Mining subsidies hurt e-scrap recycling
by Michele Raymond, Raymond Communications Inc.
24 March 2004 – A recent presentation from recycler Robin Ingenthron at the Take it Back WEST conference really makes you think about how costly virgin material subsidies are from an environmental standpoint.
It seems to support a recent report from the United Nations University that manufacturing one desktop computer and 17-inch CRT monitor uses at least 240 kg (530 lbs) of fossil fuels, 22 kg (50 lbs) of chemicals and 1,500 kg (3,330 lbs) of water – a total of 1.8 metric tonnes of materials -- roughly the weight of a rhinoceros or sport utility vehicle. Here's our story:
Mining Subsidies Hurt E-Scrap Recycling
It could cost electronics makers $1-2 billion a year to ensure recycling of old units in the U.S. – but one recycler claims that if the 1872 Mining Act were reformed, recyclers could afford to take all e-scrap in for free.
“Hard rock mining accounts for 45% of all toxics emitted – and 14 out of 15 Superfund sites,” says Robin Ingenthron, a former state recycling official and VP of Good Point Recycling. He spoke at the March 3 session of the Take it Back WEST conference.
He pointed out that because it only costs industry $5 an acre to mine new ores, virgin metals prices are artificially cheap in the U.S. - but not so in other countries.
“E-scrap is 300% richer in metals than rocks - and recycling creates a fraction of the pollution,” he says. “Gold mining releases more mercury than all mercury mining and disposal combined!” He notes the Asia is number one in the world in per-capita consumption of gold and platinum.
Ingenthron was making a case for a reduction in virgin material subsidies, and he explained why it makes environmental sense to export some e-scrap materials.
He says that the 5% of the old units her gets in that can be re-sold, reused account for 50% of income. Units that can be repaired account for 30% of income - and the 75% that can be recycled account for 20% of income. “The Internet has lowered barriers to entry” for marketers, he adds.
“The countries with high reuse, no mining subsidies and low wages have the advantage,” he concludes.
The realities are that if the U.S. exports all e-scrap, then there will be 1/3 reusables, 1/3 recyclables, and 1/3 toxics “along for the ride.”
If the U.S. exports no e-scrap, then reusables are destroyed, and the countries will have to mine more virgin materials - “and the mining does more harm than recycling,” he emphasizes.
The solution: “Set a higher standard,” he says.
- If the material you are disposing of is “pristine” eg: fairly recent computers and monitors with some value, then you can deal with just about any recycler.
- If the material is picker over junk, insist on a recycler that processes domestically
- If its “I dunno. . .” then insist on a U.S. company that can provide documentation.
He advises that municipalities and companies check the following documents of recyclers:
- Glass recycling records
- Gold-bearing scrap
- Sample manifests
- Employee or capital investment per ton
E-Scrap Infrastructure There, Recycler Says
There seems to be plenty of existing capacity to handle recycling of old computers, monitors, TVs and peripherals, though more investment will be needed in equipment, according to Lauren Roman, VP of United Recycling ( http://www.unitedrecyclingind.com) Roman presented at the Take it Back WEST conference Mar. 3.
She estimated the current volume of NEPSI-type old electronics at about 500 million pounds per year. Currently about 1.5 billion pounds is being recycled – about 1.2 billion of that being exported, if Basel Action Network figures are correct.
Currently, recyclers in the U.S. can handle about 600,000 pounds per year, if they extend their shifts, she says.
The cost will depend on how efficient the recyclers are, and suggested that it will be best if they do not need to do any brand sorting, and they automate processing. She estimated that it will take about $40 million in new investments of equipment to ensure efficient processing of e-scrap.
Details of all presentations, including 16 audio files, will be available from Raymond Communications in the Proceedings of the Take it Back WEST conference. Go to http://www.raymond.com or call 301-345-4237.
Table of contents of the March SRLU:
E:Waste: States Push Bills While Industry Argues Financing. . Quebec Releases Draft Packaging EPR Regulations p. 1. . Ontario Packaging Fees to Rise 27% p. 2. . . Green Dot Fees to be Charged in U.S., Mexico. ..New Legislation for CA's RPPC....Heavy Metals Not a Problem for Landfills-Yet p. 3. . .LCDs Covered in California Fee Law...More Electronic Waste Legislation for California p.4. . .Mining Subsidies Hurt E-Scrap Recycling EPR Becoming Widespread in Canada p. 5. . . STATE BILL WRAP p. 6. . .Used Oil Hot Topic in Canada...Torontonians' Trash Could Cost Them More...GRRN to Host North American Zero Waste Conference...Office Depot Refuses Further Business with APP p.12. . . Contest Rewards Creativity and Responsibility...Calgary's Recycling Event Attracts Latest Technology...Waste Plastics Prices Set to Drop...Drywall Recycling Scheme has Holes...Proceedings for Take it Back West Includes Audio p. 13...State Recycling Laws Reference Updated p. 14
To subscribe to the regular paid newsletter, check http://www.raymond.com
Sincerely,
Michele Raymond
Publisher
michele@raymond.com
FAIR USE NOTICE. This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The Basel Action Network is making this article available in our efforts to advance understanding of ecological sustainability and environmental justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
More News
|
