Electronic Waste In recent decades, citizens of the world have become increasingly dependent upon technology.

As a global leader in business and technology, it is no surprise that The United States of America is at the forefront of the technological boom. Electronics are an integral part of everything we do. Ninety-nine percent of homes in the U.S. have one television, and more than two-thirds of households have three or more televisions. In addition, there are almost 300 million cell phones in use in the United States alone nearly one for every man, woman, and child in the country. Other common electronic devices that many of us use daily include laptop and desktop computers, MP3 players, stereo systems, video game consoles, and GPS systems. The consumer electronics industry generates approximately $2 billion a year in sales. Electronics manufacturers are racing to continually enhance and improve devices in an effort to get consumers to replace their current devices with the newest model. This strategy appears to be working, as it is estimated that Americans own a record-high 3 billion electronic devices. Aside from providing entertainment, these devices help increase productivity and efficiency in every day life. Each new product introduced in the market represents the obsolescence of at least one and perhaps many other electronic devices. For example, a new cell phone today can do the job of an MP3 player, a camera, a calculator, and in many cases even a computer. To be sure, such advances in technology are very convenient for the consumer, making it possible to carry one small device that has the capability of performing multiple tasks. The cost of owning such devices continues to decline rapidly. In addition,

the cost-savings of purchasing one device over many is beneficial to the consumer and to the economy as a whole.

What becomes of the outdated and obsolete devices that we discard is a matter of great importance, and requires urgent attention. It is estimated that in the United States alone, we throw away over 350,000 cell phones and more than 100,000 computers each day. This electronic waste, also known as e-waste, combined with discarded refrigerators, microwaves, stoves, and other appliances amounts to nearly 50 million tons of discarded devices annually. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that almost half of the electronic devices that were purchased between 1980 2004 are either still in use or in storage. The other half, approximately 900 million pieces, have been permanently discarded. Of the 900 million pieces that have been disposed of, less than 20% were recycled or disposed of properly. Although electronic waste accounts for only two percent of Americas solid waste, it represents seventy percent of overall toxic waste. Electronics contain precious materials such as gold, platinum, and copper. When electronic devices are discarded they are often harvested of these materials. In developed countries such as the United States and much of Europe, there are regulations and strict guidelines regarding the disposition of old electronics. These regulations are in place because in addition to the much sought-after minerals, there are also nearly 1,000 other substances in electronics that pose a grave threat to public health and the environment. Electronic devices contain dangerous materials such as lead, cadmium, mercury, barium, and phosphor. Alone, each of these materials has the

potential to adversely affect humans nervous system, brain function, blood flow, and reproductive systems. Combined with the chemical flame-retardants applied to many plastics, these materials represent a significant increase in risk for developing ailments such as cancer, respiratory problems, or muscular degeneration. Places like Guiya, China and Banglore, India dismantle tons of electronics every year, profiting from the sales of precious metals, but at the cost of the local environment and the health of residents. Third world countries utilize methods that are not only harmful but also more wasteful. The most expedient and most prevalent method is to simply toss equipment into an open bonfire in order to melt plastics and burn away anything that is not valuable metal. This creates acrid smoke full of carcinogens and neurotoxins that linger in the air and creates a deadly fog. Remaining waste is then dumped into the nearest drainage ditch or waterway where it will be carried to the ocean or local water supplies. The Erren River in Taiwan is a perfect example of environmental neglect. The Erren River is fouled by pollutants and bordered by an eight-foot wall of stripped electronic circuit boards. A single circuit board contains and leaches enough lead to surpass the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys hazardous waste standard by thirty to one hundred percent. Mixtures of seventy-five percent hydrochloric acid and twenty-five percent nitric acid are used to recover gold from computer components. The gold recovery process also releases lead, tin, copper, antimony, cadmium, and nickel. Testing by Greenpeace in China revealed these mixtures were in the river. Both lead and cadmium are toxic to humans, animals and plants. Both are also bio-accumulative and can cause kidney damage. The toxicity of antimony is very similar to that of arsenic and cadmium and is considered hazardous by the U.S. EPA at only 1.0 mg per liter, but was found at 12.2 mg per liter at

many sites. Concentrations of these substances found at testing sites in China and India were over one hundred times higher than levels expected in an uncontaminated ecosystem. The illegal disposal of e-waste has so severely damaged the ecology of the Erren River that fish die within two minutes of being introduced to its waters. The human life expectancy of the surrounding communities is fifty years and the cancer rates twenty-seven percent. Companies that polluted the Erren River have no legal obligation to pay for its restoration. Since 2001, the Taiwanese EPA has spent nearly $60 million (TWD) to clean up sites along the river. On average, only one site is cleaned up every two years. One example of minimal effort to prevent run-off from contaminated property near the river was when the Taiwanese EPA workers simply covered a remaining eight-foot high mound of discarded circuit boards with tarps, leaving them to slowly decompose, and further contaminate the river. Based on the latest information from the Taiwanese governments eleven watermonitoring stations, the level of pollution in the Erren River is still rated medium to heavy. Taiwans poorly enforced right-to-know laws leaves the local community with more questions than answers. Residents along the Erren have no access to information about what specific contaminates were found in river sediments during the EPA cleanup efforts, or the levels of pollutants found. The U.S. government is complicit in many aspects of this world-wide environmental crisis. As the worlds largest employer, the federal government is also the worlds largest purchaser of personal computers, representing approximately seven percent of the entire worlds computer sales. Being such a large contributor to the problem of e-waste, the government is surprisingly ambivalent when it comes to finding an effective solution to the problem. The U.S. EPA has long recognized the seriousness of e-waste, conducting studies

and funding awareness initiatives across the country, but neither the agency nor the government have established realistic protocols for effectively dealing with the problem. One example of the governments half-hearted efforts is the e-waste recycling program run by the Federal Prison Industries (FPI), a government owned corporation that does business under the trade name UNICOR. Todays prison industry has become a source of ultra-cheap, captive labor. UNICOR handles obsolete electronics for government and private business in eight federal prisons across the country. UNICOR depends on taxpayer support for buildings, health care services, food, equipment, and emergency service. UNICOR is required to follow Occupational Safety Health guideline, but is not subjected to the same rigorous OSHA oversight as the small business recyclers with which it competes. UNICORs e-waste recycling business depends on the exploitation of inmates, preferential treatment for government contracts, labor-intensive substandard operations, and exemption from the full range of health and safety, environmental, and labor laws. UNICOR claims that their work programs are job training and completely voluntary and provides workers with income. However, UNICOR denies inmates full protection as workers, including the rights to organize and participate in discussions that effect their health and safety. The wage system used by UNICOR exempts inmate workers from any minimum wage laws. Wages are as little as twenty cents per hour, closer to the wages in Third World and developing countries. Inadequate workshops, ventilation, and tools put both inmate workers and staff at risk for toxic exposure. The contamination does not stop there, as many employees take these toxins and neurotoxins home with them on their clothes and skin, subjecting their families to exposure.

Another startling situation is the U.S. governments position on exporting used electronics overseas. Of the 175 countries to take place in the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, the U.S. is the only developed country that has not adopted the agreement into law. The Basel agreement prohibits developed nations from dumping hazardous wastes, including e-waste, in developing countries. The United States has signed the agreement, but has failed to ratify it, meaning that it is not an official participant, and not bound by its regulations. As a result, approximately sixty percent of the e-waste generated in the United States is exported to places such as China, Indian, and Taiwan where there are little or no regulations regarding the disposition of used electronics. In many cases, the electronics are sent under the guise of being working units that the either the government or some corporation has donated to a developing country as a gesture of good-will. Often times, these donated items are not in working condition, or sent to remote locations in places such as Mongolia, where the people do not know how to use computers and more importantly, do not have a consistent source of electricity. Currently, there is no federal legislation regarding e-waste. In fact, the U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) specifically excludes e-waste from export controls regarding harmful materials. Considering the great trade imbalance between China and the United States, it seems that it is more economical to send broken electronics to China for disposal rather than complying with domestic regulations and wage laws. Rather than send empty or even partially full container ships back to China, organizations can loads many tons of discarded electronics and dispose of them for a significantly smaller amount rather than properly recycling them domestically. A report issued by the U.S. EPA estimates that even

the units collected at free recycling events during community days or near Earth Day typically find their way overseas. Although some individual states have enacted legislation regarding e-waste, there are not many, and enforcement is difficult at best. The ethical implications in regards to the U.S. governments actions, or more specifically inaction, are many. Catholic social teaching is very clear in regards to the expected treatment of others and of the environment, and the policy of exporting these dangerous materials to poor countries is in violation of nearly every principle. It is in violation of the respect for human life and dignity to expect workers in developing countries to be exposed to the harmful substances found in many electronics either through voluntary employment or as a result of contamination from a landfill. Further, the economic justice principle suggests that workers have not only the right to productive work and fair wages, but also to safe working conditions. Neither of these conditions are in existence under the current arrangement. Employees are working long hours in unsafe conditions for very low wages. In addition, we, along with our government are in direct conflict with the church through the neglect and abuse of the plant Gods creation. Knowingly allowing toxins to leach into the ground and into water supplies are in conflict with this principle. As a developed nation with many resources, we have a greater responsibility to ensure that such acts do not occur, and to work to correct existing problems. The government has an obligation to promote human dignity, protect human rights, and build the common good. The U.S. government, by knowingly allowing if not actively promoting the exportation of domestic e-waste to other countries is derelict in fulfilling those obligations.

The time has come for the U.S. government to take a proactive role in working to end the exploitation of workers in underdeveloped countries. Contamination of the soil and the Guiya River in China has led to a miscarriage rate in the region that is six times higher than the normal rate, respiratory problems, and lead poisoning, among other problems. Because this is a relatively new phenomenon, it is likely that the full effects of poisoning from ewaste will not truly be known for many years. The solution is complex and multi-faceted. To simply stop shipping old electronic devices to places such as Guiya may actually do more harm than good. The effects of contamination will be felt for many generations to come, while ending shipments immediately would do nothing but disrupt the supply of precious metals and income to a greatly depressed region. To truly solve the problem that we have helped to create, we must simultaneously put an end to the destruction of the environment, work to reverse the damage that we have caused through years of unregulated contamination, and give both economic help as well as health-care assistance to the inhabitants of the regions that we have abused and neglected for so long.

Works Cited

References www.SVTC.com WWW.smh.com.au www.fec.gov www.EPEAT.net www.ecycle.com www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Recycling www.epcusa.com/recycling/solutions