Growing Problems With Electronics Waste

eldavojohn writes "The BBC is reporting that many countries are dumping their e-Waste in poorer African nations. From the article, 'The world's richest nations are dumping hazardous electronic waste on poor African countries, says the head of the UN's Environment Programme (Unep).' The problem with e-Waste (versus other wastes) is that the gases and chemicals that make up a lot of electronics are particularly harmful for the environment. I suppose nobody takes their computer, TV or Radio to the repair shop anymore since a new one is a fraction of that cost down at the local convenience store."

repairs vs new

[56ker]

nobody takes their computer, TV or Radio to the repair shop anymore since a new one is a fraction of that cost down at the local convenience store."

Yep, case in point - I gave someone a quote of £175 to fix their laptop. They preferred instead to spend £339 on a new one. Even if the cost is lower for repairs people still prefer to buy new (which doesn't make much sense to me).

The global village's septic tank

[tcd004]

It's not just e-waste. As this piece notes, the toxic byproducts of manufacturing are being dumped as raw materials too: The Global Village's Septic Tank [foreignpolicy.com]

Been in the shlock buying biz for 8 years now...

[Super Dave Osbourne]

and seen countries come and go regarding taking it on the chin for the US consumer byproduct/waste. First it was indeed our own backyard landfills, then we got 'smart' and taxed heavy or disallowed it in the mid to late 90s. Then it went off to Mexico, in the form of used crap being sold to uneducated folks in Mexico for top dollar when the markets began to collapse in the 99-01 timeframe. Then it started to head off (monitors in particular) to China. Then they got wise, and also stopped allowing big electronic trash ships to dock at all and unload, basically causing a huge bottleneck at their ports and off the coasts. Now it is Africa, doesn't suprise me at all if next it is Antartica when folks realize what this stuff does to the ground waters. Its hilarious that folks are so shocked at this capitalism at its worst with monitors and heavy metals from electronic consumerism. Steve Jobs, you should be ashamed of yourself. :)

Re:Ironically

[sonamchauhan]

> Will I get a replacement battery?
Yes, for an old laptop, that could be a bad idea. :-)

My experience: I sourced a replacement battery for a 5 year old Fujitsu laptop direct from Fujitsu who had it stocked all these years. Even though the new battery was virgin, it had deteriorated in storage.

Instead, repack your battery ( http://www.google.com/search?q=repack+laptop+batte ry [google.com] )

Re:Ironically

[timmarhy]

rubbish i've done 1000's of hours of soldering with both lead and lead free solder, and so long as your using a quality flux and solder there is zero advantage of lead over tin aside from price, and frankly the less lead contamination in our living environment the better.

Re:Ironically

[seanadams.com]

Ironically, the EU regulation RoHS (which is intended to cut down on hazardous materials in electronics) is likely to make the waste problem worse - since it bans solder with lead in it. Lead free solder is quite inferior to leaded solder - it tends to be more brittle, and tin whiskers are more likely to form.

Having been through the RoHS transition for my company's consumer products, I can tell you it is really not that bad.

There were some pains - plastic in one connector that had very minor heat deformation issues, and tin whiskers in another connector, which were easily cleared with a blast of air. However, as soon as we pointed these out to the suppliers they were quickly fixed.

There were also some delays getting new lead-free ICs and hexavalent-chromium-free screws, but nothing disastrous.

Reliability in the field has been just as good with non-RoHS product.

And as an added bonus, since it is far more cost effective to produce _only_ RoHS compliant products, our US shipments will also be lead-free.

I suspect your experiences are not first-hand. I have yet to hear from anyone who is experiencing big problems with RoHS that can't be chalked up to simple bad planning.

The RoHS requirements may have been a transitional PITA for many, but now that everyone had made the switch, it is really no more difficult to design and build than it was before. Maybe the solder costs a few cents more.

India's e-recycling

[Kensai7]

I've been reading a lot about India's growing role in the business of electronic scavenging and recycling. Seems that this Asian country with the enormous population and booming e-economy tries to find new uses from obsolete equipment. Read here: http://www.physorg.com/news67098899.html [physorg.com]

Re:repairs vs new

[tsa]

Medion, the computers you buy at the Aldi [www.aldi.nl] stores. They come preinstalled with pretty much everything you need, but no trial versions. Great stuff.

Re:Ironically

[Alioth]

You got any sources to back-up your blanket assertions that tin is inferior?

Solder always has had tin in it (it's traditionally tin/lead alloy). But you can always http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/ [justfuckinggoogleit.com]

Here's a handy link, off the first page of Google results: http://www.rohsusa.com/ [rohsusa.com]

Quote:

It is widely accepted in the Engineering community that the recent ban of lead in solders for use in electronics in Europe is not only erroneous, but will actually lead to a worsening situation on the environment with the replacements being in general use from July '06 having a GREATER environmental impact.

My source? - The US Environmental protection agency. The EPA report on Solders in Electronics: A Life-Cycle Assessment (472 pages) published August 2005 has some very interesting data. It shows that the replacements for "leaded" solder generally referred to as "SAC alloy" has a higher impact than tin lead solder in a number of areas such as:

Non-renewable resource use
Energy use
Global warming
Ozone depletion
Water Quality

Re:Is this really such a bad thing?

[stonecypher]

Apparently you've never been to New Jersey, where there are many landfills several orders of magnitude larger than this. It's easy to get karma by saying "if you calculate it [out, sic]." However, pretending to run the numbers isn't good enough. If what you were saying was true, then one enterprising owner of strip-mined land could take up every refuse contract in the nation, and become an exceptionally rich individual overnight.

New York City produces 12,000 tons of garbage per day [earth-policy.org]. If you honestly believe that a 25 square mile area 200 feet deep will handle this country for a thousand years, then sir, that location is on the other side of the Brooklyn Bridge, and I'll sell you both for a modest fee.

Don't say "if you calculate it" unless you're actually willing to do so. Stapling the suggestion that your lie is statistically backed onto your lie makes it no less a lie.