Texas Campaign for the Environment: e-Waste

issue background


E-Waste is Toxic Waste
Electronic contain an array of toxic materials, including lead, mercury and PCB-like brominated flame retardants, among others. An old-style TV or computer monitor contains at least 4 pounds of lead, and flat panels contain mercury bulbs. The toxic flame-retardants (which cause cancer and birth defects in animal studies) are showing up in mother's milk sample taken in Texas and in meat and dairy products in Texas supermarkets. Click here for more on the toxins in electronic waste.

New State Law for Computer Recycling!
In 2007, after five years of pressure from TCE and our supporters, Texas legislators passed the Electronics TakeBack Law (HB 2714) that now requires all computer manufacturers to offer free recycling for Texas residents. To use the manufacturer recycling programs, visit www.texasrecyclescomputers.org. 

Worldwide Contamination
Unfortunately, many companies that claim to be recycling e-waste are actually exporting the toxic material to be dumped in developing nations overseas. This "sham recycling" is widespread and laregly unregulated. The toxins in our obsolete electronics are contaminating entire villages across the world, and e-waste exported to China appears to be a source of the lead in contaminated children's jewlery being imported into the US! TCE is pressuring federal lawmakers and electronics manufacturers to end this shameful practice -- click here to take action.

electronic waste: an environmental crisis

Electronics contain an array of toxic materials, including lead, mercury, and brominated flame-retardants (similar to PCBs outlawed in the 1970s), among others.

  • Currently there are no laws in Texas banning consumer electronic waste from landfills, which is the fastest growing waste stream and makes up 40% of the lead and 70% of heavy metals in landfills. *
  • A typical monitor contains 4-8 lbs. of lead, and flat panel displays often contain mercury. 
  • Currently most of these electronics are destined for landfills or incinerated in the US or developing countries. Burning e-waste puts toxins into the atmosphere where it spreads around the world.
  • Brominated flame-retardants are showing up in high levels in mother's milk samples and supermarket meat and dairy products in the U.S.***

Two reports, "Exporting Harm: The High Tech Trashing of Asia" and "Digital Dump: Exporting High-Tech Re-use and Abuse to Africa"** documented that much of the electronic waste actually is sent to "dirty recycling" or open dump operations in developing countries. The photos and video shocked the world.  The toxins are having severe health impacts and have poisoned the air, land and water. 

*"Computers, E-waste and Product Stewardship: Is California Ready for the Challenge?" , May 11, 2001, Report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region IX.

**"Exporting Harm: The High Tech Trashing of Asia" 2002 & "Digital Dump: Exporting High-Tech Re-use and Abuse to Africa" 2005. Basel Action Network.

***"Record numbers of toxic fire retardants found in American mothers' breast milk" Environmental Working Group September 2003

The Long-Term Solution: Producer Takeback

  • Producer takeback recycling means there is a built-in incentive to make electronics that are more recyclable, last longer, and use less toxic material. Increasing efficiency is not only profitable, it is ecologically beneficial and labor intensive - recycling provides more jobs than landfilling or incinerating.
  • Consumers pay 1-3% more for the products, but pay nothing for recycling. Countries that have adopted this policy are experiencing recycling rates of 50-80%*, whereas current recycling programs in the U.S. are yielding less than 1% of annual sales.** Given that taxpayer-funded local solid waste programs are already overburdened and under funded, why should taxpayers be asked to shoulder the additional burden of e-waste management?
  • Convincing the Electronics Companies that Corporate Responsibility Pays. Brand name giants respond to market demand, public pressure, and legislation. TCE generated thousands of letters to Dell, Apple, Samsung and LG, and these companies now embrace producer takeback and sees this as an opportunity to recover resources and increase profit margins.

*Industry Collection of Electronics More Efficient, Report Says. Recycling Policy News. July 29, 2002.

**Electronics Product Recovery and Baseline Report. National Safety Council. 1999

 

Poison PCs and Toxics TVs: The Costs of Electronic Waste in Texas - The Financial and Environmental Tidal Wave Awaiting the Lone Star State

Texas Campaign for the Environment issued a 35-page national report with a Texas supplement, called Poison PCs and Toxic TVs - E-waste tsunami to roll across US: Are we prepared? The major findings are:

  • Texas taxpayers will foot $606 million tax bill from computer manufacturers over ten years if companies don't take back obsolete products. TCE's analysis provides estimates for the taxpayer or ratepayer burden for each major metropolitan area of the state.
  • More than 2 million tons of toxins are headed to Texas landfills and incinerators and state's record on electronic waste found lacking.

A number of states ban toxic electronic waste from their landfills. Texas does not. Federal hazardous waste rules prohibit institutions that generate large quantities of e-waste (220 pounds per month or more) from landfilling or incinerating their toxic e-waste. Unfortunately, this is not well enforced.

Producer TakeBack Recycling shifts the financial responsibility for electronics recycling from local governments to the manufacturers. Due in part to the cost savings this represents, over 40 cities and counties throughout Texas have publicly endorsed Producer TakeBack policies for e-waste recycling. Most have passed local resolutions in favor of state legislation, and several have gone on record in support of specific bills during the past two legislative sessions. The following local governments support Producer TakeBack Recycling:

Counties:
Harris, Dallas, Tarrant, Travis, Hays, Callahan, Coleman, Brown, San Saba, Lampasas, Menard, Burnet, Washington, Waller, Austin, Lavaca, Goliad, Gonzales, Caldwell, Fayette, Matagorda, Refugio, Aransas, Wharton, Bandera, Val Verde, Culberson, Hudspeth, Fort Bend*

Cities:
Georgetown, Kyle, Plano, Highland Village, Rowlett, San Marcos, Avery, Lakeway, Austin, Round Rock, Sherman, Richardson, Corpus Christi*, Houston*, Dallas**

*(Record of support during 2009 legislative session)
**(Record of support during 2007 legislative session)

Chemicals in electronics are in our bodies

Scientists are finding higher and higher levels of flame retardants used in electronics and other products in the bodies of Americans and in fish in our lakes and bays - and even in polar bears.

Testing on mothers' milk and umbilical cords show the levels of these flame retardants ten to a hundred times higher than found in Europeans - and every sample of mothers' milk found detectible levels.  Another study tested mainly Texas mothers milk samples with similar results. 

Women should continue breastfeeding for the wide variety of health benefits.  But we can safely assume that all Americans have this substance in the fatty tissues of our bodies - this is not limited to nursing moms.

Working with other Electronics TakeBack Coalition activists, tests of the dust on computer monitors were taken and a report released in 2004 documented the presence of these chemicals in dust from universities, schools and legislative offices.  Similar studies of household dust has also detected these chemicals.

In addition to exposure through inhaling dust, other exposures roots include inhalation of the chemicals as they off-gas from products and through the food chain.  A study of foods containing animal from the shelves of Dallas supermarkets found much higher levels of these chemicals than similar studies in other countries.

These chemicals - brominated flame retardants or BFRs - are a family of chemicals, similar to now-banned polychlorinated biphenyls, which are widely used as fire retardants in consumer products. In animal studies of BFRs, there are similar impacts to PCBs.  Testing of animals has shown the following impacts:

  • reproductive disorders
  • endocrine and hormone problems
  • cancer
  • nervous system disorders

Electronics producers are beginning to respond to direct pressure and legislative efforts to rid their products of these chemicals.  After two mothers' milk studies were released in 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency negotiated a phase-out of two kinds of these chemicals (Octa-BDE and Penta-BDE).  But the federal government has not taken protective action on the main chemical of concern used in electronics, deca-BDE. 

Thanks to pressure from the Electronics TakeBack Coalition, many producers are eliminating the use of all BFRs.  Electronics companies that have set deadlines to phase out BFRs include Apple, Acer, Dell, Lenovo, LGE, Nokia, Samsung, Sony-Ericsson, Sony, and Toshiba.