article.

I'd like to talk to you about this outsite the posting section.

Please email me when you get a chance.

My email is brandon at investedinterests.com

Thanks,
Brandon

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

blogmommy
Posted by: blogmommy on Aug 21, 2005 2:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, Mr. Pelta-Heller gives me something to stew about. I enjoy my Apple computer,but I will certainly be watching the company now to see if their policies regarding e-waste are going to improve. I had not thought through this issue, probably because I haven't replaced a computer in years and I don't have an i-Pod. Thanks for the info and the clear writing. Yours, Nelly Greenwald PhD

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]