ANALYSIS
26
[Arrow Electronics]
TAKING
THE LEAD
Laurie Wiegler argues that the US environmental
legislators could learn from Europe on dealing
with dead computers
IN EUROPE, new laws are forcing computer
manufacturers to remove lead and other
hazardous substances from their equipment,
and to take responsibility for the eventual
recycling of their products, but what is the
situation in the United States?
The US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) defines hazardous waste as that which
appears on specific lists or which, although not
listed, exhibits at least one of four characteristics
– ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity.
Hazardous waste is regulated under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA).
Engineering & Technology | May 2006 | www.theiet.org/engtechmag
Computer waste – notably cathode ray
tubes (CRTs), circuit boards, batteries and
mercury switches – contains toxic materials
such as cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury,
and various flame retardants. According to the
EPA, the glass screens of CRTs in particular can
contain as much as 27% lead. An estimated
one in four to five US citizens discard a
computer each year – equating to some
63 million waste PCs.
According to Jeff Rousseau, vice president
with St. Louis-based CSI Leasing, which owns
electronics recycler EPC, roughly 80% of those
unwanted computers are being shipped
overseas. The other 20% are not necessarily
being recycled – or recycled responsibly. For,
while businesses like CSI try to get the word
out, the number of firms truly recycling PCs in
America isn’t growing especially fast. According
to Rousseau this is down to lack of awareness.
Other studies show that individuals are hoard-
ing used computers in attics and basements,
unsure what to do with the waste.
Rousseau and John Shegerian, CEO and
president of Electronic Recyclers of America in
Fresno, California, both find this unfortunate.
They attest that a PC is packed with chemical
goodies. If properly and responsibly recycled,
everyone wins. If, however, the CRTs found in
monitors wind up in standard landfills, lead leaks
into the ground and water, proving highly toxic.
But what are the jewels within the PC?
Shegerian’s firm recycles plastics, metals and
glass – with none going into landfill – to be
sold as commodities to plastics and glass
brokers, for example. And Rousseau says “The
biggest chunk is probably plastic. We send it on
a train to a site that melts it and it becomes the
plastic in your phone, for example. Steel is a
precious commodity, as are aluminium, the
copper in the wiring and gold in trace amounts.
You’d be surprised what good stuff is in there.”
That ‘good stuff’ is only beneficial if recycled.
With the bulk of US PCs ending up in places
they shouldn’t, countries around the globe are
bearing the brunt of the crisis. For, typically, the
shipped computers sent under the auspices of
being capable for reuse rarely are reusable.
According to Rousseau, virtually none of the
thousands of used computers shipped
overseas to Nigeria, China and other countries
are of any use to its citizens.
So what is the US doing about the situation?
Rousseau says there is federal legislation
pending. “There are four federal bills that I am
aware of and they have different strategies.
One of the theories is that there will be an
upfront fee, so every time you buy an
electronic piece of equipment there will be a
fee from about $6-$10 assessed. And that
money is to go into a fund to set up a
nationwide recycling scheme for all PCs and
electronic gear.”
He says there’s another bill pending that
would provide tax credits to set up a recycling
programme whereby every individual would get

a tax credit of up to $15 when they return their
end-of-life electronics. And companies would
get an $8 tax credit upon recycling of that
computer and related equipment. “And part of
that legislation would also include a ban on
landfilling any electronic gear, which I think is
the most important goal for the legislation – to
do an overall ban on landfill and mandate
recycling,” Rousseau says.
However, Rousseau is not confident that
any of these federal initiatives will pass into law.
He says that the states that are taking the lead
with regard to e-waste are California, followed
by Maryland and Maine.
California has already passed recycling
legislation, whereby consumers pay up to $10
per electronics purchase. “The rest of the
country is disastrously behind,” says Shegerian.
“Here legislators have watched California’s
runaway success, [so] if I was a smart legislator
I’d say that’s smart, it’s been implemented... It’s
the fastest growing solid-waste stream.”
So why not follow suit? And what about
tackling the design or engineering end to
ensure recyclability of computers? How can
manufacturers make the PC of 2007 with a
lead-free or – in the case of the LCD –
mercury-free screen?
According to Joshua Goldowitz, associate
professor of environmental management and
technology, Rochester Institute of Technology,
this means “incorporating environmental
management systems into the engineering
process so the engineers who are designing
new components have some cognisance not
just of the technical requirements and
specifications, but also, right from the onset, the
design phase, looking at how each part can be
reused or remanufactured.”
That calls for a different mindset, Goldowitz
says, adding that Xerox has been introducing
the idea of reuse and remanufacturing into its
copier designs for 20 years. The best approach,
he says, is to consider how much hazardous
waste is being kept out of the waste stream, or
what resources one can recover.
“Probably the old monitors are the most
The shredder at
CSI’s E-scrap
Processing
Center in St Louis
Goods await
recycling at EPC
Engineering & Technology | May 2006 | www.theiet.org/engtechmag
ANALYSIS
27
important to recycle,” says Goldowitz. “They are
truly hazardous. A CRT has roughly four pounds
of lead.” Leaky lead needs to be put into a
hazardous waste site – the problem is, that
doesn’t always happen.
In Europe, the Restriction of Hazardous
Substances (RoHS) directive applies to new
electronic and electrical equipment sold after
1 July 2006, regardless of where it is made. So,
will responsible American computer
manufacturers follow the European Union’s
directives? Will American monitors become lead
or mercury free? And what about US
chipmakers and their designs?
London-based Leonie Tipton, vice president
of global supply chain programmes for compo-
nents distributor Arrow Electronics, explains that
European chipmakers are reconfiguring the way
they design their products to satisfy the directive.
She says that many of these manufacturers
have been moving towards removing hazardous
substances for some time.
“The biggest change,” says Tipton, “is the
lead-free manufacturing process requirement,
which means products have to withstand a
higher temperature in manufacturing. Making
products that have the right terminal finish for
the new lead-free process and higher tempera-
ture tolerances, as well as removing the
[banned] substances, are the challenges for the
manufacturer. But most of them have very clear
road maps and alternative products available.”
Tipton points out that there are two related
pieces of legislation, the Waste Electrical and
Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive and
RoHS. WEEE is the recycling element of the
legislation, whereas RoHS looks at eliminating
the hazardous substances from the
manufacturing process itself.
The US, however, does not have a
comparable overaraching strategy. The EPA, in
its e-cycling literature, lists Massachusetts and
Florida as taking steps to streamline hazardous
waste regulations for CRTs, and California as the
one state that considers CRTs to be hazardous
waste and banned from standard landfills.
Tipton argues environmental responsibility is
higher on the agenda in Europe because of its
greater impact on the population. “If you look
at the population density on the amount of
land here in Europe, that’s very different from
North America,” she says.