Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

HP's Printer Cartridges Are an E-Waste Disaster -- Does the Company Really Care?

By ZP Heller, AlterNet. Posted October 29, 2007.


There are ways to clean up our massive e-waste mess. The industry giant Hewlett-Packard needs to do much more.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheists, It's Time to Stand Up to Jesus
Russell Blackford, Udo Schuklenk

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by ZP Heller

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

We live in a technology-addicted culture, and the race for the latest electronics is taking its toll on the environment. Electronic waste, or e-waste, is now the fastest-growing part of the municipal waste stream.

But as people become more conscious of their "carbon footprints" or their environmental impact, programs are cropping up to recycling common e-waste like cell phones and computers. However, when it comes to printer cartridges, there is a lot of work to be done. Especially when it comes to industry leader Hewlett-Packard, which is trying to wipe its carbon footprint clean.

HP dominates the printer cartridge market. According to Andy Lippman, an industry analyst at Lyra Research, HP produces more than half of the 500 million ink-jet and 75 million laser cartridges sold annually in North America alone. Considering that about half of the empties those ink-jet cartridges replace are simply thrown away, it's no wonder HP seeks to clean up the e-waste mess it perpetuates.

HP has an e-cycling (or electronic recycling) process that is convenient and astonishingly simple, given HP's global reach. Here's how it works: Most of its new cartridges come equipped with a postage-paid shipping label or green mailer envelope for customers to drop their empties in the mail, free of charge. Those empties have already added up to 143 million recycled cartridges worldwide. It's the kind of environmental stewardship that led Fortune Magazine to call HP a "green giant" this year.

But there are cracks in HP's e-cycling façade, wide enough for environmental watchdogs like Greenpeace to be concerned and for recycling alternatives to emerge.

This past July, HP met its goal for recycling one billion pounds of electronic products six months ahead of schedule. According to Jean Gingras, HP's environmental marketing manager for North America, recycled ink-jet and laser cartridges comprised more than 25 percent of that total -- some 260 million pounds. The company anticipates similar numbers for its next billion pounds of e-waste, which it intends to collect by 2010. "HP designs with the environment in mind," Gingras said. While these numbers seem laudable at first glance, Greenpeace is holding its applause.

In September, Greenpeace released the latest installment of its quarterly "Guide to Greener Electronics," in which HP ranked among the bottom of 15 companies on the quest to go green. The report contended that among HP's more heinous crimes against the planet is its failure to eliminate vinyl plastics (PVCs) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from its products. These hazardous materials are virtually impossible to recycle and wreak havoc on our environment. PVCs and BFRs that end up in incinerators, smelters or landfill fires release dioxins and other carcinogens into the air. The materials can also leach into the soil and wind up in our food chain.

Both PVCs and BFRs can be found in printers and printer cartridges. Iza Kruszewska, a Greenpeace International Toxics Campaigner, said that BFRs can be found in the green circuit boards on cartridges. While BFRs and PVCs can certainly be found in the cartridges of other companies as well, HP bears the burden of producing the largest number of cartridges currently available. To date, HP has no products available that are PVC-free or BFR-free, nor has HP issued a timetable for eliminating all uses of PVCs or BFRs from its products.

Gingras claimed that, over the past decade, HP has removed 95 percent of BFRs and PVCs from its products. She also insisted that no components of its recycled cartridges end up in landfills. But others, like Rick Hind, the legislative director of Greenpeace's Toxic Campaign, disagree. "Those materials have to go somewhere. There's no safe disposal of PVCs or BFRs, in the same way you can't dispose of radioactive material," he said.

While to some, removing 95 percent of BFRs and PVCs is impressive, the sheer volume of cartridges HP produces means that there are still too many products out there containing these hazardous materials. In North America alone, that remaining 5 percent of HP cartridges containing BFRs and PVCs is equal to 12.5 million ink-jet and another 3.75 million laser cartridges. This staggering number is why Greenpeace has demanded HP set a timetable for eliminating BFRs and PVCs.

Reduce, reuse, recycle

It is not just the chemicals in HP's products that are of concern -- but also their recycling.

Recycling printer cartridges consists of reducing the empty cartridges down to raw materials that are then used to manufacture new plastic or metal products. HP uses these materials to create auto body parts, clothes hangers, roof tiles, spools, and serving trays, along with a slew of other products. HP even sells a scanner made from 25 percent recycled ink-jet cartridge plastic and 75 percent recycled plastic bottles. Yet despite these innovative endeavors, HP has turned recycling into a business in highly dubious ways.

For starters, HP refuses to remanufacture printer cartridges. Remanufacturing takes empty cartridges, cleans and refills them with high-quality toner and resells them at a fraction of the cost of buying a new cartridge. Above all, remanufacturing ensures that empty cartridges won't wind up in landfills. Gingras said that HP's concern over remanufactured cartridges lies in their reusability. She pointed to a study (commissioned by HP) in which the print quality is degraded using refurbished cartridges. "What we've seen is that there's more waste generated during reuse," Gingras said, "since there's a need to reprint pages with poor quality and use more ink and paper."

HP's stats are debatable considering remanufactured cartridges can last longer and contain up to 20 percent more ink than new cartridges. Either way, HP's decision not to remanufacture cartridges seems more like a business move than an environmental concern.

Andy Lippman of Lyra Research explained, "It doesn't make sense for [HP] to remanufacture cartridges because, logistically, it would be very expensive for them." Lippman referred to the "razor and blades" business model for selling ink-jet printers. Printers are sold at low or below cost (many are bundled for "free" in computer sales) because companies like HP make up their costs on cartridges. Since remanufactured cartridges can be upwards of 40 percent to 60 percent cheaper than the original manufacturer's, HP is merely watching out for its profit margins by designing cartridges for one-time usage.

HP has created a recycling Catch-22. It has made recycling easy, but by not offering remanufactured printer cartridges, customers have no choice but to buy new cartridges at full price. In March, Recharger Magazine, a trade publication, reported that Staples discontinued the sale of all HP-compatible store-brand printer cartridges. Other industry leaders like Dell, Canon and Lexmark allow companies like Staples to offer cheaper store-brand cartridges that are compatible with their printers.

HP also has some products, such as its 90 series of ink-jet cartridges, that will not work outside of the United States. This maneuver, assessed Rick Hind, "undermines the company's global takeback policy," since it limits the global market of empty cartridges and overseas recycling. In other words, while HP is recycling millions of printer cartridges, it has created a system that guarantees the production of millions more.

The alternatives

Greenpeace alleges that in general, HP has recently weakened its stance on individual producer responsibility. "Polluters should pay," Hind explained. "Companies should be financially and mechanically fully responsible for taking back all their waste globally." Unlike in the European Union, there is no federal legislation in the United States or China regarding individual producer responsibility, meaning that recycling is left up to the states, and HP is left largely off the hook.

There are alternatives to recycling with HP, some of which are financially rewarding for customers. Staples, for instance, gives customers $3 off their next printer cartridge purchase for each empty cartridge they bring in, regardless of brand. Then there are independent chains that have cropped up across the country in recent years, like the Cartridge Recycling Center, which offers even more cash for cartridges.

Tom Dougherty of Cartridge Recycling said his company will send a business or school collection boxes with prepaid postage, paying up to $4 per cartridge. The center in turn sells these empties back to companies that remanufacture, and they currently process 20,000 cartridges a month.

As Jean Gingras said, HP has no qualms with its recycling competitors, which is understandable given the monopoly they have created over their products. Gingras did say that customers ought to make sure materials are recycled properly and that nothing goes to landfills. Now the only question that remains is whether HP will do the same.

For more information about e-cycling alternatives, E-cycling Central provides links to local recycling companies in your area.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: recycling, electronics, e-waste, hp, hewlett-packard, ewaste

Zack Pelta-Heller is an AlterNet contributor.

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:
All I know is..
Posted by: picklebarrela55 on Oct 29, 2007 12:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
$15-20 dollars for cartridge of ink. Absurd.

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

» RE: All I know is.. Posted by: jellison45013
A fundamental problem with HP cartridges ...
Posted by: eloots on Oct 29, 2007 4:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is that, for most of the printers in the HP catalog, the cartridge is the printhead.

My first inkjet printer was an HP. I always found it a waste that, when you bought new cartridges (mine had two, one B/W, the other for colour), every cartridge has a print head integrated in the cartridge. I think this is a enormous waste in itself. Other printer manufacturers (such as Canon and Epson) make printers that have a replaceable print head and ink cartridges. (which reduces them to basically simple ink tanks) Makes recycling/refilling much easier/cheaper.

Using the integrated print head approach allows a printer manufacturer such as HP to limit the choice of the consumer for alternatives.

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

» RE: A fundamental problem with HP cartridges ... Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
The Money’s in the Ink
Posted by: d.nweindeb on Oct 29, 2007 4:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I use HP products with my Mac and find them excellent, and do recycle. However, it seems to me that HP makes little, even next to no, money on its everyday printers, such as the Photosmart C4180 All-In-One which I use. It was very inexpensive, but the 2 ink cartridges it uses are not at all that way - au contraire! And if I use cheaper substitute cartridges, I cannot then access the software for my printer that tells me how much ink remains, etc. It’s quite obvious that HP is making its money, lots of it, more on its disposable cartridges than on the printers themselves. Solution? Either some definite environmental morality or damn strict regulations.

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

» RE: The Money’s in the Ink Posted by: marxalot
» RE: The Money’s in the Ink Posted by: AussieGeoff
Also disappointed in HP
Posted by: eksommer on Oct 29, 2007 5:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My old HP 940 was a workhorse and I dutifully returned my spent ink cartridges to Office Depot. Recently I bought a new HP C5180. When the cartridge ran out, I once again took it Office Depot and was told nope, those cartridges may not be recycled.

In addition, I have noticed that the ink does not last very long at all. My printing habits have not changed. So I am greatly disappointed in HP, and will shop around for another brand next time I need a printer.

And I agree that having the printheads in the ink cartridge is a waste of materials.

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

My office supply store gives out a free pad of paper
Posted by: pammers on Oct 29, 2007 5:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
return your cartridges, get free paper. Maybe you should change where you shop.

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

The article seems to miss the obvious.
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Oct 29, 2007 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always thought the HP recycling envelopes were the height of hypocrisy. HP only came out with them when competitors started refilling HP cartridges. They have one true purpose - to take the cartridges out of circulation, not to save the environment. It's a heck of a scam. HP pays bulk mail while its competitors pay $3 to $4, and as the article points out, the HP model actually increases pollution. That's why HP cartridges are the only thing that ever comes with a convenient little recycling envelope. Why not include a UPS tag with their throwaway printers?

But then "Help us sell more new cartridges by using this envelope...", doesn't have the same ring as "Help save the environment...", does it?

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

HP Sucks!
Posted by: nc green on Oct 29, 2007 6:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
$10 - $15 for a cartridge of ink?! What universe is that poster living in? Obviously, an HP-free universe, where you only have to pay for Canon ink cartridges.

HP cartridges are freakin' $40 and more (buy two and pay only $35 each!).

Besides that, HP inkjet printers are the least reliable paper handlers on the market, in my never-humble opinion. Constant, neverending paper jams!

They're long-lived, or I would have gotten rid of this piece of trash that's been cluttering up my e-life for the last four years. Blah!

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

Here's where I always argue with other's on "The Left"
Posted by: dwilliamsamh on Oct 29, 2007 7:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading this article I have only one question for HP and One comment for the people who are posting about how awful HP is.

The question for HP (and I would have appreciated an answer IN the article) is WHY don't they get rid of the offending chemicals and toxins in the cartridges completely? Why is 95% as far as they are willing to go? Is there some actual reason for the intransigence on this point? I think that is a serious question and deserved 100% of the column space taken up by what seemed to be the over arching criticism: That HP won't cut its own throat to re-manufacture and refill print cartridges, instead of recycling them into other products.

Look, in a perfect world nothing would cost anything it would all be free because we are all looking out for the wants and desires of our fellow man and everything would be cooler than the other side of the pillow baby. Get over it.

Corporations exist as vehicles of profit that is passed on to the investors. Given the choice between a company that makes a profit and makes every effort to recycle the mountain of disposable waste their product generates (like HP) VS, a corporation that not only doesn't provide FREE shipping for all its post consumer waste to recycling plants, but actually actively hurts the environment, I choose the former.

As a practical matter HP must continue to make a profit so that it can stay in business. Do you think if they go under or drop the printer business all together, their remaining competitors are more or LESS likely to pick up the degree of commitment to recycling that HP has shown? I think less.

Get real people. Profit is not evil. Some schemes to make a profit are, but profit isn't.

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

Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
NOT THAT LONG AGO WE HAD A GOOD SYSTEM
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Oct 29, 2007 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Deposit bottles? Milk and soda? I know how busy everyone is but it takes very little time to return an empty whatever it is when you buy the new one. Companies have to assume some responsibility beyond making stuff, selling it and making money. Do they refill in China or India? How about the USA. If they can't play ball they can pay a big fat fine. It's been done before and it works. Companies have to be regulated. We pay to buy things and then we have to pay to get rid of them. We need a better way. Thanks, ANNA

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

» RE: NOT THAT LONG AGO WE HAD A GOOD SYSTEM Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
B/W laser are much more economical (and last longer, and can be remanufactured several times)...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Oct 29, 2007 8:34 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...compared to the tiny boxes of ink for which unwitting consumers continue to shell out $20-30. The print quality is much nicer, the DPI is higher, it prints faster, and if you really need color prints, you local drugstore can do them for you for pennies. Beyond that, laser printers last longer, don't have failure/clog-prone needles, the ink doesn't degrade, etc. And back to simple self-interested economice, the price per page printed with a laser can be two orders of magnitude lower than the price per page printed with an ink-squirter.

"Polluters should pay," Hind explained. "Companies should be financially and mechanically fully responsible for taking back all their waste globally."

Yes! Make Big Evil (little) Grocery Stores that I shop at who make Big Evil Money responsible for paying my sewage bill, too! Or, *sh*, should I just leave *it* at the curb for my next Global Waste Take-Back Truck? In an otherwise decent and fairly informative article, the author makes the mistake of assuming that ___________ (waves off in the distance...) should really be the one footing the tab for the what he decides to buy and use. Gee, wouldn't it be great to live in a world where you write off the consequences of your choices? Can I get bus fare to that planet, and we'll just send our bills back to Earth?

First order of business once there: we'll base our economy on Interstellar Carbon Trading, and we'll even send HP a bill for all the Interstellar Carbon Creds we print and sell.

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

The trouble isn't HP -- it's our mentality that trash is worth less than gold.
Posted by: alaskagrrl on Oct 29, 2007 9:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sure you separate your recyclables and by doing this UNPAID WORK you drive the price of garbage so low that is has no value. If there was more money associated with garbage there would be legions of people out there collecting and recycling it by the ton.

For the sake of the environment -- STOP RECYCLING ! (And tell your government why you shouldn't be forced to).

Think I'm crazy ? Think again....

In 1983 I was an electrician working on a garbage separating plant located in Fairbanks Alaska. The price of recyclables was so high we mechanically sorted EVERY CAN OF GARBAGE the city generated and even began 'eating away' at the existing landfill. Our only significant cost was the bunker crude (tar) used to dry the garbage before manipulation.

Then the 'recycling craze' hit. The price bottom fell out of recycled materials because legions of unpaid workers got involved. We had to stop and the landfill began growing again.

My point is -- if it worked in Fairbanks Alaska where every bit had to be shipped by truck, then train, then barge south -- it would work ANYWHERE !! IF ONLY THE PRICE STAYED HIGH. It's simple economics.

Recycling for free corrupts any chance of commercial recycling ever becoming a viable management tool. If it did, we wouldn't have to worry about e-waste. My gosh, there's actually elemental Gold in that e-waste !! It should be placed right in the garbage can where it belongs, to enhance it's value enough that someone goes after the rest.

Environmental writing pioneer Edward Abby (remember him?) metaphorically tossed soda cans out the window as he drove through the desert. Remember why ? It enriched the resource and thus caused others to eagerly pursue it.

Stop Recycling and Save the Planet.

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

» Landfill space? Posted by: BlueTigress
What else can I do?
Posted by: picklebarrela55 on Oct 29, 2007 10:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not like I have the money to throw down for an entirely new printer. And it's not like any other company is that much better.

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

» RE: What else can I do? Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: What else can I do? Posted by: frantaylor
Ditched HP for good
Posted by: DaBear on Oct 29, 2007 11:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
HP printers are inferior, period. They're half the speed of Epson, their cartridges cost twice that of Epson, and they clog all the damned time.

For the record, in the decade I was using an HP printer I never once saw a recycling envelope or slip in the ink cartridge box. Not once. I use Epson and recycle the tanks after my generic refills crap out.

Do I wish Epson would do better? Sure I do. Do I think HP is able to do better? Sure, but in a decade, they haven't, so why should I trust someone with a negative track record? The excuses one dude made about making profit... my arse, 20th century trog. No corporation has to put profit over the environment. Just because they're not doing it yet doesn't mean they can't.... it's a choice by the aristocracy that owns them. And the aristocracy is about the stoopidest bunch of pathetic excuses for human beings at this stage of human progress.

Finally I don't give a frack what Greenpeace thinks, most of the time. A bunch of half-wit zealots, that's about it. There are much more reliable eco-watchdogs out there with a whole lot more horse-sense than Greenpeace.

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

» RE: Ditched HP for good Posted by: dwilliamsamh
Well put
Posted by: picklebarrela55 on Oct 29, 2007 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just bought a cartridge of HP ink and I was pissed off for spending 15 bucks the entire day. The same day, my dad bought a generic cartridge of ink for his printer for $3.99. I also did not see an envelope with the cartridge of ink I just purchased, and I guess I have no choice but to throw out my old one (is there any other option?)

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

Ink refill
Posted by: zepher on Oct 29, 2007 12:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, HP provides a printer that is accessible to lots of people, (unlike most computers) because of reasonable prices. Then the ink cartridge runs out and the best price you can get is still really expensive. So, don't people re-ink the little beasts with a kit that was available everywhere in the past? Re-inking has saved me hundreds of dollars in the past few years. The kits tell how to do it. Have some outside the box fun, reuse the ink cartrideges! HP would wake up then.

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

» RE: Ink refill Posted by: jjdoggie
Ink and Page Recycler
Posted by: gppbear on Oct 29, 2007 12:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
About 5 years back I remeber an interview with a company that developed a machine for office application that would erase the ink from printed pages so you could re-use the paper and re-cycle the ink. Whatever happened to that?

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

» RE: Ink and Page Recycler Posted by: VZEQICVA
HP is unethical
Posted by: frantaylor on Oct 29, 2007 6:30 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read about their boardroom shenanigans that have gone on recently at HP. Illegal evesdropping and such. You won't ever want to business with them again. Oh, and the way they treat their loyal HP/UX and VMS customers is downright disgusting.

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

I was one of their best customers
Posted by: wisewebwoman on Oct 29, 2007 6:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a large office and use HP printers exclusively as they were the best for performance, less paper jams, no repairs and I was able to purchase generic cartridges, both for laser and inkjet.
However, in the past year, their arrogance in the monopolistic world they have created has turned me completely against them.
For one, their pre-Vista scanners are incompatible with Vista and I don't get any assistance from their help desk.
They have forced many suppliers into removing their own cartridge brands which has resulted in my costs increasing by 30%.
And the recycling mailing bags are now missing from our recently purchased cartridges.
I want to find a more environmentally sustainable product and will replace all our printers when we do so.
Trashing the planet is not part of our mission statement and we will ensure that we don't do business with companies like HP.

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

Cartridges shmartridges
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on Oct 29, 2007 7:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not even mentioned is the millions of shitty computers companies like HP and compaq put out that are now rusting in landfills. The damned things were practically manufactured to be disposable. Anyone who has owned one knows this.

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

Face it, capitalism only works when
Posted by: Missing Piece on Oct 29, 2007 8:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
resources are abundant and waiting to be exploited. Capitalism doesn't work so well when resources have peaked and people are starving. Don't worry, people will demand socialism and redistribution of wealth just like they did in the 30's when we almost went communistic. THATS WHAT THE POWERFUL ARE SCARED OF AND THATS WHY THEY COMMITTED A FALSE FLAG TO CONVINCE US THAT THEY ARE NOT THE PROBLEM......ENEMY COMBATANTS ARE.

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

Ban Disposable Products!
Posted by: Mr. Heathen on Oct 29, 2007 10:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every year manufacturers change the design of their products just enough to make sure that parts are not interchangeable. I think the worst offenders are the car makers. It is planned obsolescence, and should be ILLEGAL.
I have a '95 model car that runs fine, but will have to die because I can't get parts for it. I have a '98 computer with an HP printer. Neither can be updated or upgraded because the manufacturers stopped supporting them more than a year ago. The printer and scanner won't work with a new computer even though the new ones perform essentially identical functions. Just get me started on stereo and medical equipment!
When I visit my neighborhood thrift store, there are piles of identical, perfectly "serviceable" devices nobody can use. So, people spend their paychecks and savings buying things they shouldn't need to, thus leaving them unable to cover medical and retirement.
My retirement? When I get that old, I just hope I have enough strength to make to the freeway and throw myself in front of a GIANT BOXSTORE TRUCK.
I bought my "recycled" inkjet cartridges from a budget computer supply chainstore where I saved about 5 dollars on two. HP requires the recyclers to pay a royalty on their patented cartridges.
On the flipside, I just bought a new stylus for my thrift store stereo. F#$K MP3. I'm looking for a good whistle.

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

The most direct method of recycling is refilling your cartridge
Posted by: apara on Oct 30, 2007 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Instead of throwing away your cartridges, bring them to Cartridge World. They can refill your cartridge or if you don't want it they can recycle it for you by refilling it for someone else. They will also take Epson cartridges while most stores will not. You can refill your ink and toner cartridges. Color and monochrome.

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

HP a Bad Actor?
Posted by: eCycleGroup on Nov 27, 2007 10:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Zack Pelta-Heller’s recent report on Hewlett-Packard’s cartridge recycling program startled many of us in the industry. Quoting HP reps, Greenpeace, and Lyra Research, Pelta-Heller accused HP of refusing to manufacture cartridges or act as a responsible producer.

Most egregious of HP’s alleged misbehaviors is the company’s refusal to remanufacture printer cartridges. Here’s an expert from Pelta-Heller’s expose:

Andy Lippman of Lyra Research explained, “It doesn’t make sense for [HP] to remanufacture cartridges because, logistically, it would be very expensive for them.” Lippman referred to the “razor and blades” business model for selling ink-jet printers. Printers are sold at low or below cost (many are bundled for “free” in computer sales) because companies like HP make up their costs on cartridges. Since remanufactured cartridges can be upwards of 40 percent to 60 percent cheaper than the original manufacturer’s, HP is merely watching out for its profit margins by designing cartridges for one-time usage.

Pelta-Heller also sites the quarterly Guide to Greener Electronics, wherein Greenpeace points out that HP is yet to “eliminate vinyl plastics (PVCs) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from its products.” What Zeller neglects to mention, and eCycle Group wonders why, is that HP came in third overall amongst international peers in Greenpeace’s most recent Toxic Report and received top marks for Chemical Management, Individual Producer Responsibilty, and Amounts Recycled.

If accurate, eCycle Group is alarmed by HP’s behavior, particularly the allegation that they do not remanufacture cartridges. eCycle Group feels that it is the responsibility of producers to design products for reuse. Furthermore, producers should collect, refurbish, and resell end-of-life products. A carpet company called Interface, does just that. Interface sells, installs, and services carpet. When the carpet wears out, Interface collects and recycles it. This framework, called Cradle-to-Cradle, is growing more popular.

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

  • 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