space Press Releases, News Stories

By Julie Moran Alterio, The Journal News

7 July 2002 -- Sometime in April, the one-billionth personal computer was sold.

That's reason to cheer among the legions of PC fans whose careers and personal lives have been buoyed by e-mail, instant messaging and Solitaire. Looked at another way, that's a whole lot of trash to clean up.

And the pile is only going to get bigger — Gartner Dataquest reports that we're already on our way to a second billion sometime in 2008.

Few people think about one day disposing of their new PC when they bring it home from the store. But that mind-set could change if shoppers get hit with an upfront fee — one popular solution with experts debating ways to pay for computer recycling.

The challenge of disposing out-of-date PCs has been mitigated so far by the tendency among home computer users to stow old machines in closets, attics and garages rather than throw them away.

But across the United States, there is rising concern over who will pay to safely recycle the hundreds of millions of computers, televisions and other electronics that will become obsolete in coming years.

"It's a problem that hasn't even hit crisis proportions yet. That's why people are nervous about it," said Clare Lindsay, a project director in the Office of Solid Waste at the Environmental Protection Agency.

Right now, there are no nationwide rules governing disposal of household electronics — despite the fact that computer monitors and TVs contain several pounds of lead and other hazardous substances such as mercury.

Federal rules bar corporations from shoveling unwanted computers into Dumpsters, but consumers in most states, including New York, can legally place their PCs on the curb for trash pickup.

Households in Westchester and Rockland counties, however, are encouraged to take advantage of special cleanup events where electronics are collected for recycling. Putnam County doesn't have a similar program.

In the absence of a nationwide solution, states are beginning to write their own rules.

Massachusetts and California have banned computer monitors and TVs from disposal in landfills. Lawmakers in several other states, including New York, have proposed similar legislation.

California is going one step further. A proposed law would require retailers to collect a fee from computer shoppers at the time of purchase. The money would help pay for electronics recycling in the state. Cathode ray tubes (CRTs) would bear a new label warning consumers against dumping them in the trash.

It's exactly to avoid these kinds of state-specific solutions that electronics manufacturers, government agencies, environmentalists and recyclers last year formed the National Electronics Product Stewardship Initiative, or NEPSI.

The coalition is charged with developing a nationwide system for the collection, reuse and recycling of used electronics.

Part of the momentum for NEPSI comes from rules in Japan and Europe that require manufacturers to bear a degree of financial responsibility for the disposal of their products.

Here in the United States, manufacturers aren't eager to pick up the tab, and the likeliest candidate for that privilege is the consumer. In March, NEPSI participants agreed to work on a plan to charge shoppers a recycling fee when they buy their computers.

Many of the fledgling recycling efforts in place today are already shouldered by consumers in one way or another. IBM Corp. and Hewlett-Packard recycle used home computers for about $30, which includes shipping. When local governments sponsor household cleanup days, the taxpayers get the bill.

Electronics companies, pointing to their slim margins, say consumer financing is the only viable alternative.

"The reality is that the companies don't have a pile of money that they don't know what to do with. So anything that we do is going to be passed along to the consumer," said Renee St. Denis, product takeback manager at Hewlett-Packard and a NEPSI participant.

Whose problem is it?

Environmentalists argue that manufacturers should bear financial responsibility for the products that they design, distribute and sell. "The cost and burden is falling disproportionately to local governments as historic garbage collectors," said David Wood, program director of the GrassRoots Recycling Network.

European governments have been less squeamish than those in the United States when it comes to placing recycling obligations on industry, said Harrison resident Bette K. Fishbein, a national expert on the emerging concept of "extended producer responsibility."

An environmentally inclined citizenry and a dearth of space for landfills has prompted strict recycling laws in Europe. "The American companies have to comply with this when they sell in the European market, but they fight it tooth and nail here," said Fishbein, a senior fellow at INFORM Inc., a New York City-based research organization that examines the effects of business practices on the environment and on human health.

Electronics companies are sitting at the table with other NEPSI participants to sidestep directives similar to ones in Europe and Japan that set recycling goals with manufacturer obligations, Fishbein said. "Companies in this country are very nervous they are going to get passed here as well," Fishbein said.

They should be, according to state Assemblymember William Colton, sponsor of a bill to ban CRTs from disposal in New York state's municipal waste. "If we don't come up with a consensus, there will be a crisis, and government will impose its solution, which manufacturers won't like at all," Colton said.

Though the New York bill would pay for CRT recycling with the state's environmental protection fund, Colton said he thinks that electronics makers should bear part of the burden. "Ultimately, the manufacturer has a responsibility to share in the cost of what they put in the market," he said.

The template for a solution to the high-tech recycling conundrum comes from a decidedly low-tech industry: carpeting.

After two years of negotiations, 10 states, the EPA and the carpet industry agreed in January to a voluntary initiative to dramatically reduce the amount of carpet going to landfills.

The deal marked the first national product stewardship agreement in the United States brokered among varied interest groups, said Catherine Wilt, a senior research associate at the Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies at the University of Tennessee, which is coordinating the NEPSI process.

The rechargeable battery industry also formed its own stewardship plan after a number of states tried to mandate disposal rules. Today, consumers can take rechargeable batteries from cell phones, camcorders and laptops to a variety of retailers for disposal.

Wilt said she is confident electronics makers will hammer out a solution by September, the deadline set when the NEPSI coalition was formed. "This is a very enlightened industry, and they recognize both the real and perceived concerns about their products," she said.

Armonk-based IBM isn't taking part in the NEPSI dialogue, but is watching the proceedings closely. "Clearly, any model that's going to work and be sustainable is one in which there is some degree of shared responsibility among the players involved," said Wayne S. Balta, vice president of corporate environmental affairs and product safety at IBM.

Balta said IBM favors industry-wide approaches and considers "visible fees" paid by the consumer to be the most practical way to sustain recycling programs.

IBM, Hewlett-Packard and other electronics companies started their voluntary consumer recycling programs in part to ward off government mandates, charges INFORM's Fishbein. "This is a step in the right direction because at least they're thinking about their products at the end of life. The problem with it is they don't take back any substantial amount," she said.

Hewlett-Packard's program, which, like IBM's, accepts computers from all manufacturers, has received a few hundred PCs a month from consumers since it began a year ago, St. Denis said.

Educating consumers about recycling and training them to pay for it is the key to greater participation, she said. "They want to just throw it away because that's the way we all grow up in America. We have to get the word out to customers that we have a responsibility to deal with this stuff," St. Denis said.

Fishbein said she thinks that Hewlett-Packard and IBM are "asking an awful lot of the consumer" by requiring them to box up and ship their PCs.

"People want to do the right thing, and I think if you make it convenient for them they will do the right thing with computers," Fishbein said.

Environment is a worry

This rising sense that someone must bear responsibility for "doing the right thing" with PCs comes against a backdrop of studies from the National Safety Council, EPA and others that show electronics are a major source of lead and mercury in the nation's landfills.

Once in landfills, mercury combines with methane to morph into the highly toxic methylmercury, reports Wood of the GrassRoots Recycling Network. If the chemical leaches into groundwater, it can cause nerve damage, particularly in developing organisms.

The health risks associated with sending electronics to the landfill or incinerator justify legislative action, Wood asserts. "It may be one more regulation, but regulation is not inappropriate when the public health is threatened," he said.

There's no way to know for sure how many PCs are dumped in landfills vs. sitting in basements vs. donated to charity. Unlike cars, computers aren't registered with any government authority.

The people perhaps most imperiled by electronic waste don't live in the United States.

A report by the Basel Action Network and the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition released this winter estimated that 50 percent to 80 percent of the electronic waste collected by U.S. recyclers is being shipped to developing countries, including China and India, where whole families are employed breaking apart hazardous materials without regard for their health or safety.

The Basel Action Network is a watchdog group that takes its name from the Basel Convention, an international agreement to ban the export of hazardous wastes from rich countries to poor ones.

"Exporting Harm: The High-Tech Trashing of Asia" documented instances of PCs bearing labels from U.S. organizations being dismantled by Chinese villagers living amid piles of discarded circuit boards and breathing fumes from melting computer plastics.

Environmentalists said the report was a wake-up call to America's high-tech companies. "They're complicit in polluting developing countries and causing harm to young children and women and entire families," said Michael Bender, executive director of the Mercury Policy Project.

The "Exporting Harm" report was also a black eye for the electronics recyclers and was a hot topic at the industry's most recent conference in May, said Peter Muscanelli, president of the Albany-based International Association of Electronics Recyclers, which has about 70 active members.

The association has developed a certification program that recyclers can complete to make themselves more attractive to customers that want accountability about the destination of their electronic trash.

Shareholders get a say

While lawmakers are trying to deal with electronics recycling through legislation, shareholders are acting through proxy resolutions.

Calvert Asset Management introduced what it believes were the first-ever shareholder resolutions on electronics recycling during this year's annual meeting season.

The Bethesda, Md.-based mutual fund company, which has $8 billion under management, has a history of shareholder activism on such issues as greenhouse gas emissions, indigenous people's rights and disclosure of work force diversity data.

It's appropriate for investors to examine the electronics recycling issue in light of reports such as "Exporting Harm," said Julie Frieder, environmental analyst for Calvert.

"As prudent shareholders, we think there is a risk not only with the environmental liability, but the perception. This is an issue that's gaining attention with the public," she said.

Calvert asked six computer makers to study electronics recycling and issue a report within six months of their annual meetings. Apple and Dell agreed to do the study, and Calvert withdrew its proposal.

Compaq's proposal was merged into Hewlett-Packard's, which was opposed by management. The resolution received 8 percent of shareholder votes. Gateway likewise opposed the resolution, which received 7.5 percent of votes.

IBM contested the resolution on a technicality with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which ruled in favor of IBM. But Frieder said Calvert has been in contact with Big Blue since. "They are eager to work with Calvert on this issue," Frieder said.

IBM's Balta said environmental responsibility means dealing with the byproducts of the high-tech boom.

"The technology revolution has indeed brought us fabulous advancements in what we are able to do with technology, but one accompaniment to that is increased waste," Balta said.