space Press Releases, News Stories

By Henry Norr, San Francisco Chronicle

SAN FRANCISCO, California, 19 August 2002 -- You don't have to be a hard-core environmentalist to recognize that the high-tech revolution has created a huge problem: What's going to happen to our PCs, monitors and other digital gear when no one wants them anymore?

Given that most of this stuff is laced with lead, mercury, brominated flame retardants and a slew of other toxic materials, the solutions we've relied on until now -- mainly dumping it in landfills or shipping it to Asia to be dismantled, often in blatantly unsafe ways -- clearly won't do.

The best answer, over the long haul, is to replace the toxic materials with safer alternatives. Unfortunately that's not going to happen any time soon, and besides, there are already mountains of poisonous equipment to be dealt with.

That means we have to find safe ways to recycle it, and that's going to cost money -- far more than the value of the materials that can be extracted.

Right now, consumers and businesses who want to do the right thing have to cover the costs, but let's face it, most people won't do it if given the choice.

The only effective answer -- and one that makes all kinds of economic sense -- is to roll the cost of dealing with the problem into the price of the products. Ideally, we should adopt national legislation setting up such a system, as Japan and the European Union have done in recent years, but the politicians in Washington, D.C., can't be bothered -- they're all too busy hustling contributions, cutting services and planning wars.

Amazingly enough, the California Legislature may actually rise to fill the void this year.

A pair of related bills, SB 1523 by Sen. Byron Sher, D-Palo Alto, and SB 1619 by Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, address the most glaring part of the problem, the lead-laden cathode ray tubes in conventional monitors and TVs.

The bills would prohibit the sale of CRT devices in California without a fee to cover the cost of recycling. The rates for different devices, to be set by the California Integrated Waste Management Board, would depend on the type and quantity of hazard involved, but there would be a cap of $30 per device, and the fee for most computer monitors would probably be much less.

The bills, which have strong support not only from environmental groups but also from most Bay Area cities and counties, have already passed the Senate, and my sources in Sacramento say there's a real chance they could pass the Assembly before the current session ends on Aug. 30 -- provided our esteemed representatives don't knuckle under to vehement opposition coming from two industry trade groups, the American Electronics Association and the Electronics Industry Alliance.

That's where you come in: If you agree that something has to be done about the e-waste problem, and that the Sher-Romero bills add up to a reasonable first step, it's important to let your representatives know where you stand.

You can find sample letters, as well as the bills themselves and lots of good background information, at the Web site of Californians Against Waste (www.cawrecycles.org).

Do it soon -- if the bill doesn't pass this month, the struggle will have to start all over next year.