E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 1

Table of Contents
Table of Contents....................................................................................................... 1

INHERENCY:................................................................................................................ 2

Legislation...............................................................................................................2

Private sector initiatives..........................................................................................3

Private companies are collecting used electronics. .............................................3

Example: Hewlett Packard buyback/recycling program. .....................................3

Dell banned exports of e-waste............................................................................3

SIGNIFICANCE:............................................................................................................4

Lack of data............................................................................................................. 4

Very little information is available about status quo management of e-waste.....4

Because of a lack of data, it’s impossible to know the actual scope of the e-
waste problem......................................................................................................4

SOLVENCY:................................................................................................................. 6

Insufficient infrastructure........................................................................................6

Infrastructure needs to be established for e-waste recycling in the US...............6

Infrastructure is very limited in North America....................................................6

CRT (main component of e-waste) glass manufacturing industry lacks recycling

capacity. ..............................................................................................................6

Limited number of glass smelters in North America. ...........................................7

E-waste recycling problems.....................................................................................7

Glass manufacturers are hesitant to take recycled CRTs.....................................7

There are numerous barriers to glass-to-glass recycling......................................8

Glass-to-lead recycling of CRTs reduces value of the glass. ................................8

Disadvantage:............................................................................................................9
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 2

INHERENCY:

Legislation
Legislation in Congress to reduce e-waste.
Matthew Wheeland (reporter, managing editor of Greenbiz.com), July 21 2009 Greener
Computing “Federal Bill on E-Waste Policies Moves to Senate”
http://www.greenercomputing.com/blog/2009/07/21/federal-bill-e-waste-policies-moves-senate
Two Democratic U.S. Senators -- Amy Klobuchar of Minn. and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York
-- introduced earlier this month legislation aimed at funding R&D efforts to improve to recycle
e-waste and develop best practices and innovation in greener design of electronics. The
Electronic Device Recycling Research and Development Act, a nearly identical version of which
passed the U.S. House of Representatives in April, provides almost $85 million over the next
three years to help spur the growth of electronics recycling practices in the U.S.

If passed, law would provide grants for e-waste recycling

development. Business Wire (news service) September 28th 2009
“Federal E-Waste Legislation Proposed to Improve Electronics Recycling Nationwide”
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?
ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20090928006127&newsLang=en
The bill, the Electronic Device Recycling and Research and Development Act, is the first step in
bringing together manufacturers, retailers, recyclers and research institutes to help find solutions
to the problem of e-waste. If passed, the bill will:

• create competitively-awarded grants for universities, government labs, and private

industry to research and develop demonstration projects for recycling, reuse,
refurbishment and life-cycle analysis;
• call for a study by the National Academy of Science to look at barriers and opportunities
to increase electronic device recycling and reduce the use of hazardous materials in
electronic products; and
• direct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make grants available for
curriculum development for engineering students and professionals in electronics
manufacturing, design, refurbishing and recycling industries.
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 3

Private sector initiatives

Private companies are collecting used electronics.

Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
Several original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) have established ‘take-back’ collection
systems for collecting used electronic products from consumers. IBM, Dell, HP, and other
computer manufacturers collect unwanted computer and related products regardless of the
original manufacturer.

Example: Hewlett Packard buyback/recycling program.

Greener Computing (news service that reports on environmental issues) January 6th, 2009 “HP Ups E-
Waste Efforts, Offers Easy Cash for Reusable Electronics”
http://www.greenercomputing.com/news/2009/01/06/hp-ups-e-waste-efforts-offers-easy-cash-
reusable-electronics

After more than a billion pounds of electronics recycled or reused, Hewlett Packard is stepping
up the program, announcing a buyback and recycling program for computers, accessories and
other electronics. The new HP Consumer Buyback and Planet Partners Recycling Program is the
latest initiative in the company's goal to reduce the amount potentially toxic -- and often valuable
-- electronic waste that ends up in landfills or exported overseas for processing. The company is
accepting all types of computers and monitors, as well as printers, PDAs and smartphones.

Dell banned exports of e-waste.

Jessica Mintz (Associated Press Technology Writer, May 19th, 2009 “Dell Bans e-Waste Export
to Developing Countries” Associated Press,
http://www.usnews.com/science/articles/2009/05/12/dell-bans-e-waste-export-to-developing-
countries.html
PC maker Dell Inc. formally banned on Tuesday the export of broken computers, monitors and
parts to developing countries amid complaints that lax enforcement of environmental and
worker-safety regulations have allowed an informal and often hazardous electronic-waste
recycling industry to emerge.
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 4

SIGNIFICANCE:

Lack of data

Very little information is available about status quo

management of e-waste.
Linda Luther (Environmental Policy analyst at the Congressional Research Service) October 7th,
2009, “Managing Electronic Waste: Issues with Exporting E-Waste” Congressional Research
Service http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40850.pdf
Answering questions about both e-waste disposal and recycling involves a host of challenges.
For example, little information is available to allow a complete assessment of how e-waste
ultimately managed. General estimates have been made about the management of cathode ray
tubes (CRTs, the only devices where disposal is federally regulated), but little reliable
information is available regarding other categories of e-waste. For example, accurate data
regarding how much is generated, how it is managed (through disposal or recycling), and where
it is processed (either domestically or abroad) are largely unknown. Further, little information is
available regarding the total amount of functioning electronics exported to developing countries
for legitimate reuse.

Because of a lack of data, it’s impossible to know the actual

scope of the e-waste problem.
Linda Luther (Environmental Policy analyst at the Congressional Research Service) October 7th,
2009, “Managing Electronic Waste: Issues with Exporting E-Waste” Congressional Research
Service http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40850.pdf
One significant factor is the lack of timely, accurate data needed to help fully understand the
scope of the potential problem. It is almost impossible to know exactly how much e-waste is
generated, to what extent it is processed domestically (e.g., to what degree it is sorted or
disassembled by domestic recyclers), how much is exported, and, of the waste that is exported,
how much is actually reusable or sent to a facility that will manage it properly. That is not to say
that all or even the majority of e-waste that is exported is managed improperly. It is simply
impossible to know using existing data.
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 5
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 6

SOLVENCY:

Insufficient infrastructure

Infrastructure needs to be established for e-waste recycling in

the US.
Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
It should be noted that, at present, electronic waste recycling has a short history in the U.S., so
that there is not yet a broad and fixed infrastructure in place. The International Association of
Electronics Recyclers (IAER) estimated that in 2003 the U.S. electronics recycling industry
consisted of just over 7000 employees and annual revenue of over
US$ 700 million (IAER, 2003). Electronic products are an integration of numerous modern
technologies and are composed of many different materials and components. This means that to
recycle EOL electronics effectively, many parties and technologies should be involved. As with
the recycling of other products, the establishment of appropriate infrastructure is essential to the
successful implementation of electronic waste recycling.

Infrastructure is very limited in North America.

Linda Luther (Environmental Policy analyst at the Congressional Research Service) October 7th,
2009, “Managing Electronic Waste: Issues with Exporting E-Waste” Congressional Research
Service http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40850.pdf
The presence of recycling facilities with the ability and capacity to recycle e-waste components
is limited, and varies from region to region, within North America. For example, there is only
one smelter in the United States and one in Canada capable of processing CRT glass for lead
recovery. There are also limited opportunities for copper and precious metal recovery from
circuit boards in the United States.

CRT (main component of e-waste) glass manufacturing

industry lacks recycling capacity.
Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
However, research done by the Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) (Monchamp et al., 2001)
found that the CRT [cathode ray tube] glass manufacturing industry in the U.S. does not have
sufficient capacity to absorb the total amount of recycled cullet, if the widespread collection of
EOL [End of life] CRTs were to begin. Another variable is high-definition TV (HDTV). At
present, the market for new TVs in the U.S. is nearly saturated (more than 99%), but the
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 7

introduction of HDTV in the near future and the preference of consumers for flat panel displays
will accelerate the rate of obsolescence and replacement of conventional CRT TV sets. To cope
with these changes, legislation and research will be needed to facilitate the optimization of glass-
to glass recycling, as well as the development of new applications for used CRT glass.

Limited number of glass smelters in North America.

Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
In North America, there are a limited number of smelters for CRT glass, which leads to the need
for long-distance transport for the CRTs, which is very expensive. For instance, in California,
CRTs can be sent to shredding facilities, such as ECS. HMR and Kinsbursky Brothers, Inc.
provide CRT crushing services, whereas Micrometallics ships CRTs to the Noranda smelter.
Although there are several secondary smelters in North America, the major end-markets for
glass-to-lead CRTs are Doe Run and Noranda (Materials for the Future Foundation, 1999a,
2002).

E-waste recycling problems

Glass manufacturers are hesitant to take recycled CRTs.

Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
Glass-to-glass recycling is considered a closed loop recycling process because glass that is
collected is used as a raw material for new CRTs [short for cathode ray tubes.] Collected CRTs
are sent to the recycler and whole glass is ground into cullet without separation of panel and
funnel glass. The recycler sends the cullet to the CRT manufacturers for use in making new
CRTs. CRT glass compositions differ depending on the manufacturer and when it was made,
especially for panel glass. This is one reason why glass manufacturers are reluctant to take
recycled CRT glass. Glass companies do not want to mix different types of glass. Using recycled
CRT glass can create some risk to the glass manufacturing company due to the difficulty in
determining the exact composition of recycled glass. The risk involved with using glass with an
unknown composition is that a small addition of the wrong composition can contaminate the
contents of an entire glass furnace and lead to changes in glass properties. To correct an incorrect
glass composition can require the glass furnace to be shut down for 3–4 days
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 8

There are numerous barriers to glass-to-glass recycling.

Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
But there are barriers for glass-to-glass [recycling.] The barriers include the difficulty in
identifying glass composition, the cost of CRT demanufacturing, the cost and complexity of the
required collection infrastructure, and insufficient supply of recycled cullet. Overall, this is a
labor intensive and expensive process compared to lead smelting, discussed below.

Glass-to-lead recycling of CRTs reduces value of the glass.

Julie M. Schoenung (PhD from Massechusetts Institute of Technology in Materials
Engineering,) Hai-Yong Kang (Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science,
University of California) July 14th, 2005 “Electronic waste recycling: A review of U.S.
infrastructure and technology options” Published by Elsevier
http://aix.meng.auth.gr/pruwe/dhmosieuseis/weee_usa.pdf
In the glass-to-lead recycling process, metallic lead (Pb) and copper (Cu) are separated and
recovered from the CRT glass through a smelting process. Although there are variations, CRTs
generally contain 0.5–5 kg of lead (in the glass) (Hainault and Smith, 2000), which is used in the
glass to protect people from exposure to X-ray emissions, and 1–2.3 kg of copper (in the yoke)
(Materials for the Future Foundation, 2002). Before smelting, CRTs are shredded and the metals
and plastics are separated. Recovered CRT glass goes to the lead smelter. CRT glasses behave as
a fluxing agent in the smelting process. This process is automated compared to the glass-to-glass
recycling and is more cost effective. It also provides safe working conditions because workers
are protected from lead dust by the automated nature and the emission control system. The glass-
to-lead recycling process has a high overall throughput. However, this process reduces the value
of high quality glass.
E-Waste NEG Gracie Cockett 9

Disadvantage:
1. Recycling is bad: harm to people and the
environment. Link: Affirmative plan is passed/e-
waste recycling is required, etc. Impact: E-waste recycling processes
exposes humans and the environment to dangerous toxins.

The Workshop in Applied Earth Systems Management I, Master of Public Administration

Program in Environmental Science and Policy, Columbia University (team of graduate
students at Columbia University led by Professor Steve Cohen, the Director of the Master of
Public Administration Program in Environmental Science and Policy at Columbia
University’s School of International and Public Affairs. He is also Executive Director of the
Earth Institute at Columbia University) August 18th, 2006 “Electronic Waste Recycling
Promotion and Consumer Protection Act” Columbia University
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/mpaenvironment/pages/projects/summer06/ewastefinalReport.p
df
The Bill assumes that e-waste recycling reduces human exposure to the toxins contained in
computers. However, the wide variety of processes which could be classified as “e-waste
recycling” leaves many unresolved questions related to human exposure to toxins during
recycling. It is uncertain whether e-waste recycling practices eliminate all human exposure to
e-waste toxins, and if they do not, what the exposure rates are. In addition, some e-waste
recycling practices use strong acids that create additional chemicals that must be disposed of
safely. Finally, some analysts believe that hazardous materials are left as an end result of the
recycling process. Some studies report negative health effects suffered by workers that
recycle e-waste utilizing the most rudimentary methods. For example, some recyclers utilize
prison labor force workers to hammer apart cathode ray tubes—one of the most toxic parts of
computers and televisions. Research reveals that people dismantling e-waste showed
significantly higher levels of all brominated flame retardants in their blood. Since these toxins
accumulated in human tissue, this problem can have a cumulative effect. This may indicate
that toxins may be released into the environment during these processes.