Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 2:41 am
Time: 2:41 am
Results for waste from electrical and electronic equipment
7 results foundAuthor: Hopson, Eric Title: Scam Recycling: e-Dumping on Asia by US Recyclers Summary: BAN’s e-Trash Transparency Project is the first large-scale e-waste flow study accomplished by observing actual e-waste movement from the United States into the global marketplace. The result has been sobering. At the outset of the project, the question was posed: Does the public still need to fear that their e-waste, when delivered either to a charity or to a recycler, has a strong likelihood of being exported to a developing country instead of being recycled here in the United States? Unfortunately, this has been answered in the affirmative. Exports continue Despite years of education, particularly within the recycling industry, as well as national media attention spotlighting the harmful exploitation of developing countries via export, and despite the subsequent development of recycling certification schemes spurred into existence by the revelations of harm done, the exportation of electronic waste from the United States to developing countries continues to occur at an alarming rate. For the project’s tracker installations, BAN chose three waste types -- LCD monitors with mercury backlights, CRT monitors, and printers. Each of these are considered as hazardous waste under international law. To date, the study has witnessed 34% of the 205 tracker deployments move off-shore, with 31% of the total going to developing countries. Looking at those that were exported only, 93% of the exports went to developing countries. 87% have gone to Asia, 3% to Africa, 1% to the Middle East, 1% to Latin America and Caribbean region. 7% moved to the developed countries of Mexico and Canada. Of the 152 trackers delivered directly to recyclers, the primary subject of this report, 40% were exported -- significantly higher than the 15% export rate for the 53 trackers delivered to charities or retailers. In the course of the entire pathways (chains) of the 205 tracker movements, the trackers passed through the hands of 168 different identifiable US recyclers. Of these companies delivered to or revealed, over 45% were part of a movement that went offshore (export chain). LCDs were exported at the highest rate of the three types of equipment deployed: 53% of LCDs studied were exported, 30% of printers, and 18% of CRTs. LCDs containing mercury lamps, as exclusively deployed in this study, are likely the most toxic of the three. Certifications and export One of the responses in recent years to the absence of federal government action to the discovery of irresponsible exports has been the advent of electronics recycling certification programs. Relative to exports from the US that likely result in illegal trade,this study found that R2 certified recyclers had a higher-than-average export rate, uncertified recyclers had a lower-than-average export rate, and e-Stewards had the lowest average export rate of all three categories. With respect to certifications represented as the last holder of e-waste prior to export (apparent exporter), R2 exceeded e-Stewards 9 to 1. Illegality – foreign and domestic This study also looked at when and whether these exports are illegal. Compared with much of the rest of the world, the US has been negligent in passing national legislation to control most hazardous waste exports. Despite this deficiency, the hazardous waste exports we documented were still likely to be illegal under existing US law, and almost in every instance are likely to be in violation of the laws of importing countries. For example, China, including the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong, has long had a prohibition on the import of hazardous e-waste. More broadly, any of the 184 Basel Convention Parties, under the terms of the Convention, are not allowed to trade in hazardous wastes with a non-Party like the US unless all trading partners are members of the OECD group of developed countries. Thus, many of the importing countries revealed by this study are among 150 countries prohibited from importing Basel listed hazardous wastes from the US. Once the waste has been exported from the US, it is considered "illegal traffic" and is a criminal act for those in Basel Parties to import it. In the United States, there is one rule that requires companies to pre-notify the US EPA if they wish to export some CRTs (CRT Rule). However, none of the companies found in this study to be involved in a chain of export for CRTs are listed on the EPA website as having provided the necessary notification; this means those CRT shipments are likely to violate US law. Fraud and false representation There are also domestic legal questions regarding fraud and false advertising. At least 18 of the 72 (25%) companies with websites found in this study to be in a chain of exporting hazardous electronic waste, make strong claims on their websites that they will only manage it domestically. A legal review conducted for this report (see Appendix 4) indicates that such misrepresentations can be prosecuted under state and federal consumer protection or fraud laws, and have been. Green washing Apart from legal matters, many of the companies in the chain of export also appear to cloak their export behavior with affiliations with reputable organizations and government programs. Many are part of state takeback programs, some claim EPA affiliations such as the WasteWise program, or tout membership in business associations such as the Institute for Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI). Our comprehensive table found in Appendix 5 indicates the above-mentioned affiliations which, listed on the "front door" may help to cloak a company's actions with a reputable green aura, while irresponsible and likely illegal exports pass out the "back door". New Territories, Hong Kong: the next Guiyu? More than half of the exported trackers made their way to Hong Kong's New Territories. BAN’s recent visits there raise significant alarm bells that the area, which for many years had served only as a staging, sorting, and shipping area for e-waste from North America prior to its smuggling into mainland China, may become the next Guiyu, if action is not taken quickly. BAN's 205 trackers found 48 different electronics junkyards in New Territories and we estimate there are likely between 100 and 200 such sites now involved there smashing and crudely separating commodity and toxic fractions from printers, LCD screens, and other equipment. Meanwhile, Hong Kong authorities appear to have not been diligently enforcing against such imports and subsequent toxic recycling operations, despite clear signs of illegal importation, damaging pollution, and illegal labor practices. Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2016. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://wiki.ban.org/images/1/16/ScamRecyclingReport-print.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Asia URL: https://www.ban.org/trash-transparency Shelf Number: 155486 Keywords: Asia E-Dumping E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Hazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Basel Action Network Title: The Summary: INTRODUCTION The BAN e-Trash Transparency Project In 2016, BAN published its groundbreaking reports entitled "Disconnect: Goodwill and Dell, Exporting the Public's E-Waste to Developing Countries," (May) and "Scam Recycling: e-Dumping on Asia by US Recyclers," (September). These reports followed several years of research, development and implementation of GPS/cell phone-based tracking technology. They involved placing 205 different GPS tracking devices inside of old printers, LCD, and CRT monitors, delivering them to US charities, retailers and recyclers and following them to their endpoints across the globe. Such research activities and subsequent publication of the results can be said to be a form of citizen enforcement because the trade of hazardous wastes, including most electronic waste, to developing countries from developed countries is illegal under international norms (Basel Convention) and under laws of most developed countries. Certainly, under the rules of the Basel Convention, it is illegal for developing countries to import hazardous e-wastes from the United States. 96% of the exports revealed by BAN 's 2016 study were deemed as likely illegal. The study as summarized in "Scam Recycling" witnessed 34% of the 205 deployments moving offshore with 31% of the total going to developing countries. Looking at those that were exported only 93% of the exports went to developing countries. 87% to Asia, 3% to Africa and 1% to the Middle East, and 1% to the Latin America/Caribbean region. 7% moved to the developed countries of Mexico and Canada. Most of the exports ended up in Hong Kong's rural northern area called New Territories. BAN's investigators visited GPS locations where the trackers ended up and found hundreds of e-waste junkyards in New Territories where the hazardous equipment is unfortunately smashed by hand, exposing workers to dangerous mercury laden dust, vapors and hazardous toners. Much of the e-waste was simply dumped in fields and wastelands. Of the 152 trackers delivered directly to recyclers and not to charities, 40% were exported significantly higher than the 15% rate for the 53 trackers delivered to charities or retailers. In the course of the entire pathways (chains) of the 205 tracker movements, the trackers passed through the hands of 168 different identifiable US recyclers. Of these companies, over 45% were part of a movement that went offshore (export chain). That study revealed also that R2 certified recyclers had a higher-than-average export rate. Uncertified recyclers had a lower-than-average export rate, and e-Stewards Certified Recyclers had the lowest average export rate of all three categories. With respect to the Certifications held by the "last holder" (apparent exporter), R2 exceeded e-Stewards 9-1. Finally, the report reveals the false claims and "green washing" of many of the companies that claim that they never would allow the public's waste electronics to be exported. The complete reports and media generated from them, including the PBS Newshour video segment that followed BAN to Hong Kong, can be found on our website's Trash Transparency Project pages. These reports include in detail, a full disclosure of the study findings including lists of all companies involved, the environmental harm caused, methodology, conclusions, and recommendations. BAN's work tracking e-waste in the United States and around the world with GPS trackers continues. BAN's ethical recycling certification program known as e-Stewards now uses trackers routinely to verify performance of the trade requirements in the standard (e.g. no export of hazardous e-waste to developing countries). At the same time, BAN continues to deploy trackers across North America to reveal for consumers and lawmakers alike, the illegal and/or unethical trade practices of some recyclers. It is our intention to continue to report on these trackers. The most recent deployment involved 60 trackers deployed in Texas, Georgia, and Florida in the US. 31 of these were R2 Certified (52%), 4 were both e-Stewards and R2 (6.66%), 1 was eStewards only (1.67 percent), and 24 were uncertified (40%). On September 6 of 2017, the first update of new tracker findings since our September 15, 2016 report was published. In that report we revealed 16 more chains of export (15 LCD monitors and one printer) involving 7 target recycling companies. 5 of these were in California, one in Ohio and one in Texas. An additional two companies (Skill Office Machines and VKL Exports) were also identified. Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2017. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://wiki.ban.org/images/1/13/TheScamRecyclingContinuesUpdate_1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: International URL: https://www.ban.org/trash-transparency Shelf Number: 155487 Keywords: E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green CriminologyHazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Basel Action Network Title: The "Scam Recycling" Continues: E-Waste Exportation from the U.S. to Developing Countries Update Number 2 Summary: INTRODUCTION The BAN e-Trash Transparency Project In 2016, BAN published its groundbreaking reports entitled "Disconnect: Goodwill and Dell, Exporting the Public's E-Waste to Developing Countries," (May) and "Scam Recycling: e-Dumping on Asia by US Recyclers," (September). These reports followed several years of research, development and implementation of GPS/cell phone-based tracking technology. They involved placing 205 different GPS tracking devices inside of old printers, LCD, and CRT monitors, delivering them to US charities, retailers and recyclers and following them to their endpoints across the globe. Such research activities and subsequent publication of the results can be said to be a form of citizen enforcement because the trade of hazardous wastes, including most electronic waste, to developing countries from developed countries is illegal under international norms (Basel Convention) and under laws of most developed countries. Certainly, under the rules of the Basel Convention, it is illegal for developing countries to import hazardous e-wastes from the United States. 96% of the exports revealed by BAN 's 2016 study were deemed as likely illegal. The study as summarized in "Scam Recycling" witnessed 34% of the 205 deployments moving offshore with 31% of the total going to developing countries. Looking at those that were exported only 93% of the exports went to developing countries. 87% to Asia, 3% to Africa and 1% to the Middle East, and 1% to the Latin America/Caribbean region. 7% moved to the developed countries of Mexico and Canada. Most of the exports ended up in Hong Kong's rural northern area called New Territories. BAN's investigators visited GPS locations where the trackers ended up and found hundreds of e-waste junkyards in New Territories where the hazardous equipment is unfortunately smashed by hand, exposing workers to dangerous mercury laden dust, vapors and hazardous toners. Much of the e-waste was simply dumped in fields and wastelands. Of the 152 trackers delivered directly to recyclers and not to charities, 40% were exported significantly higher than the 15% rate for the 53 trackers delivered to charities or retailers. In the course of the entire pathways (chains) of the 205 tracker movements, the trackers passed through the hands of 168 different identifiable US recyclers. Of these companies, over 45% were part of a movement that went offshore (export chain). That study revealed also that R2 certified recyclers had a higher-than-average export rate. Uncertified recyclers had a lower-than-average export rate, and e-Stewards Certified Recyclers had the lowest average export rate of all three categories. With respect to the Certifications held by the "last holder" (apparent exporter), R2 exceeded e-Stewards 9-1. Finally, the report reveals the false claims and "green washing" of many of the companies that claim that they never would allow the public's waste electronics to be exported. The complete reports and media generated from them, including the PBS Newshour video segment that followed BAN to Hong Kong, can be found on our website's Trash Transparency Project pages. These reports include in detail, a full disclosure of the study findings including lists of all companies involved, the environmental harm caused, methodology, conclusions, and recommendations. In this latest update report we have identified six new chains of export (involving four printers and two LCDs) involving six new US recycling companies. Three of these were in Texas, one in Georgia, and two in Florida. We have also included an update on a company - CompuCycle that we reported in our first update. We have included it here as its tracked printer has since moved to a new country - Pakistan. But we have not included it in the table below in order to keep our running tally of chains of export accurate. This report also shows that the City of Houston was involved in export via their approved collection center. A listing in this report of a company does not necessarily imply culpability. However, companies that are the "last" handlers prior to export are likely willfully involved in exporting, as they most likely had direct control over the decision to export or not. For this reason, we call these actors "apparent exporters." Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2018. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: https://www.ban.org/trash-transparency Year: 2018 Country: International URL: http://wiki.ban.org/images/1/17/ScamRecyclingContinuesUpdate_2.pdf Shelf Number: 155488 Keywords: E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green Criminology Hazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Palmer, Hayley Title: Illegal Export of e-Waste from Australia: A Story Told by GPS Trackers Summary: In September and October of 2017 BAN deployed 35 pieces of non-functional electronic waste equipment including CRT monitors, LCD monitors and printers with GPS trackers imbedded within them across Australia. All of the equipment qualified under the Basel Convention as hazardous waste. 14 units of equipment were deployed in the Brisbane area, 13 in the Sydney area, 3 in Adelaide, and 5 in Perth. Out of these 35 trackers 2 were exported (5.71%), 1 moved to a seaport and was likely exported (2.86%), 11 moved to a Recycler (31.4%), 4 moved to a landfill (11.4%), 7 never moved, (20%), 6 had no signal after delivery (17.1%) and 2 moved to an unknown location (5.71%). 2 are still reporting regularly and the rest have gone quiet, meaning they could be bulldozed into a landfill, buried deep in a warehouse, or shredded or disassembled by a recycler. Exports from OfficeWorks -- Three of the devices appear to have been exported, with two definitely going to Hong Kong's New Territories area. Both of these were LCDs monitors from the Brisbane area and one of these was later re-exported to an e-waste processing facility in Thailand. The two exported LCDs were deployed at different OfficeWorks stores in the Brisbane area. Officeworks' "Bring I.T Back" as a "Drop Zone" location is an official Australian Government public drop-off location that the public is encouraged to use for their electronic recycling. Officeworks, according to their website, considers itself to be a very sustainable company. The third device, another LCD left at Endeavor Foundation Industries, another government approved e-waste dropoff location, last signaled at a container dock at the port of Brisbane and was likely exported- though it has yet to signal again. Site Visits BAN traveled to the two locations in Asia where the two exported LCDs ended up. Both of these, without showing any other stopping points after their respective OfficeWorks deliveries, were joined in one intermodal container and shipped to the Ping Che area of New Territories, Hong Kong. Ping Che is an infamous area of Hong Kong for e-waste trafficking where most commonly undocumented laborers are involved in the crude and harmful breakdown of the equipment, often exposing them to dangerous toner dust, and, in the case of LCDs -- the toxic metal mercury. However, when we visited the location a few months after the arrival of the LCDs, there was no trace of e-waste in the facility - apparently, it had been cleaned out and one of the tracked devices stopped signaling. The other one, however, we visited its second location in Thailand. In Thailand that LCD monitor arrived at a location that was involved in crude smelting of circuit boards, creating deadly dioxins and furans, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Illegal Exportation There can be little doubt that these exports were illegal due to the fact that all three countries concerned, Australia, China (including Hong Kong), and Thailand are all parties to the Basel Convention. Due to the presence of mercury in the backlights of these LCD monitors and the lead in the circuit boards of the monitors, and because the equipment was rendered non-functional, the equipment was clearly a hazardous waste under the definitions of the Basel Convention. As such, all exports would require that they be notified prior to export by the government of Australia and consented to by the initially receiving government of Hong Kong. Thailand, in recent weeks, has made it abundantly clear that they are not happy receiving e-waste imported illegally en masse to primitive processing facilities that have been springing up all over their territory following China's own importation ban (see Current Trends in the e-Waste Trade). Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2018. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://wiki.ban.org/images/7/7c/Australian_e-Waste_Report_-_2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://www.ban.org/trash-transparency Shelf Number: 155489 Keywords: AustraliaE-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green CriminologyHazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Brigden, K Title: Recycling of Electronnic Wastes in China and India: Workplace and Environmental Contamination Summary: Executive Summary Introduction Expansion of the global market for electrical and electronic products continues to accelerate, while the lifespan of the products is dropping, resulting in a corresponding explosion in electronic scrap. As noted by UNEP (2005): "Every year, 20 to 50 million tonnes of electrical and electronic equipment waste ("e-waste") are generated world-wide, which could bring serious risks to human health and the environment. While 4 million PCs are discarded per year in China alone." This rapidly growing "e-waste" stream presents additional difficulties because a wide range of hazardous chemicals are, or have in the past been, used in components of electrical and electronic devices, and these subsequently create substantial problems with regard to handling, recycling and disposal of obsolete products. The European Union (EU), Japan, South Korea,Taiwan and several states of the USA have introduced legislation making producers responsible for their end-of-life products. The EU has banned the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic products from July 2006, to facilitate safer recycling. For the present, however, the "e-waste" recycling sector in many parts of Asia remains largely unregulated. It is also poorly studied with regard to its impacts on the environment and on the health of recycling workers and surrounding communities. design of the study This study was designed to provide a snapshot of workplace and environmental contamination from a selection of industrial units and dump sites associated with the electronic waste-recycling sector in China and India. A total of more than 70 samples were collected during March 2005 from sites located in the vicinity of Guiyu Town, Guangdong Province in southern China and in the suburbs of New Delhi, India. Samples included industrial wastes, indoor dusts, soils, river sediments and groundwater from typical sites representing all major stages routinely employed in the dismantling, recycling and final disposal of electrical and electronic wastes (i.e. storage, component separation, plastic shredding, acid processing/leaching, open burning and residue dumping) in both countries. summary of key findings Results confirm that all stages in the processing of electrical and electronic wastes have the potential to release substantial quantities of toxic heavy metals and organic compounds to the workplace environment and, at least to the extent studied, also to surrounding soils and water courses. Among the toxic heavy metals most commonly found in elevated levels in wastes from the industry, as well as in indoor dusts and river sediments, were those known to have extensive use in the electronics sector, i.e. lead and tin, most probably arising in large part from solder and, in the case of lead, batteries - copper, for example from wires and cables - cadmium, from a variety of uses including batteries and solder joints - antimony, most probably from use of antimony trioxide as a flame retardant additive in plastics and resins as well from use in electrical solders. Many other metals associated with the electronics industry were also relatively abundant in many samples, including barium, chromium, cobalt, gold, mercury, nickel, silver and zinc. The range of organic contaminants identified in waste and sediment samples also reflected current or historical use in electrical and/or electronic goods, including brominated, chlorinated and phosphorus-based flame retardants, phthalate esters and esters of long-chain organic acids. Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were particularly in evidence, as well as many other organic chemicals, some containing chlorine or bromine, which could not be reliably identified. Given the crude methods employed in much of the recycling sector investigated, it is likely that some of these chemicals arose as products of incomplete combustion or of chemical reactions occurring in complex mixed wastes. Key results according to the different activities and processes employed in the "e-waste" recycling sector in both China and India, as well as brief information on the hazards of some of the chemical groups investigated, are summarised below. Details: Exeter, United Kingdom: University of Exeter, 2005. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: https://www.greenpeace.org/austria/Global/austria/marktcheck/uploads/media/report_recycling_electronic_waste_2005.pdf Year: 2005 Country: International URL: http://us-cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/attachments/02193_recycling.pdf Shelf Number: 155490 Keywords: Asia E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green Criminology Hazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Puckett, Jim Title: The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-use and Abuse to Africa Summary: The photo-documentary report entitled "The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-use and Abuse to Africa," exposes the ugly underbelly of what is thought to be an escalating global trade in toxic, obsolete, discarded computers and other e-scrap collected in North America and Europe and sent to developing countries by waste brokers and so-called recyclers. In Lagos, while there is a legitimate robust market and ability to repair and refurbish old electronic equipment including computers, monitors, TVs and cell phones, the local experts complain that of the estimated 500 40-foot containers shipped to Lagos each month, as much as 75% of the imports are "junk" and are not economically repairable or marketable. Consequently, this e-waste, which is legally a hazardous waste is being discarded and routinely burned in what the environmentalists call yet another "cyber-age nightmare now landing on the shores of developing countries." Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2005. 85p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://archive.ban.org/library/TheDigitalDump.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Africa URL: http://archive.ban.org/films/TheDigitalDump.html Shelf Number: 155491 Keywords: Africa E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green Criminology Hazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Khetriwal, Deepali Sinha Title: Solving the E-Waste Problem: An Interdisciplinary Compilation of International E-Waste Research Summary: This edited volume provides a forum for young scholars to present their research and contribute to the international debate of challenges and solutions for a global e-waste management. The book contains research that was presented at the NVMP-StEP E-waste Summer School Series 2009/2010. It is structured in five parts. The first part contains the chapter by Mary Lawhon and Djahane Salehabadi and is aimed towards explicitly considering e-waste in ways that build on social studies of waste, including the recognition of its co-constituted material properties and social construction. The authors outline social scientific research on social and material constructions and show how this way of thinking offers critical insights into the e-waste problem. The second part has two chapters that focus on the concept of environmental justice, which, as the United States Environmental Protection Agency defines it, is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, colour, national origin or income in the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies. Hiromi Inagaki analyses the distribution and structure of economic benefits and environmental health risks of e-waste recycling on a global and national level, drawing on a case study on computer waste flows to and from India. Somjita Laha highlights the way in which capitalism escapes environmental regulations through the informalization of environmentally unsound activities, exemplified in the case of e-waste. The availability of cheap labour and the absence of rigid environmental and health regulations - or the absence of implementing or compliance mechanisms - provide an incentive for exporting e-waste to developing countries, where again, the waste is processed in the informal sector. Both chapters comment on the disproportionate weight of environmental problems borne by marginalized people in the informal sector, constituting a gross violation of the principles of global environmental justice. In the third part the authors discuss the environmental and health consequences of informal e-waste recycling and the resulting need for more environmental education, based on experiences in Nigeria and Kenya. Innocent Nnorom and Oladele Osibanjo present the results of a study of a site used for the open burning of selected WEEE components to recover the copper, aluminium and other valuable materials in Aba, South-eastern Nigeria. The results indicate there is severe heavy metal contamination of the soil. Further, the metal pollution at the site studied also has the potential to contaminate surface waters through rainwater leaching, of groundwater as well as crops in nearby farms, with obvious health hazards for the surrounding population. Kehinde Olubanjo and colleagues analyse the concentration of lead and copper in different parts of waste personal computers imported into Nigeria. The disposal of e-waste, particularly computers, in Nigeria has become a serious problem since the methods of disposal are very rudimentary and pose grave environmental and health hazards. The situation is worsened as there is no e-waste management system in place, as well as the lack of awareness, inadequate legislative mechanisms, a lack of funds and reluctance on the part of the government and corporate organizations to address this critical issue. The authors call for more environmental education and continuous and detailed education programmes to be implemented at all levels of society. The issue of consumer behaviour and disposal attitudes is central to the chapter by Elizabeth Muoria and colleagues, who have researched how residents in a municipality in Kenya dispose of e-waste, together with the factors that affect their behaviour and their level of awareness of the effects of poor disposal of e-waste on human health and the environment. Muoria and colleagues' study shows that once equipment is out of use, most of it is either stored or disposed of with other solid waste, either due to its intrinsic resource value or because it is convenient or cheap to do so. Most residents are not yet sufficiently aware of the dangers for the environment and in particular for human health resulting from an inappropriate disposal of e-waste. All three chapters not only shed light on e-waste in the African context but also emphasize the need for integrated e-waste management that addresses the social, technical and legislative challenges associated with e-waste. The next part of the book deals with system design approaches for sustainable e-waste management systems, given limited resources and limited carrying capacity of our ecosystem. Henning Wilts explores how the circulation of palladium, a scarce metal found in WEEE, can be improved by means of international covenants, negotiated but binding treaties based on private law between public institutions, industry and other stakeholders, for electronic products. A policy approach that is already widely adopted for the sustainable management of e-waste is the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR), which encourages producersto design environmentally friendly products by holding them responsible for the costs of managing their products at their end of life. The European WEEE Directive, as one of the pioneering legislations on the sustainable management of WEEE, is based on the principles of EPR. Hazel Nash explores the extent to which the WEEE Directive and the WEEE Recast Proposal promote patterns of sustainable consumption and production. In particular, the chapter assesses the ways in which the roles and responsibilities of producers and consumers are addressed and the impact this has on achieving the overarching aim of sustainable waste management. Hua Zhong and Shu Schiller explore the implementation of an EPR strategy in China. In their chapter they proposes a third-party take-back model as an alternative approach where private companies assume the EoL responsibilities for products on behalf of the original equipment manufacturers. They argue that such a third-party recycling system, by means of an internet platform to organize the collection and recycling of WEEE, could balance the interests of all stakeholders involved: the consumer and the third-party recycler contracted by the manufacturers, as well as the government as the regulatory body. In part five, we look more at the technological challenges and innovations in managing e-waste, in particular bioleaching processes to recover metals. Conventional recycling processes are either hydrometallurgical (meaning the separation of metals by liquid processes, such as leaching) or pyrometallurgical, which entails thermal treatment. However, bioleaching can be an alternative method for recovering metals from WEEE. Metals-bearing waste like EoL vehicles or waste EEE are often recycled using post-shredder techniques encompassing gravimetric, magnetic or eddy current separation stages, which result in large amounts of materials such as plastics, foam or textiles that have to often be dumped in landfills. High dumping costs and recent advances in the hydrometallurgical extraction of metals have increased interest in hydrometallurgical processes and other alternatives. The use of microorganisms to solubilize metals from waste is one such potentially low-cost alternative to the classical hydrometallurgical processes. Bioleaching does not need high temperature and pressurization, which reduces the energy cost and avoids the emission of gas pollutants. Today, bioleaching is applied on a commercial scale for the recovery of copper and uranium from low levels ores and sulphide minerals. However, studies have demonstrated that metals can be recovered from printed circuit board scrap by bacterial leaching. Gregory Lewis and colleagues investigate the potential of bioleaching of polymetallic industrial waste using chemolithotrophic bacteria while Luciana Harue Yamane and colleagues discuss the influence of ferrous iron supplementation on bioleaching to recover copper from printed circuit boards. Details: New York: United Nations University Office at United Nations, 2013. 208p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 16, 2019 at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4e5c/5729c74e15b7889a8c24f9b779fc22b65580.pdf?_ga=2.12509940.1124749473.1563312159-462006081.1559056280 Year: 2013 Country: International URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Solving-the-E-waste-Problem%3A-An-Interdisciplinary-Khetriwal-Luepschen/4e5c5729c74e15b7889a8c24f9b779fc22b65580 Shelf Number: 156812 Keywords: E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Hazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offenses Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment |