Electronics comes clean

Electronics comes clean - Solving the e-waste crisis in California The disposal of hazardous electronic wastes presents a number of challenges, in addition to the public outcry caused by its export to developing countries. To address these issues, the US state of California has introduced a fee-based system for environmentally sound e-waste recycling and disposal - though even the legislation itself faced challenges. Mark Murray In 2000, the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) designated cathode ray tubes (CRTs) - the picture tubes found in computer monitors and television sets - as hazardous waste and banned them from landfills. However, this left Californian consumers confronting an age-old problem: one hand of government didn't quite seem to know what the other was doing. Although DTSC was right to designate the CRTs as hazardous electronic waste (or e-waste, as we've come to know it), consumers trying to rid themselves of obsolete TVs or computers now had no easily accessible method of doing so. Landfills would no longer be accepting e-waste and, while there were some recycling options, they were not widely known, were not cheap and were not easily accessible. Some local authorities instituted e-waste clean-ups of various types and sizes, but these tended to be expensive and, if left unchecked, could have become prohibitively so. E-waste is the largest-growing component of the American waste stream The problem was already large and it was growing. Rapid technological advances in both the home computer and television industries meant that many consumers were discarding such items as often as once every two years to make room for the latest machines. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has singled out e-waste as the largest single growing component of the American waste stream. In California, it was estimated that there were already some 6 million obsolete computers and TVs stored in people's homes and that another 10,000 a day joined them - all waiting for the day when there would be an easy way to get rid of them. And, as increasing numbers of consumers switch over to high-definition televisions, there is likely to be a significant spike of obsolete TVs (above and beyond current rates of obsolescence) over the next five to ten years. As the scope of the dilemma became clearer, reports began to hit the press about a new outrage; of the computers and TVs that were supposedly being recycled, as much as 80% were being exported by unscrupulous 'recyclers' to developing nations such as China, India and Pakistan. Small villages in these countries that had once been the centres of agrarian life, had been turned into toxic pits - smouldering junkyards of the husks of our high-tech gadgets. Water now has to be imported to the villages from miles away, the children are often ill and the schools are often closed due to unbreathable air. This grim reality, in a free market, means that the poor of the world are being forced to bear a disproportionate share of the environmental burden of e-waste. This reality is the dirty little secret of the electronics industry. CAW strikes back As these stories started to alert the public and Californian policymakers to the CRT disposal problem and the health and environmental risks that were being exported to the poorest of the poor, we at Californians Against Waste decided that it was the right time to take action. Los Angeles labels found on e-wastein China An ash pile created by the open burning of wires from imported electronic waste near Guiyu, China. The export of e-waste to developing countries has resulted in extremely contaminated water supply, ill health of children, and school closures due to unbreathable air. PHOTOS: BAN Californians Against Waste (CAW) is a non-profit organization whose members have been at the forefront of solid waste reform for 20 years. CAW already enjoyed a reputation as an environmental group that knows how to negotiate in the real world. We had sponsored California's highly regarded 'bottle bill' and led the fight to implement California's Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939), which requires local authorities in the state to reduce solid waste disposal by 50%.At various times, CAW has forged alliances with groups as disparate as waste haulers, glass manufacturers, recyclers, consumer organizations, local government recycling co-ordinators and retailers. But until now we had stayed out of the fight over toxic materials; our goal was - and has been since our inception - the reduction of solid waste, the phasing out of our reliance on virgin materials, and the establishment of a vibrant economy based on products made from recycled materials. But now there was a confluence of two divergent issues and a real opportunity to address an issue that seemed fundamental to us - producer responsibility, that is, the notion that a manufacturer's responsibility for its products should not end when the consumer takes such products home. In California, there are 6 million obsolete computers and TVs stored in homes - a figure increasing by 10,000each day Here was the perfect scenario: manufacturers whose products become obsolete quickly and, as a result of that built-in obsolescence, become hazardous to the environment and public health. If policymakers couldn't be made to see the logic, wisdom and political beauty in transferring that responsibility from taxpayers (who ended up paying for whatever method of disposal their local authorities came up with) to producers (the ones profiting from their products' rapid obsolescence), perhaps there was no wisdom left in the halls of the US governing bodies. The first step: Senate Bill 1523 In 2001, CAW approached Senator Byron Sher, a lawmaker who had taken the lead on many of the most significant waste-related issues, and together we crafted legislation to deal with this growing crisis. We had originally wanted to establish a producer responsibility model, but this would have led to the entire industry pounding us at every opportunity. We decided to fall back and instead created California Senate Bill 1523 (SB 1523), which provided for an advanced disposal fee, so consumers would pay a small fee on CRTs at the time of purchase that would pay for proper recycling at the end of their life-cycle. At around midnight on the last day of the 2001-2002 session, we finally got the 41st vote we needed to pass the bill in the State Assembly and send it on its way to the Governor. But a bitter industry pulled out all the stops and, at the end of the day, Governor Gray Davis vetoed the bill.But as we began to read his veto message, our initial despair began to lift. He said, 'I am very troubled by an increasing electronic waste pollution problem in California, as well as across our nation ... I am equally disturbed that this dangerous cargo is being sent to underdeveloped nations, [so] exposing children to hazardous waste materials. We should compel industry to solve this problem.' The solution: Senate Bill 20 Girl dismantling a monitor screen in China Thus was born Senate Bill 20 (2003-2004 session). In its initial inception, the bill would have required producers of computers and TVs either to set up their own free and convenient recycling programme, or pay a fee to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to meet the cost of recycling. In an early incarnation of the bill, a collection fee would be added on each device, to be paid by consumers, so that they - and not taxpayers - would fund the cost of transporting the e-waste from home or office to the recycler. We felt that having at least some part of the industry in support could prove critical for lawmakers, especially in the State Assembly, where a strong contingent of business-oriented moderate Democrats often held sway on issues pertaining to California's economy. This might never be more true than in 2003, with the state and national economy just beginning to get its head above water after a long and difficult recession.Two issues proved to be deal-breakers in our negotiations with some elements of the industry. Some in the industry were adamantly opposed to any consumer-paid collection fee at the point of purchase. They believed that, with the giant Dell Inc. and others selling via the internet or through catalogues, any additional fee paid on in-state sales would impact their market share. Other producers with California retail sales were also concerned. Although we were able to obtain a legal opinion from the Office of the Legislative Counsel of California that the state could charge such a fee on both in-state and out-of-state sales provided the revenue was used to solve an environmental problem, those opposed did not budge.A second and more problematic issue was the insistence of some producers that the programme be applied only to residential sales, and their corporate and other business sales should be exempt. We just as adamantly insisted that they could not exempt from such a programme roughly half the sales of computers in California as well as an unknown but significant percentage of TV sales.Fortunately, a coalition of computer and TV manufacturers agreed to support a bill with an advanced disposal fee and a strong producer responsibility element. Under the compromise we negotiated, SB 20 established a recycling programme that would begin to deal with the huge backlog of obsolete CRTs and other e-waste, and prohibited the export of electronic waste to developing nations except under the most stringent requirements. A number of manufacturers agreed to support a bill including advanced disposal fee and producer responsibility With a group of manufacturers on board, SB 20 finally cleared the Assembly Floor with one vote and one day to spare. But just as we were breathing a collective sigh of relief, Assembly Minority Leader Dave Cox exercised a legislative technique to force yet another vote on the measure on the next legislative day. However, the motion to reconsider the bill failed by 30 votes to 46 and, finally, the more environmentally friendly Senate sent it on to the Governor on a 27 to 13 vote. In one of his last environmental acts before losing the historic recall vote to Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Governor signed SB 20 into law. Of the computers and TVs that were supposedly beingrecycled in California, as much as 80% were beingexported by unscrupulous 'recyclers' to developingnations, turning areas such as this into e-waste dumps.PHOTOS: BAN What the new law will do Senate Bill 20 is designed to take a number of initial steps to address California's growing e-waste problem. It provides incentives and the financial wherewithal for the establishment of 'free and convenient' opportunities to recycle specified hazardous electronic waste in a scheme financed by a front-end fee paid by retailers and manufacturers. Specifically, SB 20 requires any retailer or manufacturer selling hazardous electronic devices to pay a fee to the state to cover the cost of recycling. Initial fees are set at US$6-10, but will ultimately be based on the actual cost of recycling. SB 20 also provides manufacturers with market-based incentives to reduce the use of toxic materials and design their devices for recycling. The new legislation requires the establishment of annual state-wide goals for e-waste recycling Crucially, the bill restricts the export of toxic electronics from California in order to protect worldwide public health and the environment while maximizing recycling. Additionally, this measure prohibits the sale of devices containing specified levels of certain toxic heavy metals after 2007. This is consistent with a phase-out initiated by the European Union with the EC Directive on the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (ROHS Directive) and will prevent California from becoming a dumping ground for devices that can no longer be sold in Europe.SB 20 also requires manufacturers to report to the California Environmental Protection Agency every two years on their efforts to reduce their use of toxic materials and design their devices for recycling. Provisions of the new bill The electronic devices covered by the new bill include CRTs and other video display devices that the DTSC determines to contain toxic materials. Devices with screen sizes smaller than 4 inches (100 mm) are exempt. The system introduced by SB 20 is intended to: ensure that economically viable and sustainable markets for recovered materials and components are developed and supported in order to conserve resources and to maximize business and employment opportunities within California provide a comprehensive and innovative system for the reuse, recycling and proper disposal of electronic devices covered by the legislation encourage the design of electronic devices that are less toxic, more recyclable and which use recycled materials establish a free programme that makes it convenient for consumers and the public to return, recycle and ensure the safe disposal of e-waste ensure that the cost associated with the handling, recycling and disposal of e-waste is the responsibility of the producers and consumers of the devices (but not local authorities, their service providers, the state government or taxpayers) ensure that the cost associated with the proper management of the electronic devices covered by the legislation is absorbed by the producers and consumers of those devices at or before the point of purchase, and not at the point of discarding The new legislation also requires the CIWMB to establish annual state-wide recycling goals for e-waste, with input from manufacturers, retailers and covered e-waste recyclers.The e-waste recycling fee is not a tax. In response to a request made by Senator Sher, the Legislative Counsel of California stated: 'The charge imposed under SB 20 would not be levied for unrelated revenue purposes. There would be a clear nexus between the purchasers of the covered electronic devices as fee payers and the programmes, designed to mitigate the environmental harms arising from the subsequent disposal of the devices, that would be funded by the revenues generated by those charges.'Numerous legal opinions from the Legislative Counsel of California, the California Environmental Protection Agency and others made it clear that the e-waste recycling fee can be levied on out-of-state manufacturers. Out-of-state companies will be legally obliged to pay the fee to the CIWMB as a condition of doing business in California and failure to pay it would be a violation of state law. California already has a number of environmental/regulatory fees that are currently assessed and collected on out-of-state manufacturers selling into California. As a regulatory fee, the e-waste recycling fee can be legally assessed on all 'remote' purchases, including catalogue, phone and internet sales. The CIWMB and other state agencies (including the California EPA) are currently assessing and collecting regulatory fees for tyres, used motor oil, pesticides and other problem products sold into California by out of state manufacturers via the internet or other remote sales. If any out-of-state computer company refused to pay the e-waste recycling fee on their sales, they would be considered in criminal violation of state law and effectively barred from selling their devices in California. In addition, SB 20 prohibits the state from entering into a contract with any organization that is not complying with the legislation. In this recyclers' village near Guiyu, China, residents make their living sorting wires by day and burning them on open fires by night. PHOTO: BAN Conclusion With the help of enlightened manufacturers, CAW has helped to bring into being new state legislation that is designed to boost e-waste recycling in California and to ensure the safe disposal of unwanted CRTs without endangering the health and the environment of people in the developing world. Mark Murray is Executive Director of Californians Against Waste, Sacramento, California, US.Fax: +1 916 443 3912e-mail: murray@cawrecycles.orgweb: www.cawrecycles.org