Electronic Waste by David Weinstein by Richard Weinstein

Electronic Waste Recycling in Sydney, Australia Weinstein, David Evan Academic Director: Brennan, Peter Advisor: Meyers, Dr. Donald University of Georgia International Affairs, Environmental Ethics Australia, Sydney Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Australia: Sustainability and Environmental Action, SIT Study Abroad, Spring 2010

Abstract Think about the number of computers, TVs, cell phones, radios, game consoles, and music players that have passed through your hands over the years. These are just a few examples of devices that are part of the growing phenomenon known as e-waste. E-waste is the term used to describe discarded electronics and electrical products and is the fastest growing waste problem in the world. E-waste contains a variety of toxic and hazardous components that is currently being sent to landfills. Ensuring the proper management of recycling and disposing of electronic waste is a global ethical and environmental issue that is of vital importance to solve if wanting to achieve a sustainable future. It is necessary to increase e-waste recycling rates in order to improve the efficiency with which resources are used, reduce the impact on the environment of waste disposal, and to provide for equity between generations. This study evaluated and analyzed electronic waste recycling in Sydney, Australia. The study determined the current methods of recycling and collecting electronic waste available to the public and examined what measures are in place to regulate and ensure that electronic waste is recycled and handled in an ethical and environmentally friendly manner. To accomplish these goals, interviews with four electronic waste recycling and collection companies were conducted, interviews with three government offices were conducted, and a survey of 150 people in Sydney was conducted. The study suggests that e-waste recycling in Sydney needs to be improved to increase the rate of recycling of e-waste. People in Sydney are willing to recycle e-waste, but a lack of knowledge of available options, costs to recycle, and the ease of simply throwing out e-waste prevents the public from recycling e-waste. This study suggests that to increase recycling volumes of e-waste government action needs to ban e-waste from landfills, provide education on options to recycle e-waste, and create funds to help cover the expensive costs of e-waste recycling. With limited help from government, this study suggests that e-waste recycling and collection can greatly be improved to increase the rate of e-waste that gets recycled in Sydney. Sanitary, Municipal, and Waste Management 819 International Law and Relations 516 Public Administration 523 Â

2 Â

Table of Contents Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 6 1.1. What is E-Waste .............................................................................................. 6 1.2. Global Significance of E-Waste ...................................................................... 7 1.3. Justification/Aims/Focus of Study ................................................................... 8 2. Background............................................................................................................ 10 2.1. Why Recycle Electronic Waste ...................................................................... 10 2.2. E-Waste Volumes........................................................................................... 12 2.3. Previous Studies ............................................................................................. 13 2.4. Hazards and Common Materials and Found in E-Waste ............................... 14 2.5. How E-Waste Gets Recycled ......................................................................... 17 2.6. E-Waste Regulations ...................................................................................... 20 3. Methodology.......................................................................................................... 24 3.1. Overview of Methods ..................................................................................... 24 3.2. E-Waste Survey Data Collection Techniques ............................................... 24 3.3. Interview Techniques ..................................................................................... 25 3.4. Summary of Interviews .................................................................................. 26 4. Results.................................................................................................................... 27 4.1. Summary of Interviews with Government Officials ..................................... 27 4.2. Current Legislation on E-waste in Australia .................................................. 28 4.3. Survey Results ................................................................................................ 30 4.4. Summary of Interviews with E-Waste Recycling Companies ....................... 33 5. Discussion.............................................................................................................. 35 5.1. Overview of Discussion ................................................................................. 35 5.2. Interpretation of Survey Results..................................................................... 35 5.3. Limitations of Survey Results ........................................................................ 36 5.4. Interview Interpretations ............................................................................... 36 5.4.1. Sims Recycling Solutions, Peter Millar, General Manager................. 36 5.4.2. MRI Australia Pty Ltd, Will Le Messurier, Managing Director ......... 37 5.4.3. 1800 EWASTE, Timothy Waters, Spokesman ................................... 38 5.5. Analysis of E-Waste Recycling and Collection Companies’ Feedback......... 38 5.6. Analysis of Interviews with Government Offices .......................................... 39 5.7. Analysis of Current E-Waste Situation in Sydney ......................................... 39 5.8. E-Waste Policy Options in Sydney ................................................................ 40 6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 42 6.1. Overview of Conclusion................................................................................. 42 6.2. How the Study Could be Improved ................................................................ 43 6.3. Ideas for Future Research............................................................................... 43

Figures and Tables Figure 1, Global Supply of Materials Found In Electronic Waste ............................. 11 Figure 2, E-Waste Toxic Components and their Damage to Human Health Figure ... 16 Figure 3, The Recycling of a TV/Computer................................................................ 17 Figure 4, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling...................................................... 18 Figure 5, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling...................................................... 18 Figure 6, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling...................................................... 19 Figure 7, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling...................................................... 19 Figure 8, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling...................................................... 19 Figure 9, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling...................................................... 20 Figure 10, Sims TV and Computer CRT Recycling.................................................... 20 Figure 11, Do Respondents Currently Posses E-waste................................................ 30 Figure 12, Past Methods of Disposal of E-waste......................................................... 31 Figure 13, Do Respondents Know How To Properly Dispose of E-waste.................. 31 Figure 14, If Respondents Knew How To Recycle E-Waste Would They ................. 31 Figure 15, Preference of Disposal Options.................................................................. 32 Figure 16, How Far Respondents Would Travel To Recycle E-Waste ...................... 32 Figure 17, How Much Respondents Are Willing To Pay To Recycle E-Waste.......... 33 Figure 18,Methods of Payment for E-waste Recycling............................................... 33 Table A, Effects of E-Waste Constituents on Health .................................................. 15 Table B, Hazardous Substances in Televisions and Computers.................................. 16 Table C, Non- Hazardous Materials in E-Waste ......................................................... 16 Table D, Electronic Waste Law in Australia ............................................................... 23 Table E, Electronic Waste Law in NSW ..................................................................... 23 Table F, Interviews with Electronic Waste Recycling and Collection Companies..... 26 Table G, Interviews with Government Offices............................................................ 26 Table H, Ownership of Electronic Products ................................................................ 30 Table I, Interviews with E-Waste Recycling Companies and Collection Companies 34 Appendix..................................................................................................................... 45 A. Age/gender....................................................................................................... 45 B. Hazardous Chemicals in E-Waste ................................................................... 46 C. ISO Standards .................................................................................................. 48 D. More Definitions.............................................................................................. 48 E. Pilot Survey ..................................................................................................... 49 F. Final Survey..................................................................................................... 50

Acknowledgements This report would not have been made possible without the help from many people. I would first like to thank Dr. Donald Meyers for guiding me through the research process. Dr. Meyers was there to help me from the start and was always available to assist in every step of the project. I gained an invaluable experience from conducting this study with his aid. I would also like to thank Peter Brennan for encouragement and support throughout the entire course of study. An integral part of a solid research study is strong data and I would not have been able to provide valid feedback on electronic waste recycling in Sydney without the help from several individuals. I would like to thank the following people for allowing me to interview them on electronic waste, Peter Millar General Manager of Sims Recycling Solutions, Will Le Messuier, Managing Director of MRI Australia Pty Ltd, Ben Cassell, Operation Manager of eGarbo, and Timothy Waters, Spokesperson of 1800-EWASTE. I would also like to thank Cathy McGowan, Assistant Director of Resource Recovery from the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts’ Waste Policy Branch, Lauren Moore Office Manager of the Greens in New South Wales, and Eleanor Raftery, Environment Officer, Waste & Recycling of Waverley Council, for providing me feedback on how e-waste is currently being handled in Sydney and in Australia. I would like to thank everyone who took the time to fill out surveys for the study. A big thanks goes out to Richard Weinstein, John Kung, Ricki Friede, and Adam Ossher for helping me distribute surveys to people in Sydney. Thank you to my parents, sister, and brother for always providing support and feedback. Last but certainly not least, a special thank you to the Weinstein family in Sydney, Richard, Ruthie, Jamie, Daniel, and Jarrah for providing me a home away from home, a great environment to conduct my work, and giving me an absolutely extraordinary experience during my time in Sydney.

1. Introduction 1.1.What is E-Waste & Definitions What is Electronic waste? Electronic waste (e-waste) refers to discarded electrical and electronic equipment. E-waste can refer to many things and there is not one agreed upon definition on what is considered e-waste. The major discrepancies in the definitions of electronic waste stem from what it means for equipment to be ‘discarded’, and what equipment the definition refers to. Although most definitions of e-waste describe what it means for equipment to be discarded, many of these definitions only give general descriptions of what equipment the definition refers to. To cover all perceived definitions of electronic waste some definitions include: •

“Electronic waste is a popular, informal name for electronic products nearing the end of their ‘useful life.’ Computers, televisions, VCRs, stereos, copiers, and fax machines are common electronic products... There is no clear definition for electronic waste; for instance whether or not items like microwave ovens and other similar ‘appliances’ should be grouped into the category has not been established.”1

•

“Electronic waste encompasses a broad and growing range of electronic devices ranging from large household appliances such as refrigerators, air conditioners, hand-held cellular phones, personal stereos, and consumer electronics to computers.”2

•

“E-waste is electronic waste. It includes a broad and growing range of electronic devices from large household appliances such as refrigerators, air conditioners, hand-held cellular phones, personal stereos, consumer electronics and computers. Electronic waste is hazardous, and it is generated rapidly due to the extreme rate of obsolescence. Electronic waste contains over 1,000 different substances, many of which are toxic, and creates serious pollution upon disposal. These toxic substances include lead, cadmium, mercury, plastics, etc.”3

Electronic Waste, California Integrated Waste Management Board, <http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/Electronics/63004005.doc>. 2 Puckett, J, Byster, L, Westervelt, S, Gutierrez, R, Davis, S, Hussain, A & Dutta, M 2002, Exporting harm: the high-tech trashing of Asia, Basel Action Network p.5 3 Gaulon, B, Rozema, L & Klomp, K 2005, Electronic waste, Frank Mohr Institute, <www.mohri.nl/mawiki/E_2dwaste_99>.

•

The European Union’s two related directives – Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHS) and Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) –define EEE as “equipment which is dependent on electric currents or electromagnetic fields in order to work properly and equipment for the generation, transfer and measurement of such currents and fields... and designed for use with a voltage rating not exceeding 1000 Volt for alternating current and 1500 Volt for direct current.”4 For the purpose of this study, electronic waste or e-waste, is the term used to

describe any discarded, surplus, obsolete, or broken electrical or electronic devices. Electronic waste includes all types of electrically powered components including computers, entertainment devices, mobile phones, televisions, or other such items as toasters, hairdryers, and refrigerators, whether sold, donated, or discarded by their original owners. Electronic waste contains both valuable materials as well as hazardous materials that require special handling and recycling methods. 1.2 Global Significance of Electronic Waste With the large increase in population and production of technology over the past century, the use of electronic devices and their waste has significantly increased worldwide. The amount of e-waste entering the waste stream is growing rapidly and is the fastest growing waste problem in the world.5 To send electronic products into landfills is a waste of valuable resources and puts hazardous chemicals into the environment.6 Electronic waste is not just a problem of wealthy developed countries; controlling e-waste is a global issue. Many developed countries and lesser-developed countries (LDCs) own a substantial amount of e-waste. Of the estimated 20-50 million tonnes of electronic waste discarded annually worldwide, Asian countries discard an estimated 12 million tonnes.7 E-waste globally will only increase with the rapidly developing economies of China and India, who will have 178 million and 80 4

European Union 2003a, ‘Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)’, Official Journal of the European Union, <europa.eu.int/eurlex/ 5 Puckett, J, Byster, L, Westervelt, S, Gutierrez, R, Davis, S, Hussain, A & Dutta, M 2002, Exporting harm: the high-tech trashing of Asia, Basel Action Network p.1 6 Angel, Jeff, and Fraser Brindley. Tipping Point: Australia's E-waste Crisis. 2009. Total Environment Centre and Environment Victoria. Web. <http://www.apo.org.au/node/19256>. p.5 7 Greenpeace n.d.a, What is e-waste? <www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/toxics/hi-tech-highly-toxic/e-waste>.

million new computers, respectively, out of the global total of an estimated 716 million new computer users by 2010.8 The issue of recycling electronic waste has broad national and international implications that must be addressed to reduce harm to the environment and to protect human health. The costs of safe and environmentally friendly electronic waste disposal are very high. To overcome these costs, many developed countries are exporting increasingly large amounts of electronic waste to China, India, and other LDCs, where labor is relatively cheap and where health and environmental regulations that apply to the disposal of electronic waste are commonly not enforced. LDCs are usually not equipped to properly manage the electronic waste materials causing severe health problems and environmental contamination.9 According to Exporting Harm: The High-Tech Trashing of Asia, “The Electronic waste recycling and disposal operations found in China, India, and Pakistan are extremely polluting and likely to be very damaging to human health. Examples include open burning of plastic waste, exposure to toxic solders, river dumping of acids, and widespread general dumping.”10 1.3 Justification/ Aims/ Focus of Study Ensuring the proper management in recycling and disposing of electronic waste is a global ethical and environmental issue that is of vital importance to solve if wanting to achieve a sustainable future. It is necessary to increase e-waste recycling rates in order to improve the efficiency with which resources are used, reduce the impact on the environment of waste disposal, and to provide for equity between generations. This study evaluated and analyzed electronic waste recycling in Sydney, Australia. The study evaluates whether e-waste collection services in Sydney needs to be improved to increase recycling volumes. The goal of the study is to find ways to increase recycling volumes of e-waste in Sydney. The study determined the current methods of recycling and collecting electronic waste available to the public and 8

Greenpeace n.d.a, What is e-waste? <www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/toxics/hi-tech-highly-toxic/e-waste>. 9 Puckett, J, Byster, L, Westervelt, S, Gutierrez, R, Davis, S, Hussain, A & Dutta, M 2002, Exporting harm: the high-tech trashing of Asia, Basel Action Network p.4 10 Puckett, J, Byster, L, Westervelt, S, Gutierrez, R, Davis, S, Hussain, A & Dutta, M 2002, Exporting harm: the high-tech trashing of Asia, Basel Action Network p.4

examined what measures are in place to regulate and ensure that electronic waste is recycled and handled in an ethical and environmentally friendly manner. The study investigated the current methods of dealing with electronic waste in Sydney by analyzing feedback from government officials, electronic waste recyclers and collectors, the public, and by conducting research into past studies. Interviews with ewaste recycling and collection companies were conducted, interviews with federal, state, and council environmental and waste offices were conducted, and a survey of the public’s perception of electronic waste was conducted. A thorough synopsis of how electronic waste is managed in Sydney was achieved by interviewing stakeholders in the electronic waste recycling and collection industry. The interviews with government officials responsible for environmental issues and waste management not only shed light on past efforts and regulations on handling electronic waste, but as e-waste is a relatively new issue, information was also obtained on what efforts are currently being worked on and implemented to handle electronic waste in Sydney. The survey on how the public perceives electronic waste recycling determined what efforts the public is willing to take to recycle electronic products and gave significant insight into what measures would and wouldn’t be suitable to apply in Sydney.

2. Background Information 2.1 Why Recycle Electronic Waste Rapid changes in technology, planned obsolescence, and low initial cost of electronic products have resulted in a fast-growing surplus of e-waste in Australia and around the globe. Most of Australia’s electronic waste is disposed of in landfills, having a negative impact on the environment by releasing toxins such as lead, mercury, or cadmium into the soil, groundwater, and atmosphere.11 E-waste is a valuable source for secondary raw materials, if treated properly. Many materials used in the construction of electronic products can be recovered in the recycling process for use in future production. If not handled properly, e-waste can be a source of toxins and carcinogens. Recycling e-waste keeps these toxins out of landfills. The processing of e-waste if not managed properly can cause serious health and pollution problems as electronic equipment contains chemicals that are hazardous to human health and the environment. Care must be taken to avoid unsafe exposure in recycling operations, leaching of material in landfills, and hazardous dust from incinerator ashes. Implementing local e-waste recycling programs that are safe for human and environmental health is essential to achieving intergenerational equity and a sustainable future. By implementing e-waste recycling programs many harmful toxic metals are diverted from landfills and many valuable materials can be reused. Recycling reduces the amount of waste as well as the mining of raw materials. According to the Australian Environmental Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC) if 75% of the 1.5 million televisions that are discarded annually in Australia were recycled, this would amount to a national saving of approximately 23,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalents, 520 mega liters of water, 400,000 gigajoules of energy and 160,000 cubic meters of landfill space.12 Creating secondary raw materials, or recycling, results in huge energy savings compared to mining virgin raw materials. Recycling electronics recovers valuable materials and as a result, greenhouse gas emissions and pollution are reduced and extracting fewer raw materials from the earth saves energy and resources. Reuse of tin, silicon, iron, aluminum, copper, gold, silver, a variety of plastics, and other materials can reduce the costs of constructing 11

EPHC, Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers, July 2009, p. 1. Australia. Environment Protection and Heritage Council. National Environment Protection Council. Statement on End of Life Televisions and Computers. Novemember ed. Ser. 2008. Web.

new products. The known reserves of some of the materials in electronic products are extremely low and, in some cases, close to running out. The current rates of electronic product consumption cannot be sustained without massive adjustments to the way electronic waste is currently managed. Figure 1 shows reserves of materials found in e-waste. Figure 1 Remaining Years of Global Supply of Materials Found In Electronic Waste13

• • • • • •

Nickel is contained in rechargeable batteries for electronic products including mobile phones, laptop computers and cordless tools. Copper is used in circuit boards, wiring, and computer chips for electronic products. Lead is used in monitors, televisions, and batteries. Zinc is used in cabling, circuit boards, televisions, and monitors. Tantalum is used in capacitors found in mobile phones, laptop computers, and digital cameras. Indium is used in flat screen monitors and televisions. Burying e-‐waste in landfills is a lost opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas

(GHG) emissions. Often much less energy is needed to recover these resources than to produce new materials. 484,000 tonnes of potentially avoided GHG emissions were lost in 2007/08 when 88,000 tonnes of televisions and computers were dumped in landfills.14 The raw materials that go into making electronics require lots of energy during their extraction and refining. This energy, and the GHGs that are emitted, becomes ‘embodied’ into the electronics. If e-‐waste is sent to landfills then more energy is needed, and more GHGs are emitted, to extract and refine new, virgin materials. If e-‐waste is recycled, then most of this energy is recovered, and less GHG 13

Earth's natural wealth: an audit -‐ earth -‐ 23 May 2007 -‐ New Scientist Environment; These calculations have assumed a static rate of growth in the consumption of these materials. 14 EPHC, Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers, July 2009

emissions are required to make new products. The Carbon Reduction Institute in Australia has conducted a lifecycle analysis of a number of laptops for a large manufacturer that shows an average of 1.4 tonnes of GHGs are embedded per computer, the 4.5 million assembled PCs and laptops sales in 2007/08 contain around 6.3 million tonnes of embodied greenhouse gas emissions.15 Currently, most electronic waste in developed countries meets with one of the following fates:16 • • • • • •

Put into storage and awaiting disposal Sent to landfill or incinerated Re-used, either second-hand or refurbished Recycled at recycling facilities in the country of consumption Recycled in prisons Exported to developing countries

2.2 Electronic Waste Volumes • • •

75% of the 3 million computers bought in Australia every year will end up in landfill.17 Electronic waste is responsible for 70% of the toxic chemicals such as lead, cadmium and mercury found in landfill.18 E-waste is being sent to landfill at three times the rate of general waste.19 The amount of electronic waste is growing at an unsustainable rate.

According to a 2005 estimate by the United Nations Environment Program, 20 to 50 million tonnes of electronic waste is generated every year worldwide.20 Electronic products that tend to have short life spans such as computers and mobile phones are the most problematic.21 For example, personal computers “increased fivefold – from 105 million machines in 1988 to more than half a billion in 2002.”22 By 2005, more 15

Angel, Jeff, and Fraser Brindley. Tipping Point: Australia's E-waste Crisis. 2009. Total Environment Centre and Environment Victoria. Web. <http://www.apo.org.au/node/19256>. p.8 16 Puckett, J, Byster, L, Westervelt, S, Gutierrez, R, Davis, S, Hussain, A & Dutta, M 2002, Exporting harm: the high-tech trashing of Asia, Basel Action Network, pp. 6-8 17 ABS, Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends, 2006 http://www.abs.gov.au 18 Greenpeace http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/the-e-wasteproblem 19 Greenpeace http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/the-e-wasteproblem 20 Brigden, K, Labunska, I, Santillo, D & Allsopp, M 2005. Recycling of Electronic Wastes in China and India: Workplace & Environmental Contamination, Greenpeace International, p.3 <http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/india/press/reports/recycling-of-electronicwastes. pdf>. 21 Greenpeace n.d.a, What is e-waste? <www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/toxics/hi-tech-highlytoxic/e-waste>. 22 Worldwatch Institute 2005, When your computer becomes toxic trash, <http://www.worldwatch.org/pubs/goodstuff/computers>.

than 1 billion computers were being sold each year while 100 million computers reached the end of their useful lives 75 million of these were sent to landfill.23 Australians discarded 16.8 million electronic devices in 2007-2008. Only 9% of this was recycled while 88%, or 14.7 million devices, were sent to landfill.24 There are roughly 9 million computers, 5 million printers, and 2 million scanners currently in households and businesses across Australia, and all of these will be replaced, most within the next couple of years. 25 According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics ewaste in Australia is estimated to be growing at more than three times the rate of general municipal waste.26 Although e-waste accounts for only one to four percent of municipal waste, it may be responsible for as much as 70 percent of the heavy metals in landfills, including 40 percent of all lead.27 2.3 Previous Studies and Surveys of Electronic Waste in Australia: • In 2005 Ipsos Consultants conducted a survey for the Department of Environment and Conservation into household electronic waste that represented 62% of all Australian households. The survey found that households contain an average of 22 e-waste proudcts each, totaling 92.5 million in the households represented by the survey. Among other measures, the survey details the types of e-waste in Australian households; the amount of e-waste disposed and the method of disposal; and the amount of e-waste in storage. 28 • In October 2001, Meinhardt Infrastructure and Environment Group prepared a report for Environment Australia. The report estimated that “over 7.6 million computers, 5.3 million printers and 2.1 million scanners are in use in Australia. While there is a lack of definitive data on the geographic distribution of this 23

Environment Victoria 2005, Environmental report card on computers 2005: computer waste in Australia and the case for producer responsibility<http://www.envict.org.au/file/Ewaste_report_card.pdf>. 24 EPHC, Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers, July 2009 25 Australia. Department of the Environment and Heritage. Hazardous Waste Section. Electronic Scrap A Hazardous Waste. Feb. 2004. Web. <http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/chemicals/hazardous-waste/publications/electronicscrap-fs.html>. 26 Australia's Environment: Issues and Trends, 2006. p. 19. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 27 Wash, Joco. "E-Waste: Start Thinking About The Future." The Tech Brief; Technology News. Web. <http://www.thetechbrief.com/2008/03/17/e-waste-start-thinking-about-the-future/>. 28 Ipsos 2005, Household Electrical & Electronic Waste Survey 2005: Report of Findings, Department of Environment & Conservation (NSW), <http://www.ecorecycle.sustainability.vic.gov.au/resources/documents/051111_IpsosDEC_Final_Report_-_Public.pdf>.

equipment, various surveys conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that the greatest use is in New South Wales, followed by Victoria… There is also a gap in data on the distribution of equipment across consumer sectors, however estimates suggest that in order of significance they are medium and small businesses, households, large corporations, Government and education.” The report also indicated that “Disposal rates for printers are likely to be over 1.5 million per year... waste toner and printer cartridges are being generated in the order of 2.1 million to 8.7 million per year, depending on usage rates... [and] nearly 38,000 km of cabling of various types enters the waste stream each year.”29 • According to a 2004 study, Phone Recycling Claims Called into Doubt, “Australians have purchased over 40 million mobile phones in the past decade... including 7 million phones in 2004.”30 • The Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC) commissioned a final report in June 2009 entitle, “Willingness To Pay for E-Waste Recycling.” The report surveys samples in major cities of Australia about their willingness to recycle e-waste.31 • Also in July 2009 the (EPHC) commissioned the Consultation Regulatory Impact: Televisions and Computers prepared by Price Waterhouse Coopers and Hyde Consulting. In which the various options of e-waste, starting with televisions and computers were evaluated.32 2.4 Common Materials and Hazards In Electronic Waste33 There is a risk that humans may develop health problems by coming into contact with the toxins in e-waste. These include respiratory ailments, reproductive, developmental, and nervous system problems.34 When e-waste is sent to landfill,

Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd 2001, Computer & peripherals material project, <http://www.deh.gov.au/settlements/publications/waste/electricals/computerreport/index.html>. p.25 30 Bannerman, M 2004, Phone recycling claims called into doubt, Australian Broadcasting Commission, <http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1260911.htm>. 31 Sophie, Christophe R., and Jeff B. Brulliard. Willingness to Pay For E-Waste Recycling. RepFinal Report. Adelaide: Environment Protection and Heritage Council, June 2009. 32 PWC. Hyde. Environment Protection and Heritage Council Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers. Rep. EPHC, July 2009. . 33 Brigden, K., Webster, J., Labunska, I. & Santillo, D. (2007): Toxic chemicals in computers reloaded; Greenpeace Research Laboratories Technical note 06/07. 34 ABS – Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends, 2006 http://www.abs.gov.au

poisonous substances can leach from decomposing waste into the environment. These substances can seep into groundwater, contaminate the soil and enter the food chain.35 Table A

Effects of E-Waste Constituents on Health36

Constituent

Source of e-wastes

Health effects

Arsenic

Cathode ray tubes

Brominated flame retardants (BFRs) Barium (Ba)

Plastic housing of electronic equipments, circuit boards, plastic cases and cables Front panel of Cathode ray tubes Motherboard

Highly toxic and carcinogenic Disrupts endocrine system functions able to bioaccumulate in animals and humans

Beryllium (Be)

Lead (PB)

Cadmium (CD)

Mercury (Hg)

Solder in printed circuit boards, glass panels in computer and TV cathode ray tubes, production of batteries, and metal products Chip resistors and semiconductors, rechargeable batteries and common batteries, metal coatings, and plastics, Relays and switches, printed circuit boards

Short term exposure causes: Muscle weakness; Damage to heart, liver and spleen Carcinogenic (lung cancer), Inhalation of fumes and dust causes chronic beryllium disease or beryllicosis. Damage to central and peripheral nervous systems, blood systems and kidney damage. Affects brain development of children. Toxic irreversible effects on human health. Accumulates in kidney and liver. Causes neural damage. Teratogenic. Damages the lungs, causes and irritates the digestive tract. Chronic damage to the brain. Respiratory and skin disorders due to bioaccumulation in fishes.

Hexavalent chromium (Cr) VI

Corrosion protection of untreated and galvanized steel plates, for steel housings

Asthmatic bronchitis. Highly toxic even at low concentrations, and is a known human carcinogen, DNA damage.

Plastics including PVC

Cabling and computer housing

Burning produces dioxin. It causes reproductive and developmental problems; Immune system damage; Interfere with regulatory hormones

See Appendix B for a more in depth review of the hazardous components in e-waste.

Greenpeace http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/the-e-waste problem 36 Ramachandra, T.V., and Saira K. Varghese. “Environmentally Sound Management for E-waste” Environmental Information System,CES,Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. Web. <http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/energy/paper/ewaste/ewaste.html>.

Figure 2 E-Waste Toxic Components and their Damage to Human Health Figure 37

Table B Hazardous Substances in Televisions and Computers38

Table C Non- Hazardous Materials in E-Waste Material Silver Tin Copper Aluminum Iron Silicon Nickel Lithium Zinc Gold

Use Circuit boards Solder, coatings on component leads Copper wire, printed circuit board tracks, component leads Nearly all electronic products using more than a few watts of power use aluminum, used in electrolytic capacitors Steel chassis, cases, and fixings Glass, transistors, ICs, printed circuit boards Nickel-cadmium batteries Lithium-ion batteries Plating for steel parts Connector plating, primarily in computer equipment

“Improper Computer & Electronic Recycling Cause Harmful Effects.” Electronic Recycling Centers. Web. <http://www.greencitizen.com/harmful_effects.php>. 38 URS Australia Pty Ltd. Willingness to Pay For E-Waste Recycling. Prepared for Environment Protection and Heritage Council. P.4

2.5 How E-Waste Gets Recycled Sound electronic waste recycling is very expensive, as it requires a combination of mechanical and manual labor. Figure 3, describes the typical e-waste recycling process. Prior to mechanized processing, hand sorting occurs to extract materials for quality controlled purposes. Electronic products are then dismantled and the various materials are separated for bailing and ultimately reuse. Figure 3

The Recycling of a TV/Computer39

Reusable products: When a company is permitted and believes an item may be resold for reuse, it is refurbished and; • • • • •

all data that may reside on the product in an electronic format (eg Hard drive) is destroyed all identifying marks of ownership are removed the equipment is tested to ensure it works in the manner designed the equipment is tested for safety the equipment is cleaned and resold Products that no longer have a useful life are recycled. E-waste comes in

various forms and each type of e-waste product is recycled in very specific ways. The most troublesome of e-waste products are Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) screens. CRT screens contain leaded glass which accounts for up 50% of the weight of the monitor 39

URS Australia Pty Ltd. Willingness to Pay For E-Waste Recycling. Prepared for Environment Protection and Heritage Council. P.4

and has 25% lead content by weight thus a typical monitor weighing 10kg will have approx 1.25 kg of lead in it. The other components have little or no value. CRT screens are dismantled and recycled. Components that are recovered include the circuit board, copper wire, and the plastics when possible. The unleaded glass is sent to a glass recycler and the leaded glass is sent to a lead refinery.40 Figures 4-10 demonstrate how CRT screens get recycled at their plant in Villawood, Sydney. Another example of a commonly recycled e-waste product is old computers. Materials that are recovered include the copper wire, the circuit boards that contain precious metals such as gold, silver, and palladium, various types of plastics, steel, and other metals are such as aluminum. Figures 4-10 Demonstrate how TV and Computer CRT screens get recycled at the Sims E-Waste Recycling Facility in Villawood, Sydeny. Figure 4

Figure 5

Interview with Will LeMessieur MRI Australia Pty Ltd

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

2.6 E-Waste Regulations Most countries now have some form of legislation in place to control electronic waste. The overarching international regulation that regulates electronic waste is The Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (1989) or simply, The Basel Convention. The Basel Convention is an international treaty that was designed to reduce the movements of hazardous waste between nations, and specifically to prevent transfer of hazardous waste from developed countries to LDCs. The Convention is also intended to minimize the amount and toxicity of wastes generated, to ensure their environmentally sound management as closely as possible to the source of generation, 41

“E-recycling Services - Dismantling, Recycling - Sims Recycling Solutions.” Electronics Recycling, IT Refurbishment - Sims Recycling Solutions. Web. <http://apac.simsrecycling.com/products-andservices/e-recycling-services>.

and to assist LDCs in environmentally sound management of the hazardous and other wastes they generate. The Convention was opened for signature on 22 March 1989, and entered into force on 5 May 1992.42 The strictest regulations regarding the Basel Convention are the European Union’s ‘Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment’ directive and Australia’s ‘Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989.’ The strictest regulation influencing product design is the European Union’s ‘Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment’ directive. The European Union’s laws have influenced Governments of developing countries, particularly Asian countries where a lot of electronic goods are manufactured, to introduce matching laws so that their products can meet the standards for import into the counties of the European Union. 43 The OECD’s ‘Environmentally Sound Management of Used and Scrap Personal Computers guidelines “... focus on reuse and recovery of used PCs and their constituent materials, but do not address other environmental issues such as product design, choice of materials and energy efficiency. The guidelines highlight areas such as substances of concern in reuse/recovery and disposal activities, facility requirements (including energy recovery) and transport.”44 Under the Australian Constitution, responsibility for managing wastes, including e-waste, is held with the States and Territories. Local governments provide waste management services according to the policy and regulatory frameworks established by their respective State/Territory. The role of the Commonwealth Government is limited to international arrangements in regards to waste management and to facilitating a coordinated approach by the States and Territories towards the management of waste. The direct involvement of the Commonwealth may also be required if the taxation powers of the Commonwealth are required to implement a regulatory approach. A coordinated approach to waste by Australian jurisdiction is achieved through the Environment Protection and Heritage Council the Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC), which consists of environment Ministers

Basel Convention. Web. <http://www.basel.int/>. E-Waste Curriculum Development Project. Rep. no. 1 Vol. Final. Natural Edge Product. Print. July 2006. 44 Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd 2001, Computer & peripherals material project, <http://www.deh.gov.au/settlements/publications/waste/electricals/computerreport/index.html>. p. 54 43

from each state and territory and is chaired by the Commonwealth Minister for Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts, The Hon Peter Garrett AM MP. The export and import of hazardous waste from and to Australia is subject to the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989, which governs the disposal of hazardous waste, including e-waste. The Department of Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts has imposed restrictions on the exportation of electronic equipment, deemed as Hazardous Waste in order to stem the flow of such products in various conditions to developing nations, where such equipment would have a limited useful life. The regulations are geared to drive a stronger environmental recycling emphasis in Australia while regulating that the country that has created the waste is responsible for its proper environmental disposal. Australia is yet to enforce product-take back schemes which have already been introduced in other developed nations. Consequently, many Australian companies do not implement the same recycling standards as they do in countries where take-back and recycling is enforced.45 Regulatory activity in Australia include: •

Australian Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers Association (AEEMA), Consumer Electronic Suppliers Association (CESA), and Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA), the peak electrical and electronic industry associations, are developing voluntary product stewardship initiatives.46

•

“Extended producer responsibility for waste computer and peripheral equipment has not yet been incorporated into the ethos of Australian computer manufacturers. While the international parent companies of many Australian manufacturers have implemented a number of environmental initiatives, product stewardship in the Australian computer industry is currently in its infancy.”47

Environment Victoria, Environmental report card on computers 2005: computer waste in Australia and the case for producer p. 17 46 Australia. Department of the Environment and Heritage. Hazardous Waste Section. Electronic Scrap A Hazardous Waste. Feb. 2004. Web. <http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/chemicals/hazardous-waste/publications/electronicscrap-fs.html>. 47 Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd 2001, Computer & peripherals material project, http://www.deh.gov.au/settlements/publications/waste/electricals/computerreport/index.html p. 37

Table D Electronic Waste Law in Australia Legislation/Guideline Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989

Description Australia's obligation under the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.

Hazard Status of Waste Electrical and Electronic Assemblies or Scrap, October 1999

Circumstances under which a permit is, or is not, required for the exports and imports of waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap, in line with the Basel Convention.

National Environment Protection Measure: Movement of Controlled Waste Between States and Territories 1998 Product Stewardship Strategy for Electrical and Electronic Products 2001

The establishment of a nation wide tracking system for the interstate transport of controlled waste. The Department of the Environment and Heritage Product Stewardship Strategy for Electrical and Electronic Appliances’

Table E Electronic Waste Law in New South Wales Legislation/ Guideline Waste Minimization and Management Act (1995) Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

Description Contains statewide waste licensing requirements; standard environmental protection requirements; and waste reporting obligations. Requires that waste facilities pay a levy to the EPA.

Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) regulations 1996 Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001.

General environmental obligations for waste activities (generators and storers); waste facilities (landfills); and non-licensed waste transporters. Allows the Minister to make regulations establishing an extended producer responsibility scheme and product stewardship scheme.

Extended Producer Responsibility Priority Statement (Consultation paper), 2003

Purpose to identify wastes or products of concern and put industry in notice that it will have to act to reduce amounts and impacts of waste streams

3. Methodology 3.1 Overview of Methods This study was conducted in Sydney because it is the most populated city in Australia. Due to the size of the population, there is more likely to be more e-waste generated than in any other part of the country and therefore, more reason to conduct a study with the goals of finding solutions to improve and increase e-waste recycling. To thoroughly analyze electronic waste recycling in Sydney extensive research was done on various facets of electronic waste. Research was done on what exactly e-waste is including the various definitions of e-waste, the common materials and hazardous chemicals found in e-waste, Australian and global volumes of e-waste, Australian and international e-waste collection and recycling schemes, Australian and international regulations to control e-waste, and the common processes of how ewaste is recycled. Additionally, an investigation was done on past studies and reports on e-waste internationally and in Australia as well as an investigation into the possible solutions in ensuring e-waste that is being dealt with. To get a comprehensive idea of how e-waste is currently being handled in Sydney, interviews were conducted with electronic waste recycling and collection companies, interviews were conducted with environmental and waste management government offices, and a survey on electronic waste was conducted on members of the general public in Sydney. 3.2 E-Waste Survey Data Collection Techniques The main goal of the survey was to gauge the public’s perceptions of e-waste and to investigate how willing the public in Sydney is to recycle their e-waste. The survey was conducted to identify the common electronic products people in Sydney own, if people currently are in possession of e-waste, if people know the options to recycle e-waste, and to investigate possible solutions that would work in Sydney to ensure that e-waste is recycled. The survey was implemented using Survey Monkey, an online survey program. An online survey was deemed necessary in order to reach the maximum number of participants within a short time frame. This mode of survey has the advantage over other methods of administration such as administering surveys by hand, or sending surveys in the mail, as it allows a large number of respondents to be reached in a short amount of time. A disadvantage of administering an online survey

in this case is, that as a survey on e-waste, there is a possibility that the use of an online survey may have created a bias towards computer users. To ensure the most efficient design of the survey, a pilot survey of 25 participants was used to test questions and to refine the choice sets of the initial survey design. With feedback from the pilot survey, choice sets were altered and several questions were added. The main survey was administered online over a period of ten days, from Monday, April 12, 2010 to Thursday, April 22, 2010 and was conducted with participants solely from Sydney. To administer the surveys and to ensure the most random sample as possible, I had several contacts in Sydney of various ages and backgrounds send out emails with links to the survey and a short message asking them to complete a survey on electronic waste for a research project. At the end of the ten-day time period, 150 participants from Sydney had taken the survey and the survey was closed. The survey results were then analyzed and graphed using the Microsoft Excel software program. See Appendix D and E for copies of the pilot and final survey. 3.3 Interviews Techniques Interviews were conducted with various stakeholders of the e-waste recycling industry in Sydney. Interviews were deemed appropriate and useful as they fostered an in-depth analysis on the various aspects of electronic waste in Sydney. The interviews allowed for great detail and insight to be gained on electronic waste recycling and collection processes, current regulations on electronic waste, and frameworks that are being worked on to tackle the growing problem of e-waste in Sydney. Interviews were conducted through e-mail correspondences and via telephone. E-mail correspondences and telephone interviews were conducted over in-person interviews, as the people interviewed were unable or unwilling to meet in person. Inperson interviews would have been the preferred method of interviewing, however, due to time constraints it was deemed appropriate that interviews were done over the telephone and through e-mails as sufficient data was gained through this process.

25 Â

3.4 Summary of Interviews Table F Interviews with Electronic Waste Recycling and Collection Companies Organization Interview with Position Date of Interview Method of Interview

Sims Recycling Solutions Peter Millar

1800 EWASTE

eGarbo

April 15, 2010

MRI Australia Pty Ltd Will Le Messurier Managing Director April 16, 2010

General Manager April 15, 2010

Spokesperson

Telephone

E-Mail

Telephone

Timothy Waters

Benjamin Cassell Operation Manager April 16, 2010

Table G Interviews with Government Offices

Organization

Waverley Council, Waste & Recycling

Dept Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Waste Policy Branch Cathy McGowan

Greens NSW

Interview with

Eleanor Raftery

Position

Environment Officer

Office Manager

April 19, 2010

Assistant Director Resource Recovery April 15, 2010

Date of Interview Method of Interview

E-Mail

26 Â

Lauren Moore

April 19, 2010

4. Results 4.1 Summary of Interviews with Government Officials Cathy McGowan, Assistant Director, Resource Recovery and Product Innovation Team, Waste Policy Branch Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts Ms. McGowan provided me with an overview of how e-waste is managed by the Australian government. She stated, “There is no current Commonwealth legislation in place that deals with e-waste in Australia. Under the Australian Constitution, the states and territories have been responsible for managing the environment, including waste. Restrictions on e-waste to landfill are set at the jurisdictional level. As such, each state and territory has developed its own waste legislation and strategies. For example, in the Australian Capital Territory, computers are banned from landfill with residents required to pay AUS$15 per unit to dispose of a terminal and AUS$22.50 per monitor or laptop disposal at waste management facilities to cover the cost of recycling. The Australian Capital Territory is the only jurisdiction to have legislation enforcing a statewide ban on computers sent to landfill.” There is however legislation underway to control e-waste. Ms. McGowan provided me with a detailed account of what government is currently doing to control e-waste in Australia. See Section 4.2 Current Legislation for an overview of this legislation. Lauren Moore, Office Manager, New South Wales Green Party Ms. Moore discussed the Greens’ policy on e-waste in New South Wales. She stated, “Methods of e-waste recycling vary depending on the local government area. Greens Councilors work at the local government level to help promote e-waste collection initiatives.” The Greens are supporting Waverly and Woollahara councils in providing free e-waste recycling days. Eleanor Raftery, Waverley Council, Waste and Recycling In my correspondence with Ms. Raftery, I learned of the local efforts that councils are taking to ensure e-waste is recycled and not sent to landfills. Waverly Council is holding two Free Recycling Days in 2010. One is on Sunday June 6, 2010 the other is on Sunday November 21, 2010. “Waverley Council has been providing

this service for the past four years to help reduce the amount of electronic goods sent to landfill. This year Woollahra Council has joined us to deliver the service to residents from both municipalities. So far the drop-off days have helped Waverley residents recycle more than 70 tonnes of electronic waste.” Residents are invited to take advantage of this fee recycling service and are permitted to simply drop off ewaste at the collection point and the council ensures that the e-waste is recycled safely and responsibly. However this service is for Waverley and Woollahara residents only. Residents can drop of any broken or unusable electronic equipment including: • • • • • • • •

Computers – monitors, hard drives, printers, laptops, network equipment, scanners, cords, cables Televisions DVD players, video recorders, projectors, speakers Mobile phones, landline phones, fax machines MP3 players, cameras Toasters, kettles, microwaves, and other household appliances DVDs, CDs, and tapes Household batteries

The Waverly council is funding the free recycling days. The events are being advertised in the local press, web banners, paid ads in the local papers, on television screens at the council customer service centre, and by outreach to business owners. The councils are working with Sims Recycling Solutions to ensure the e-waste gets recycled. However, no retailers or manufacturing companies are involved in the events. Ms. Raftery stated, “discarding of the e-waste is very expensive, but the environmental costs of not doing anything are also very great.” Ms. Raftery mentioned that the Waverly Council worked hard to lobby for the Federal Government’s new National Waste Policy and product stewardship framework regarding televisions and computers. 4.2 Current Legislation on E-Waste in Australia The Electrical Equipment Product Stewardship Sub-Group examined the issue of e-waste and decided that computer and television waste were wastes of concern. Since that time the television and computer industry has been working with the EPHC to identify a suitable way to manage end-of-life televisions and computers. In November 2008 the EPHC committed to the development of a national solution to the issue of managing television and computer waste. This action culminated in the

release of a package of documents designed to enable public consultation on the various options for managing end-of-life televisions and computers on 16 July 2009. The main document in the package is the Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers. The paper canvasses various options for managing endof-life units and analyses the costs and benefits of each. In November 2009 the EPHC, released a new national policy on waste and resource management. The National Waste Policy: Less Waste, More Resources has a strong focus on taking responsibility, through product stewardship, to reduce the environmental footprint and improve the health and safety of manufactured goods during and at end of life. A key priority will be for the Australian Government to establish national framework legislation for product stewardship. The framework will support efficient industry-run schemes for collecting and recycling end of life products and ensure that proposed arrangements are accountable and effective. Public consultation on the design of the framework will occur during 2010. Televisions and computers will be the first products to be covered under the framework, with national collection and recycling schemes expected to be operational from 2011. Under the Framework legislation manufacturers will be required to either join a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) or develop their own collection and recycling scheme, which must meet standards set out in the Framework legislation, and take responsibility for end of life products. Australia’s environment Ministers have acknowledged the need to act on all e-waste. Once the product stewardship scheme for managing end of life televisions and computers is operational, other types of e-waste may also be considered. The Australian Government is working with other jurisdiction governments and peak industry associations to develop the National Television and Computer Product Stewardship Scheme, which will be an industry-led collection and recycling scheme. The National Television and Computer Product Stewardship Scheme will allow recycling of 80% of end of life televisions and computers within ten years. To help ensure the success of the scheme, public education campaigns will be implemented to provide the community with information on the scheme itself and encourage responsible disposal of end of life televisions and computers.

4.3 Survey Results See appendix A for demographics of sample. Ownership of Working Electronic Products and E-waste Table H shows how many respondents indicated that they are currently in possession of each electronic product. Table H Ownership of Electronic Products Product Owned Computer Mobile phone Television DVD player/recorder Audio system Microwave oven Video game system Portable electronic devices (eg. MP3, PDA, GPS, CD player, etc) Total

# Of Respondents Own 147 148 138 126 100 127 71 137

% of Sample that owns 98.00 % 98.67 % 92.00 % 84.00 % 66.67 % 84.67 % 47.33 % 91.33 %

994

Between the 150 respondents 994 pieces of electronic or electrical equipment are owned. That is an average of 6.63 electronic products owned by each respondent. Figure 11 shows that of the 150 respondents, 98 respondents indicated that they owned at least one piece of e-waste while 52 indicated they did not currently own any e-waste. Figure 11 Do Respondents Currently Posses E-waste

30 Â

The sample was asked how they had disposed of e-waste in the past. Figure12 shows these results. Figure 12 Past Methods of Disposal of E-waste

The sample was then asked if they knew how or where to take their e-waste to get recycled, figure 13 shows the responses to this question. Figure 13 Do Respondents Know How To Properly Dispose of E-waste

Figure 14 If Respondents Knew How To Recycle E-Waste Would They

31 Â

The sample was asked what methods of disposal of e-waste would they prefer to use. Figure 15 shows the preference of the respondents’ disposal options Figure 15 Preference of Disposal Options

The sample was asked how far were they willing to travel to ensure e-waste was recycled. Figure16 shows their responses. Figure 16 How Far Respondents Would Travel To E-Waste Recycling/Collection Points

Figure 17 demonstrates how much the sample is willing to pay to have their e-waste recycled. Figure 17 How Much Respondents Are Willing To Pay To Recycle E-Waste

The sample was asked how they would prefer to pay for e-waste. Figure 18 shows their responses. Figure 18 Methods of Payment for E-waste Recycling

4.4 Summary of Interviews with E-Waste Recycling and Collection Companies E-waste recycling companies provided feedback on how e-waste is managed in Sydney. Information was obtained on what types of e-waste are recycled, how the recycling processes works, how the e-waste is collected, and the many challenges facing the e-waste recycling and collection industry in Sydney. Knowledge was also gained on how e-waste collection and recycling is regulated in Sydney and details of each company’s accreditation and monitoring standards were provided.

Table I Summary of Interviews with E-Waste Recycling and Collection Companies Sims Recycling Solutions

Interview with Government aid Work with Local Councils?

Collection of ewaste

Recycling of ewaste How much volume

Materials Handled ISO Accreditation

Idea of public's perception

Most difficult aspect of ewaste

What government should do

What manufacturers should do

Peter Millar, General Manager

MRI Australia Pty Ltd

eGarbo

Will Le Messurier, Managing Director

Benjamin Cassell, Operations Manager

1800 EWASTE Timothy Waters, Spokesperson

No start up help, but have received support in terms of consulting and R&D grants

Yes Only in large quantities and if specified in contract, supplies skips, containers, or bins to site for the duration of a contract.

Yes

Charges for pick up service, and supplies skips, containers, or bins for removal service (long-term)

Charge for doorstep collection, retail collection, commercial collection, collection from local government

Charges customers to recycle combination of automatic of manual recycling processes Up to 20,000mt per annum Every type of electronic and electrical product except for toasters, hairdryers, and a particular type of mobile phone

Does not recycle, is charged by outside company to recycle products

Charge for recycling $1 per kg for CRT and $0.50 per kg non CRT scrap

Charges for pick up service Does not recycle, is charged by company in Australia to recycle e-waste

Confidential

5,000mt per annum

Confidential

Anything that has electronic components

All types of e-waste

ISO 14001

ISO 14000

All things electronic and electrical Certificate system

Public mostly lacks knowledge of e-waste recycling

Not willing to pay to recycle, need more public education about e-waste

Consumers do not wish to pay a recycle fee at end of life though more willing to pay recycle fee if included as part of cost of new product

Public is not willing to pay

Dealing with hazardous materials

Convincing consumer they have to pay to recycle, people don't want to pay twice for product

Insufficient volumes, estimated recycle rates are 10%

Does not get enough volume

Ban e-waste in landfill

Ban e-waste in landfill, otherwise let market be independent of government intervention

"Should have role to level the playing field ensure participants are all treated equally to ensure that it is compulsory to participate to ensure minimum standards are met"

Ban e-waste in landfill,

Product Stewardship partnership with recyclers and collection services

"They should be required under legislation to achieve certain recycle rates for product and meet minimum standards they have large role to play they can form common purpose association to assist with the marketing and collection and processing of end of life material"

Pay for recycling fees

Product Stewardship, partnership with ewaste recyclers

See Appendix C for more information on ISO Standards

34 Â

No No

5. Discussion 5.1 Overview The survey was used to gauge the public’s need for e-waste recycling and collection options and to evaluate if the public would be willing to pay for and willing to make the effort to recycle. Interviews with e-waste recycling and collection companies and government officials were used to get a thorough analysis of the current e-waste services available to the public in Sydney. According to the results of the survey and interviews with recycling and collection companies and government officials, e-waste collection for recycling in Sydney needs to be improved to increase the volume of e-waste that gets recycled. 5.2 Interpretation of Survey Results From the survey results it is evident that people in Sydney own many electronic products. Of the sample of 150, there were a total of 994 electronic products owned. On average each respondent owned 6.63 electronic products. This corresponds with Ispos Consultants 2005 survey on e-waste owners in Australia. Ispos found that each Australian household had an average of 22 e-waste products.48 Furthermore, of the 150 respondents, 98 respondents indicated they owned at least one e-waste product. This indicates that there is definitely a need for electronic waste collection and recycling services in Sydney. When asked about past disposal of ewaste, over 50% of respondents indicated they had put e-waste in the normal garbage bin. Moreover, when the sample was asked if they knew how to properly dispose of e-waste, 112 of the 150 respondents indicated they did not know how to recycle their e-waste. This indicates a need to provide e-waste collection/recycling services to and education of how to recycle e-waste to the public. Respondents overwhelmingly indicated that if they knew how to recycle ewaste and had the options available to them, they would recycle e-waste. This is significant because it again demonstrates the need for collection/ recycling services in Sydney. When asked about which method of collection is preferred, the sample indicated collection and drop off points as the most preferred. Respondents were 48

Ipsos 2005, Household Electrical & Electronic Waste Survey 2005: Report of Findings, Department of Environment & Conservation (NSW), <http://www.ecorecycle.sustainability.vic.gov.au/resources/documents/051111_IpsosDEC_Final_Report_-_Public.pdf>.

willing to travel, even though only a short distance to recycle e-waste, 137 of the 150 respondents indicated that they would be willing to drive over 3 kilometers (2 miles) to recycle e-waste. 68 respondents indicated that they would not be willing to pay for e-waste recycling. This corresponds with past studies on e-waste recycling such as the EPHC’s final report in June 2009 entitled, “Willingness To Pay for E-Waste Recycling.” It also gives a possible explanation of why e-waste recycling rates in Sydney are so low. However, it must be noted that 51 respondents indicated that they would be willing to pay between $1 and $10 to recycle e-waste and 31 respondents indicated that they would be willing to pay between $10 and $20 to recycle their ewaste. This equates to a total of 82 respondents that indicated a willingness to pay for e-waste recycling. This is significant because e-waste collection and recycling schemes can be funded if the consumers are willing to pay for such services. In terms of methods of payment for e-waste recycling, if required to pay for ewaste recycling 64% of respondents of the survey indicated that they would prefer to pay for e-waste with advanced recycling fees (paying for recycling costs when the product is purchased). 32% indicated they would prefer to pay when they took the product to be recycled. 5.3 Limitations of Survey Results The data gained from the survey needs to be interpreted with several limitations. As with any survey, the reliability and validity of the survey needs to be assessed. The pilot survey was used to ensure that the questions were as valid and reliable as possible. Many of the results of the pilot survey were replicated in the final survey. The survey was intended to be a representational sample of Sydney, however with a limited sample size of 150 in a city of approximately 4.5 million the survey results need to be viewed within a limited context. Additionally, as the survey was administered online there could be some bias towards computer users, as people who do not have e-mail would not have received the survey. 5.4 Interview Interpretations 5.4.1 Interview Analysis Peter Millar Sims Recycling Solutions, General Manager When asked about the willingness of the public to recycle Millar felt that people don’t recycle if its cheaper for them to send their waste to landfill but that

mostly a lack of knowledge of the e-waste recycling industry is the reason why people do not recycle e-waste. From this it is evident that education programs about e-waste should be implemented. When asked if the government should provide subsidies for e-waste recycling companies, Millar stated, “as an e-waste recycler it’d be nice but the question is, does the consumer or government fund such an effort. If government pays the public will be taxed, but if the consumer pays the tax is on the person who buys electronics. The difficult part is to get that person to pay for the recycling. There will have to be some government initiative to ensure that consumers pay for recycling.” Currently Sims is lobbying government to enact laws to enforce e-waste recycling and to make it illegal to send e-waste to landfill. When asked if e-waste in Sydney needed to be improved to increase recycling volumes, Millar responded, “e-waste recycling in Sydney and Australia is a long way behind Europe, the OECD, and many parts of North America, mainly due to the lack of legislation, requiring the recycling of e-waste rather than the ability to dump it. Many people want to do the right thing, but unless there is a suitable, sustainable infrastructure in place, most people are unable, or unsure what to do with their e-waste, to ensure that it is 100% recycled in the appropriate manner. The ability to leave it on the street, with an ‘understanding’ that it will be recycled, but in reality it may be scavenged for the best parts, with a high probability that the remainder ending up in landfill, cannot continue. Too many valuable resources are being lost every day to this wasteful inaction. We need a robust government decision to act and bring about change. The solutions are available, it is the directive that is missing.” 5.4.2 Interview Analysis Will Le Messurier, MRI Australia Pty Ltd, Managing Director Mr. Le Messurier indicated that government subsidies and privatization of ewaste recycling was not necessary provided that government plays a role in developing legislation that requires participation from the public. He stated that a large challenge in Australia in particular is the cost of recycling,

“Consumers do not wish to pay a recycling fee at end of life. People are more willing to pay a recycling fee if the fee is included as a part of the cost of a new product.” This is known as an Advanced Recycling Fee. In terms of government roles, Le Messurier commented, “Government should enact legislation to increase the volume of e-waste recycling and then allow market forces to determine the rest.” When asked about the roles electronic products manufacturers should have in getting consumers to recycle their discarded electronic products, Le Messurier stated “they should be required under legislation to achieve certain recycling rates for products and meet minimum standards, they have a large role to play, they can form common purpose associations to assist with the marketing and collection and processing of end of life material.” 5.4.3 Interview Analysis Timothy Waters, 1800EWASTE, Spokesman Timothy Waters of 1800 EWASTE also felt that getting consumers to pay was difficult and contributed to low recycling rates. “People do not understand that they have to pay for e-waste recycling, people do not want to pay twice for a product, they paid once for the product they do not want to pay again. Mr. Waters also suggested that government should legislate to make sending e-waste to landfills illegal. He suggested, “that the government should provide subsidies or diversion funds to help ewaste recycling, market would sort itself out after.” 5.5 Analysis of E-Waste Recycling and Collection Companies’ Feedback E-waste recycling and collection infrastructure is in place and needs to be made of use. Transparency exists in regards to their practices and to ensure e-waste is being dealt with correctly and companies are randomly audited by independent organizations. E-waste recycling has the potential to be successful and self-sustaining if large volumes are being recycled and fees are covered for processing of materials with low recovery values. In order to get increased volumes of e-waste the consensus of the interviews indicated that government initiative is necessary. Fees need to be charged to cover e-waste processing fees, as many e-waste products are very expensive to recycle. The e-waste recycling industry needs help from decision makers to ensure that the costs of e-waste recycling are being paid for.

A question that government needs to address is who pays that fee. This study suggests that a combination of product stewardship programs and advanced recycling fees should help fund costly e-waste recycling. To increase the volume of e-waste recycling e-waste must be required by legislation to be recycled. Government action must ban e-waste from landfills as allowing e-waste in landfills is the greatest contributor of the low rate of e-waste recycling volumes. From the information obtained in the interviews it is evident that a lack of legislation on e-waste is the main reason of why e-waste recycling rates are so low. However, it is necessary to note that that beyond government legislation to ensure that e-waste recycling is required, government schemes are not necessary as the e-waste recycling industry is well established. 5.6 Analysis of Interviews with Government Officials Interviews with Cathy McGowan, Eleanor Raftery, and Lauren Moore, provided details of how the government in Sydney and in Australia is working to address the growing problem of e-waste. From the perspective of the New South Wales state and Sydney local council governments, there are grassroots initiatives from local communities to initiate e-waste recycling services. However, as e-waste recycling is very costly, local councils and state governments need increased support from the Commonwealth government to coordinate large-scale e-waste collection. Currently, the Commonwealth government is working to provide computer and television recycling schemes by 2011. This is a great stride in ensuring that e-waste is being recycled in Australia. However, to be effective in ensuring that all e-waste is recycled, legislation needs to be enacted that bans e-waste in landfills and forces ewaste producers to pay for e-waste recycling. 5.7 Analysis of Current E-Waste Situation in Sydney Options do exist for recycling and collection of e-waste in Sydney. However, a large amount of e-waste is still sent to landfills and not recycled. Legislation is needed from government to ensure that e-waste is recycled. It should be illegal to send e-waste to landfill. Outlawing e-waste in landfills would greatly aid e-waste recycling and collection services. Sims’ e-waste recycling plant in Villawood, Sydney has the capacity to recycle 20,000mt of e-waste every year, roughly equal to

all of New South Wales’ e-waste. However, the plant is not even close to working at full capacity as most of the e-waste in New South Wales is sent to landfills. The Commonwealth government is currently taking action to ensure that some e-waste is recycled. This is evident in the National Television and Computer Product Stewardship Scheme and is a great first step taken by the federal government. The legislation mandates that manufacturers be required to either join a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) or develop their own collection and recycling scheme. This would make manufacturers of electronic products become responsible for the end life of their products. The goal of this initiative is to have recycling rates at 80% of end of life televisions and computers by 2021. While some e-waste is currently recycled, the financial costs of collection and recycling incurred by recyclers exceed the financial value of the recovered material resources. As a result the recycling of e-waste is not commercially profitable without a financial contribution beyond the sale of recovered material resources, or without government support. Government intervention is needed because the margin between costs of collection and reprocessing and the revenue received from recovered resources are not sufficient to result in recycling rates that society needs. In the absence of government intervention it is probable that a privately run e-waste recycling scheme will not be successful. Government action needs to be taken to help coordinate public funding of e-waste recycling. 5.8 E-Waste Policy Options in Sydney There are a number of policy options decision makers can take to increase recycling rates of e-waste in Sydney. This study fits in with the EPHC’s Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers (July 2009) which offers a number of solutions to address e-waste in Australia. Like the Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers this study suggests that for rates of e-waste recycling in Sydney to be increased there is no question that the Commonwealth government needs to have a greater role in ensuring that e-waste gets recycled. Government legislation must ensure that e-waste recycling and collection is funded by those responsible for creating e-waste. Options decision makers can take to increase the recycling of e-waste in Sydney. • Business as usual- the current situation does not change. Some jurisdictions implement regulation or schemes but there is no coordination of government policy.

In the private sector, industry participants implement brand-specific schemes that do not cover all consumers or all e-waste. Not an acceptable approach if wanting to achieve a sustainable future and solve the growing problem of recycling e-waste. • Public education schemes- educate the community about the problems relating to e-waste and the recycling opportunities available. This is necessary to do, as ewaste recyclers and collection services overwhelmingly believed that a lack of education about e-waste recycling is a large reason of why much of e-waste is sent to landfills. Necessary to implement but insufficient to enact alone. • Collection schemes- administered by governments to increase collection of ewaste. Could be administered by local governments, state or territory governments, Commonwealth Government, or industry coordinated collection scheme. Could be an effective solution, but costs would be very expensive and current e-waste recyclers and collectors would lose business. • State-based extended producer responsibility (EPR) imposed on importers/retailers that do not become members of a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) industry scheme. Would hold manufacturers responsible for their products but necessary to also implement other legislation such as education and landfill bans. See Appendix D for more information on EPR and Product Stewardship. • A subsidy for collection/recycling- a Commonwealth administered scheme whereby regulations impose a fee to be paid on all imports, and subsidies are paid to recyclers for collection/recycling of televisions and computers; would greatly aid e-waste recyclers and collectors but additional measures are necessary to implement. • Design standards- sets standards for production of electronic products that assist in ease of recycling/ disassembling and reduce use of hazardous substances. A necessary step to reduce the hazardous materials present in e-waste and to make the recycling of e-waste simpler. • Advanced Recycling Fees- legislation requiring retailers to collect a fee on each new product that goes to recycling/collection schemes. Would enforce consumers to pay for e-waste recycling. • Landfill bans- state-based regulation would require owners and operators of landfills to not accept e-waste. Necessary to implement along with other measures if wanting to achieve a sustainable future.

6. Conclusion 6.1 Overview This study evaluated and analyzed electronic waste recycling in Sydney, Australia. The study found that a legal framework on e-waste needs to be put into effect that combines direction from government and funding from e-waste producers and consumers to increase the volume of e-waste recycling in Sydney. The study determined the current methods of recycling and collecting e-waste available to the public and examined what measures are in place to regulate and ensure that electronic waste is recycled and handled in an ethical and environmentally friendly manner. Through interviews with e-waste recycling and collection companies and government offices, a survey on the public’s perception of e-waste, and research on current legislation and regulations, the study found that e-waste collection and recycling services needs to be improved to increase the rate of recycling in Sydney. The survey results demonstrated that there is a large need for e-waste recycling and collection services, that consumers are willing to recycle e-waste if options are made available, and that consumers are willing to pay for e-waste recycling. Feedback from e-waste recyclers and collectors indicated that there is a strong need for government action to ban e-waste from entering landfills and to get consumers and manufacturers to fund the large costs of recycling e-waste. Ultimately the study found that banning electronic waste in landfills and requiring consumers to pay advanced recycling fees are ways in which e-waste recycling volumes could be increased. The study concludes that to improve the efficiency with which resources are used, reduce the impact on the environment, and to improve the management of hazardous wastes, e-waste services need to be improved in Sydney to increase the amount of e-waste that gets recycled. The current recycling rate is very poor. Increasing the recycling rate allows large amounts of resources and materials to be reused and reduces the amount of energy taken to extract new materials. There are already a number of e-waste recyclers in operation around Australia that are ready to take much greater volumes of material than they currently are. For ewaste to be recycled in a safe manner it needs to be highly regulated, federal and state law should impose legislation to help fund e-waste recycling. Some problems impeding current e-waste recycling is a lack of public education about e-waste recycling and how to recycle e-waste, the high cost of recycling e-waste, and lack of

responsibility from manufacturers in ensuring the disposal of the products they produce. To overcome these problems, this study concludes that government legislation needs to be enacted. Legislation must ban e-waste in landfills, this would require ewaste to be recycled and greatly increase recycling volumes. Legislation needs to mandate advanced recycling fees in which fees are paid when an electronic is purchased that goes to local e-waste recycling and collection services. This would cover the costs of recycling e-waste and ensure that recycling and collection services cover their processing costs. Government must also take action to make manufacturers responsible for the end use of their products and legislation needs to make manufacturers responsible for the products they produce. 6.2 How to Improve the Study The study could be improved by analyzing e-waste recycling in more depth. An investigation into the role of electronics manufacturers and retailers could greatly enhance the scope of the research. A larger survey sample size would add more validity to the results of the study. Replication of the survey would also make the results more valid. More interviews with other stakeholders in the e-waste recycling and collection service could provide more feedback on the current status of the ewaste recycling industry. A more in-depth examination of the difficulties and costs of e-waste recycling could also contribute to the study. The methods of the study could be improved. As an online survey could have created a bias towards people that use electronic products, especially computer users, paper surveys or mailed out surveys could be used to reduce this bias. Additionally, as interviews were conducted by phone and e-mail, in person interviews could be implanted to create more in depth dialogue on the current practices of e-waste. 6.3 Ideas for Future Research This study can be built upon in a number of ways. First of all, as e-waste was only evaluated in Sydney, a future project can evaluate e-waste in other areas of Australia and assess the management and regulations of dealing with e-waste in different parts of the country. Another study could explicitly explore the willingness of consumers to pay for e-waste recycling. A possible future study could also

43 Â

evaluate the role manufacturers should take to ensure e-waste gets recycled as well as evaluate product stewardship schemes. It would be interesting for future studies to analyze the current legislation that is being enacted and evaluate the effectiveness of the government action that is to take place in the near future. Future studies could evaluate if e-waste has improved due to this legislation and look evaluate if education programs are effective to get consumers to recycle e-waste.

44 Â

Appendix A. Survey Demographics Age 90

# of Repsonses

70 60 44

50 40

30 20 10 0 18-‐30

31-‐50

51 or older

Age

Gender 84

# of Responses

80 70

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Male

Female Gender

B. Hazardous Components in E-Waste Arsenic is used as an alloy in electrical circuits; it is highly toxic and carcinogenic. • PVC (Polyvinyl chloride) is a plastic widely used in electrical products, particularly in coatings of wires and cables. Although PVC does not have direct toxicity in the same way as lead or mercury, this plastic does present its own manufacturing and waste management problems due to its organic-bound chlorine content. Furthermore, the use of PVC in certain applications requires that other chemicals be added to the plastic, such as phthalates to plasticise (soften) the plastic. • Phthalates are a group of chemicals possessing similar structures, many of which are widely used as plasticizers (softeners) in plastics, especially PVC. These chemicals are not chemically bound to the plastic, and so are able to migrate out of the material over time into the surrounding environment. Many phthalates are toxic to wildlife and humans, often through their metabolites (chemicals to which they breakdown in the body). Some widely used phthalates are known to be toxic to reproduction, capable of causing changes to both male and female reproductive systems in mammals.49 • Lead (Pb) is used in TV and computer cathode ray tubes, in the production of batteries, and metal products. If ingested or inhaled can harm the nervous system, kidneys, and reproductive system. Lead has been widely used as a major component of solders in electronic goods.50 Lead is highly toxic to humans, as well as to animals and plants. It can build up in the body through repeated exposure and have irreversible effects on the nervous system, particularly the developing nervous system in children. Exposure can also have effects on the heart, kidneys and brain. For many effects there is no known safe level of exposure.51 • Chromium Combines easily with other metals to form alloys such as stainless steel. Used as a rust-resistant coating on other metals, a pigment in paint, and in wood preservatives and liquids for tanning hides. Hexavalent chromium (Cr VI) is one chemical form of the metal chromium, which is far more reactive and mobile in the environment than other forms of chromium. It has been used in electronics primarily for corrosion protection of metallic surfaces. Hexavalent chromium is highly toxic even at low concentrations, and is a known human carcinogen under some circumstances.52 • Mercury (Hg) is a highly toxic metal that has been used in various applications in electrical products. Exposure can cause health effects including •

Park, J.D., Habeebu, S.S.M. & Klaassen, C.D. (2002) Testicular toxicity of di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in young Sprague-Dawley rats. Toxicology 171: 105 115. Gray, L.E., Ostby, J., Furr, J., Price, M., Veeramachaneni, D.N.R. & Parks, L. (2000) Perinatal exposure to the phthalates DEHP, BBP and DINP, but not DEP, DMP or DOTP, alters sexual differentiation of the male rat. Toxicological Sciences 58(2): 350-365 50 Geibig, J.R., Socolof, M.L. (2005) Solders in Electronics: A Life-Cycle Assessment. US EPA 744R- 05-001. Lau, J.H., Wong, C.P., Lee, N.C. & Ricky Lee, S.W. (2003) Electronics Manufacturing with Lead-Free, Halogen-Free & Conductive-Adhesive materials. McGraw-Hill ISBN:0-07-138624-6 51 Spivey, A. (2007) The weight of lead, effects add up in adults. Environmental Health Perspectives 115(1): A30-A36 52 ATSDR (2000) Toxicological Profile for chromium. United States Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, September 2000. International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC (1990) Chromium. In International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) monograph; Chromium, Nickel and Welding. IARC monograph, Vol. 49, 677pp. ISBN 9283212495

•

damage to the central nervous system and kidneys. Once in the environment, mercury can be converted into compounds, which are highly bioaccumulative as well as being toxic, even at very low levels of exposure.53 Used in flat panel monitors and batteries. Exposure occurs through contaminated air, water and food and through dental and medical treatments. High levels may damage the brain, kidneys, and developing fetuses. Cadmium (Cd) has been used in a number of applications within electronics products, both as a metal and as cadmium compounds. This toxic metal can accumulate in the body over time, with long-term exposure causing damage to the kidneys and bone structure. Cadmium and its compounds are also known human carcinogens.54 Cadmium, used in rechargeable batteries and common batteries, metal coatings, and plastics, damages the lungs, causes kidney disease, and irritates the digestive tract. Brominated flame retardants (BFRs) used in plastic cases and cables; there is potentially a very wide range of brominated chemicals that can be used as BFRs.55 Commonly used examples include polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), as well as brominated polymeric and oligomeric materials. Some BFRs, including certain PBDEs, have known toxic properties, and some are highly persistent in the environment and able to bioaccumulate (build up in animals and humans). In whatever form the bromine is present, impacts can result at the product’s end of life as a result of the unintentional formation of toxic brominated byproducts (including dioxins) during some disposal or recycling operations.56 PCBs, compounds used in industry as heat exchange fluids, in electric transformers and capacitors, and as additives in paint, carbonless copy paper, sealants and plastics. Pose risks to nervous systems, reproductive systems, immune systems, and livers.

ATSDR (1999a) Toxicological Profile for mercury. United States Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, March 1999. UNEP (2002) Global Mercury Assessment, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Chemicals, Geneva, Switzerland. Available at; www.chem.unep.ch/mercury 54 ATSDR (1999b) Toxicological Profile for cadmium. United States Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, July 1999. DHHS (2005) 11th Report on Carcinogens. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, US Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program 55 Lassen, C., Lokke, S. & Hansen, L.I. (1999) Brominated Flame Retardants: substance flow analysis and substitution feasibility study. Danish Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Project No. 494, Copenhagen, ISBN 87-7909-415-5: 240pp. 56 Stutz, M., Riess, M., Tungare, A.V., Hosseinpour, J., Waechter, G., Rottler, H. (2000) Combustion of Halogen-free Printed Wiring Boards and Analysis of Thermal Degradation Products. Proceedings Electronic Goes Green 2000, 127-132. Gullett, B.,K., Linak, W.P., Touati, A., Wasson, S.J., Gatica, S., King, C.J. (2007) Characterization of air emissions and residual ash from open burning of electronic wastes during simulated rudimentary recycling operations. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management 9(1): 69–79

C. ISO Standards ISO 14000The ISO 14000 is a family of internationally recognized standards for environmental management systems that is applicable to any business or organization, regardless of size, location or income. These standards are developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which has representation from committees all over the world. List of ISO 14000 series standards57 • ISO 14001 Environmental management systems—Requirements with guidance for use • ISO 14004 Environmental management systems—General guidelines on principles, systems and support techniques • ISO 14015 Environmental assessment of sites and organizations • ISO 14020 series (14020 to 14025) Environmental labels and declarations • ISO 14031 Environmental performance evaluation—Guidelines • ISO 14040 series (14040 to 14049), Life Cycle Assessment, LCA, discusses pre-production planning and environment goal setting. • ISO 14050 terms and definitions • ISO 14062 discusses making improvements to environmental impact goals. • ISO 14063 Environmental communication—Guidelines and examples • ISO 14064 Measuring, quantifying, and reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions. • ISO 19011 which specifies one audit protocol for both 14000 and 9000 series standards together. This replaces ISO 14011 meta-evaluation—how to tell if your intended regulatory tools worked. 19011 is now the only recommended way to determine this. D. More Definitions Product stewardshipA concept whereby environmental protection centers on the product itself, and everyone involved in the lifespan of the product is called upon to take up responsibility to reduce its environmental impact.58 For manufacturers, this includes planning for, and if necessary, paying for the recycling or disposal of the product at the end of its useful life. This may be achieved, in part, by redesigning products to use fewer harmful substances, to be more durable, reusable and recyclable, and to make products from recycled materials.59For retailers and consumers, this means taking an active role in ensuring the proper disposal or recycling of an end-of-life product. Extended producer responsibility (EPR) Extended producer responsibility is a strategy designed to promote the integration of environmental costs associated with goods throughout their life cycles into the market price of the products.60 Like, “Product Stewardship”, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) uses political means to hold producers liable for the costs of managing their products at end of life. EPR promotes that producers (usually brand 57

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_14000_essentials http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/partnerships/stewardship/index.htm 59 http://the-ncec.com/productstewardship/intro 60 OECD (2001). Extended Producer Responsibility: A Guidance Manual for Governments. Paris, France. 58

owners) have the greatest control over product design and marketing and therefore have the greatest ability and responsibility to reduce toxicity and waste.61 This can take the form of a reuse, buy-back, or recycling program, or in energy production. The producer may also choose to delegate this responsibility to a third party, a so-called producer responsibility organization (PRO), which is paid by the producer for spentproduct management. In this way, EPR shifts responsibility for waste from government to private industry, obliging producers, importers and/or sellers to internalize waste management costs in their product prices and ensuring the sustainable and safe handling of the remains of their products.62 E. Pilot Survey

F. Final Survey

Sierra Club. "Producer Responsibility Recycling." http://www.sierraclub.org/committees/zerowaste/producerresponsibility/index.asp. May 2009 62 Hanisch, C. (2000). Is Extended Producer Responsibility Effective?. Environ Sci Technol, 34 (7), pp.170 A-175 A.