Since the introduction of personal computers in the early 1990’s, our standard of living has continued to rise. With this, companies discovered how to build better and more efficient models of pre-existing products. This development spurred the consumer need to always upgrade and stay at the forefront of technology. However, not much thought was given as to where the discarded electronics would go.
Over the years these items accumulated in large amounts. At first they were simply thrown away with the municipal trash, but after the effects of battery acid leakage were revealed the EPA installed precautionary measures. Overall these were known as the Universal Waste Act whose goal was to reduce the amount of contaminant that would potentially enter landfills. This regulated the amount of electronic waste and where it would end up once it had reached its life’s end. It wasn’t until 1996 with the Implementation of the Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act passed by President Clinton, when the recycling of nickel-cadmium and rechargeable batteries was controlled. At the same time, the use of mercury was also phased out.
While batteries were being given attention due to mercury, other electronics were harder to dispose of. Even if citizens did attempt to recycle old computers and televisions, the items had to be sent to specialized locations in order to be disposed of properly. Electronics are made up of various metals, plastics, glue, glass, much of which must be taken apart and separated by material in order to be recyclable. (Similar to the way food-stained cardboard is not accepted in recycling and certain plastics have different chemical properties and sometimes cannot be used together).
Like the processing of municipal waste, states rarely dump electronic waste in the same area where it is consumed. Municipal waste management usually happens where there is no access to facilities that would recycle the materials correctly. Not all states have highly specialized recycling plants. Different states offer various rates per ton of garbage dumped which impacts where waste is sent. Because of this, it is sometimes more economical to ship the waste across county and state lines.
In 2003, the city of Toronto, Canada began shipping its waste to a landfill in suburban Detroit. This caused complaints from Michigan citizens as well as legal jurisdiction issues involving crossing international borders for waste disposal. The US government had to come up with a solution to avoid environmental lawsuits and accusations of class bias as Canada was sending its waste to a poverty-stricken city like Detroit. As a result, the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance created WasteWatcher, an organization that monitors and delivers compliance assistance information for moving solid waste across the U.S-Canadian border. WasteWatcher specifically focuses on Canadian municipal waste importation into Michigan.
The distance between Canada and United States is relatively small compared to the other areas where the U.S. has been dumping its electronic waste overseas. The regulation of exporting e-waste in large amounts (or at all) to other countries had been severely lacking.
To read the full story, visit http://chicagomonitor.com/2016/10/e-waste-and-economic-viability-why-do-we-blame-developing-countries/.