Green Tech

Greenpeace released its latest Guide to Greener Electronics on Wednesday, revealing that promises aren't always kept.

The Greenpeace guide, which started in 2006, ranks the top 17 PC, cell phone, TV, and gaming console manufacturers based on their policies regarding e-waste, climate change, and use of toxic chemicals.

Hewlett-Packard, Dell, and Lenovo all dropped in the rankings for failing to live up to public promises to eliminate polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from their computers by the end of 2009, according to Greenpeace.

While 2009 isn't over yet, Greenpeace noted that the companies have reset their clocks. HP (14th place) formally pushed back its phase-out of the chemicals to 2011. Dell (13th place) will fail to meet the 2009 deadline, but has offered no new timeline. Lenovo (down from 14th to 16th place) changed to a 2010 deadline, and Greenpeace claimed it has information that even that deadline will be dropped.

In conjunction with the release, members of the group protested at HP's Beijing facilities last week.

Apple, meanwhile, dropped to 11th place from 9th. Greenpeace gave the Mac maker kudos for its success in making products completely BFR-free and "virtually free of PVC," as well as its green computer campaign. But Apple was scolded for using "unreasonably high threshold limits for BFRs and PVC in products that are allegedly PVC-/BFR-free." As experts have noted, since there is currently no widespread standard for reporting on many environmental and carbon footprint issues, companies have been struggling to determine their own guidelines. Apparently, Greenpeace didn't like the ones it saw Apple using for this category.

Microsoft remained in 15th place, still admonished by Greenpeace for not having a better customer e-waste return policy.

Samsung garnered 2nd for succeeding in producing PVC-free LCD TVs and lowering the overall amount of toxins in its other products by significant amounts. Sony Ericsson moved up from 5th place to 3rd for improving its energy efficiency.

Last place? Still Nintendo, though Greenpeace gave the Wii maker points for switching to PVC-free internal wiring in their gaming consoles.

First place continues to be the province of Nokia, which remains the greenest company in the eyes of Greenpeace, notably for the success of its take-back program for used phones.

While many companies have gotten serious about recycling tech junk, Greenpeace sees e-waste as one of the most serious forms of pollution going unchecked.

The environmental organization claims that e-waste is the fastest growing contributor of municipal waste because of the frequency at which people upgrade to new cell phones, computers, and other electronics. According to its estimates, 20 million to 50 million tonnes of electronics are thrown away each year worldwide.(Others estimate that e-waste will plateau by 2015.)

CNET followed the last day of an analog TV's life as it was being recycled.

(Credit: Erik Palm/CNET)

On June 12, the U.S. makes its long-anticipated shift to digital television. As that changeover prompts consumers to ditch their old analog TV sets in favor of more modern devices, environmental organizations such as Greenpeace are warning of a surge in e-waste.

"We are seeing now a huge anticipated spike in the amount of electronic waste, really a tsunami of electronic waste coming through because of this digital transition," said Casey Harrell, a Greenpeace International campaigner.

And it's not just that the old television sets are piling up--as with scrapped PCs and printers, there's also the danger that they'll be exported to places with lax or nonexistent environmental safeguards.

"We're seeing a new wave of electronic waste that's ending up on the shores of India, China, West Africa, and Latin America," Harrell said.

E-waste often contains toxic metals such as cadmium, lead, and mercury, along with flame retardant chemicals that can accumulate in the body and potentially cause reproductive and neurological harm.

In the face of those concerns, some businesses are now promising to recycle your TV properly.

CNET News followed one aging analog TV as it headed to the next world, making its own transition from consumer electronics device to scrap metal and other parts. We met Mark Salvador as he was leaving his old Symphonic TV at a Waste Management site in San Leandro, Calif.

"The remote is not working, and the picture is not good. That is why we buy a new TV," Salvador said.

Salvador's TV set is transported from collector Waste Management to E-Recycling of California, in Hayward, south of Oakland. E-Recycling of California has pledged not to burn, dump, or export the waste, and for that reason it has received E-Stewards certification from the Basel Action Network, a watchdog group.

"We are actually dismantling it down into commodities...Everything's going at a commodity level on to be further recycled," Russ Caswell, manager at E-Recycling, explained. "A plastic-based television (is) 100 percent (recyclable). About the only thing on any television that doesn't always get totally recycled or reused would be a wooden case from an old console TV."

Ivan Tego of E-Recycling of California dismantles an analog TV.

(Credit: Erik Palm/CNET)

So what can you do to avoid contributing to the wave of electronic waste from the digital transition?

First, Greenpeace says, consider whether you really need a new TV. A digital converter box, subsidized by the government, can keep your old TV alive a few more years. Alternatively, the TV could continue its useful life for a while longer if you donate it to a charitable organization--the Environmental Protection Agency lists a number that will take the devices.

If you do decide to recycle the old TV, first go to the TV manufacturer's Web site for recycling information. (PC makers and retailers also offer recycling programs.) If you head to a recycling facility, make sure that the recycler has E-Stewards certification.

More information on recycling from EPA can be found here.

(Credit: Pike Research)

The contribution to landfills from electronics will actually escalate until about 2015, but good news will follow, according to a report released Wednesday by Pike Research.

So-called e-waste will reach a global volume of 73 million metric tons by 2015, then begin to decline in the years following as recycling initiatives and practices catch up to the rate of the production of electronic goods, according to the report called "Electronics Recycling and E-Waste Issues."

The prediction is the firm's own forecast based on the premise that companies and governments worldwide will continue and expand current recycling programs and initiatives--a practice Pike Research said will likely continue now that public awareness of the effects of e-waste dumping have been brought to light.

The report found that the efforts of nonprofit groups and the media to expose the effects of e-waste dumping have influenced original equipment manufacturers and recyclers worldwide to make an effort to clean up their act.

Pike Research touted the following companies as responsible leaders when it comes to recycling e-waste: Cisco, Dell, HP, Motorola, Nokia, Research In Motion, Sprint Nextel, and Vodafone.

It blamed low consumer effort to recycle old stuff as part of the problem, as well the dumping of e-waste in developing countries.

"Consumers have few incentives to reuse or recycle used electronics equipment. In most countries, it is still too easy and relatively inexpensive to throw e-waste in the trash. An optimistic estimate of average recycle rates is about 15 percent. Inconsistent legislation, minimal controls on the recyclers, and little enforcement has also led to widespread and inappropriate dumping of e-waste in developing countries," the report said.

WASHINGTON--If Congress can't figure out what to do with its old computers, members of the House of Representatives rationalized Wednesday, it's unlikely anyone else can.

Electronic recycling programs have been conspicuously unsuccessful, prompting the House Science and Technology Committee to draft a bill to fund grants for higher education programs related to e-waste management, as well as grants for research and development to find ways to better manage e-waste through product design, reuse, and recycling.

At a hearing Wednesday to review the initial draft of the bill, the legislators admitted they were not even sure what to do with their own used electronics and are unhappy with the way Congress disposes of its official electronic equipment.

"I've got a couple (computers) in my attic, and I keep worrying about them being there," said Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.).

"What do I do with them?" she asked the expert witnesses at the hearing. "Do I just take them to a recycling center?"

Witnesses at a hearing Wednesday discussed the merits of an e-waste bill being drafted by the House Science and Technology Committee.

(Credit: Stephanie Condon/CNET Networks)

Biggert is hardly alone in her confusion. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that, at best, only about 18 percent of electronic waste is recycled, pointed out Valerie Thomas, a professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology's School of Industrial and Systems Engineering.

"Products need to be designed for recycling, and collection programs need to be very easy," Thomas said.

While electronic recycling and reuse programs have proven to be difficult for individuals to understand, some congressmen said the House protocol for disposing of old computers is also flawed.

Currently, once a computer from the House of Representatives no longer meets the House's standards like hard drive or processing speed requirements, it is required to be scrubbed of information and turned over to the U.S. General Services Administration. Congressmen are prohibited from selling the computers to staffers, donating them, or doing anything else with them.

"It's ludicrous we can't give our computers to local educational organizations," said Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.).

Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation in January to permit congressmen to donate used computer equipment to public elementary and secondary schools.

While Baird applauded Serrano's legislation, he admitted he was hesitant to donate or recycle his personal computer out of concern over the data that may be left on the machine.

"I don't know what's on them, but I don't want somebody else to find out what's on them," he said. "I paid more money for a system that works less well, and now I can't recycle my old (computer). That's pretty stupid."

A lack of confidence in reuse programs is a fundamental problem with e-waste, said Willie Cade, CEO of PC Rebuilders and Recyclers, a Chicago-based refurbishing company.

"We need people to be able to feel safe about getting rid of their equipment," Cade said. "Once that happens, they'll start bringing their equipment out."

He said that the computers brought to his facility are on average just over 10 years old, suggesting that consumers hang on to old equipment for some time--and that recyclers will have to deal with machines built out of the current toxic materials in use for some time.

However, future computer models could be built out of more sustainable, easily recycled materials, the witnesses said. The draft legislation the committee is considering could fund research for sustainable design frameworks.

"These are design challenges, and by taking on the basic research with a sustainability framework, we can change this equation," said Paul Anastas, director of the Center for Green Chemistry and Green Engineering at Yale. "(Companies) could meet environmental and economic goals simultaneously."

One of the provisions of the draft bill would provide funding for consortiums of at least one nonprofit entity and at least one for-profit entity. Gordon said one of the main points of the legislation is to encourage the electronics industry to contribute to e-recycling efforts.

While the draft does not yet suggest how much money should be appropriated to the new grant programs it would create, it says that the for-profit entities involved in the consortiums would have to contribute at least 10 percent of the total R&D costs.

In Sunday's 60 Minutes, the CBS TV news magazine examines the lucrative but shadowy business of mining e-waste--junked computers, televisions, and other old electronic products--for valuable components, including gold. However, often illegal and hazardous activity creates toxic pollution, which in turn leads to brain damage, kidney disease, cancers, and mutations. In the segment, correspondent Scott Pelley examines the ethics of the recycling industry. (For the full 60 Minutes segment, see "The Electronic Wasteland.")

In the first clip, Pelley takes a tour of Denver electronic waste recycling company GRX, a member of "E-Stewards." The stringent program is run by the Basel Action Network, a watchdog group that certifies ethical recyclers that do not ship their toxic materials overseas.

In the second clip, the 60 Minutes crew chronicles piles of electronics blanketing the Chinese countryside waiting to be recycled. E-waste workers in Guiyu, China, where Pelley's team videotaped, put up with the dangerous conditions for the $8 a day the job pays.

In the third clip, scientists discuss e-waste, the fastest-growing component of the municipal waste stream worldwide, and the impact it has on those whose lives depend on it. The toxic pollution from black market recycling leads to brain damage, kidney disease, cancers, and mutations.

In the fourth clip, Pelley and his crew are attacked and threatened with violence by area gangsters overseeing the e-waste operations who tried to take the CBS team's cameras. The smugglers were trying to protect the lucrative business of mining e-wasted. However, Pelley's crew managed to escape and bring back footage of the hazardous activities.

When 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley and his crew went to China to record the black market dismantling of electronic waste, or e-waste, the experience was almost as hazardous for the 60 Minutes team as working with the toxic material is for poor Chinese workers.

Jumped by a gang of men overseeing the e-waste operations who tried to take the CBS team's cameras, Pelley's crew managed to escape and bring back footage of the hazardous activities. Pelley's investigation will be broadcast this Sunday, Nov. 9, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

The Chinese attackers were trying to protect a lucrative business of mining the e-waste -- junked computers, televisions and other old electronic products -- for valuable components, including gold. "They're afraid of being found out. This is smuggling. This is illegal," says Jim Puckett, founder of the Basel Action Network, a group working to stop the dumping of toxic materials in poor countries that certifies ethical e-waste recyclers in the United States. "A lot of people are turning a blind eye here. And if somebody makes enough noise, they're afraid this is all going to dry up."

E-waste workers in Guiyu, China, where Pelley's team videotaped, put up with the dangerous conditions for the $8 a day the job pays. They use caustic chemicals and burn the plastic parts to get at the valuable components, often releasing toxins that they not only inhale, but release into the air, the ground and the water. Potable water must now be trucked into Guiyu and scientists have discovered that the city has the highest levels of cancer-causing dioxins in the world. Pregnancies in Guiyu are six times more likely to result in miscarriages, and seven out of 10 children there have too much lead in their blood.

Calls for safe disposal and recycling of electronics are growing louder in the United States.

This week, the international environmental group Greenpeace issued a report detailing the massive flow of electronic waste, or e-waste, to the west African country of Ghana. There, much like in China and India, unprotected workers including children are exposed to hazardous chemicals like mercury and lead while burning electronics in the search for copper and aluminum to resell.

Greenpeace urged the largest electronics manufacturers including Philips and Sharp to phase out toxic chemicals and introduce global recycling programs to tackle the problem.

Congress also appears headed toward introducing new e-waste legislation. Last week, U.S. Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas), the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials, introduced a resolution that calls for the United States to ban the export of toxic e-waste to developing nations. The resolution, met with some initial praise, could signal groundswell support for government regulation in 2009, industry watchers say.

Why all the momentum, even though it's been an issue for years? Environmental advocates say that e-waste is getting harder and harder to ignore because of consumers' increasing appetite for new TVs, iPods and laptops--and the ever-shrinking lifespan of those electronics. (Americans alone own an estimated 3 billion gadgets.)

Even though consumer electronics comprise about 2 percent of the municipal solid waste stream, environmental groups say that that percentage is rising. From 1998 to 2005, just the amount of computers that became obsolete annually in the United States jumped from an estimated 20 million in 1998 to as much as 37 million in 2005, according to a July report from the Environmental Protection Agency.

(Credit: Environmental Protection Agency)

That same report showed that of the 2.25 million tons of e-waste generated in the form of old TVs, cell phones, and computer products in the last two years, as much as 82 percent went into landfills. Eighteen percent was collected for recycling.

(The U.S. Government Accountability Office plans to issue a report in the fall on the estimated amount of e-waste generated in the United States.)

Much of that waste is going overseas to undeveloped nations, according to environmental advocates. The hazard is that electronics can contain toxins like mercury, lead, and brominated flame retardants that when broken down, pollute the environment and pose health risks to the unprotected workers exposed to them. Research has even shown that lead from e-waste exported by the United States has come back from China in lead-contaminated children's toys.

One of the biggest e-waste concerns involves the U.S.'s upcoming conversion from analog TV signals to digital in February 2009. Industry watchers estimate that this year alone, people will buy 32 million digital televisions, instead of a converter box to make the switch. The old TVs will either go into storage or get dumped.

Older CRT (cathode ray tube) TV sets can contain more than 4 pounds of lead each. Even newer flat panel TVs can contain high levels of mercury.

Barbara Kyle, national coordinator for the nonprofit Electronics TakeBack Coalition, said that even when people hand their televisions over to a recycler at a local Earth Day event, they can end up unwittingly sending those devices overseas. She said very few third-party recyclers will take care to dispose of materials properly.

That's why Kyle's group has asked that more U.S. manufacturers of electronics offer free national take-back programs. Sony is one of the only TV makers that lets consumers drop off old products at a local center. It has also said that in congressional testimony that the company prohibits "the exportation of hazardous waste to developing countries."

Last week, Zenith maker LG Electronics joined Sony by introducing a free recycling program in the United States for its old televisions and electronics. LG plans to provide consumers with at least one drop-off site in each state by September.

States such as Texas have also instituted free recycling programs for electronics on a state-wide level. The EPA report said that such programs may have helped raise the recycling rate for electronics from 15 percent from 1999 to 2005 to 18 percent in the last two years.

Still, Green wants the EPA to join in an effort to do more. "The EPA regulates exports of 'hazardous waste' to protect health and the environment, but it imposes little to no regulation on exporting e-waste," Green said in a statement. "If the EPA cannot or will not act to halt the toxic e-waste trade to developing nations, then Congress should take action."

These recovered balls of recyclables at the Davis Street Transfer Center in San Leandro, Calif., will likely end up in China.

(Credit: Hanna Sistek/CNET News)

Ever since I came to the United States from my native Europe, I have been curious about the country's recycling practices. What happens to the mess of old newspapers, plastic boxes, food cans, and wine bottles that piles up each week? (Back home, we have to arrange it all neatly in separate containers.)

I got the answer when I visited the Davis Street Transfer Center, a waste management center in San Leandro, Calif. Here is a photo gallery showing how that facility sorts through those messy heaps.

I was surprised to find out that, after being sorted at the center, a large portion of recyclables ends up in other parts of the world. They are simply handled as commodities, and prices are set by the global market. The rising price of crude oil has, for instance, boosted the value of plastic waste, which is made of oil.

"We sell to the highest bidder for most materials," said Rebecca Jewell, a recycling manager at Davis Street. "This includes plastics, paper, and cardboard. In most cases, the highest bidder is one Chinese company or another."

According to Jewell, the recovery system at Davis Street is advanced enough to produce stacks of tossed-out material, 98 percent of which are PET (polyethylene terephthalate) plastics, which are popular in China. Other waste stations with less sophisticated sorting lines might sell recyclables to countries with lower demands on purity, like India or Bangladesh, she explained.

Shipping it overseas
It is very common for Western countries to ship their recyclables overseas to be processed and turned into new materials. But the byproducts of the recycling process can be devastating to local environments. (This Sky News video report features a city in China that's home to a major recycling center and is dealing with toxic pollution. And this video, made by Northern California Recycling Association, also confronts the effects of shipping waste overseas.)

Electronic waste is even worse. Each year, millions of pounds of electronic waste, or e-waste, are generated in the United States, and an estimated 50 percent to 80 percent of what gets collected is exported to other countries, according to the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. Check out their report "Exporting Harm" (PDF).

The tricky thing about e-waste--such as computers, televisions, and mobile phones--is that it often contains toxic elements and is very labor-intensive to recycle. If simply buried in landfills, the toxins will eventually trickle down into the ground, potentially getting into groundwater or otherwise causing environmental problems. Exporting e-waste to poor countries only moves the problem offshore. Also problematic is the fact that, in many cases, centers in other countries have lower worker safety standards than would be required of a center in the U.S.

So where does the e-waste end up? Here are some known and suspected global destinations, according to the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. According to the coalition, 500 shipping containers with used computers reach Nigeria every month, cumulatively representing about 400,000 computers and monitors.

The lack of e-waste recycling systems is "the worst global example of waste mismanagement," according to the Basel Action Network. Its 2005 report (PDF) examines the effects of e-waste dumps in Africa.

In the rest of the world, toxic trade to developing countries is prevented by the Basel Convention, which the U.S. has signed but not ratified.

Less formal campaigns, such as the Take Back My TV Campaign, show an increased interest among consumers.

Europe has tougher standards, like the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment directive, which forces producers to take back a variety of household appliances, including electronics. Another directive, Restriction on the use of certain Hazardous Substances, requires manufacturers to phase out hazardous substances in their products.