Sources of Mercury You Can Do Something About – E-Waste

A Rapidly Growing Problem

Before you upgrade your computer, buy a new cell phone or indulge in that enormous HDTV, think twice. The current trend towards the shorter useful lifespan of electronic hardware with each generation of technological advances is creating a massive amount of waste and that waste is not always being handled responsibly. The average useful lifespan of a computer was once 5 years, but that lifespan is now down to about 2 years. Electronic waste can contain lead, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and mercury along with a host of other toxins so it is important that we all consider reusing, donating and recycling as part of our responsibility as owners and users of these products.

E-waste is defined as electronic waste and includes computers, televisions, cell phones, printers, PDAs, calculators, fax machines, DVD players, VCRs, radios, answering machines and similar products. The term EEE (electric and electronic equipment) overlaps with e-waste and includes larger appliances as well. While lead in e-waste has been much more carefully studied and the average amount of mercury per unit of e-waste may be “low” (2-10mg), the staggering demand for electronics worldwide makes mercury from e-waste a significant problem. In 1999, a report to the European Parliament estimated that 22% of mercury consumption worldwide is used in electronics.

In 2008, the EPA completed a study on e-waste in the United States and reported that in 2007, of the 2.25 million tons of televisions, cell phones and computers that were ready for end-of-life (EOL) management, only 18% were recycled and the remaining 82% were disposed of, primarily in landfills. Although EPA estimates that e-waste comprises only 2% of the municipal solid waste stream, e-waste is responsible for about 40% of the heavy metals in US landfills. There are currently no federal laws that require bulk e-waste recycling but 20 states and New York City have enacted their own programs and standards. For example, on October 23rd, Wisconsin passed a law prohibiting e-waste from being disposed of in landfills and requiring manufacturers to provide responsible disposal options.

When e-waste ends up in landfills, its toxins can leach into the surrounding soil, ground water and, in the case of mercury, some can vaporize into the air. Higher temperatures will hasten this process. In order to classify an item as hazardous or non-hazardous, the EPA has established testing called the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) to simulate what might happen as the waste decomposes in a municipal solid waste landfill. In the TCLP, 100 grams of the pulverized and homogenized material (for example a laptop) is mixed with one of several liquids and rotated for 18 hours. The resulting leachate is tested for chemical concentrations. If the leachate concentration exceeds 5mg/l for lead or 0.2mg/l for mercury, the item is considered hazardous waste (Townsend et al. 2004). The only item of e-waste which is currently regulated at the federal level is cathode ray tubes (CRTs) which are found in older computer monitors and televisions. An average CRT contains about 4 pounds of lead in its glass.
One question that has not been addressed by research is the impact on e-waste of the switch from CRTs to flat-screen LCD monitors. LCD monitors contain less lead than CRTs, but significantly more mercury, as the earlier and cheaper models use fluorescent lighting for their screens. Manufacturers have been moving towards reduced-mercury LCDs and, in some cases, mercury-free LCDs that use LED backlights. As with the issue of lighting, however, the LED monitors are more expensive than their fluorescent LCD cousins. In general, any item that has an LCD, particularly if it is inexpensive, is likely to contain some mercury. For those looking for a television, plasma technology is also mercury-free.

The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) estimates that about 4400 tons of e-waste is generated every hour worldwide. Internationally, this waste should fall under the BASEL Convention of 1989, an agreement with 172 signatory countries on the transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal. Katharina Kummer Peiry, executive secretary of the agreement, reported this week that the global stockpile of e-waste is “roughly six billion tonnes and it is growing exponentially”. The Basel Convention was designed to prevent “toxic colonialism” where developing countries are used as dumps for toxic waste from industrialized countries but there is still substantial illicit trade in hazardous waste that is not accounted for. E-waste did not exist as a significant waste stream in 1989 so the agreement is not tailored to the current situation. It does allow for electronics to be shipped across borders for reuse, recycling and refurbishing but there is little if any enforcement to ensure the end use of a product or how it is disposed of after its second life in a developing country. The United States is the only developed country that has not ratified the treaty.

One of the key concerns with e-waste being shipped abroad is that, with few exceptions, the recycling is done without the protections for the workers and the environment that we have in the United States. Often the disassembly and recycling are done in slums by workers who have no other source of income. The high cost of safe recycling and the lower labor costs overseas combine to provide major economic incentives to exporting our problem. Currently, the largest e-waste recycling districts are in Guiyu (China), Delhi and Bangalore (India), Karachi (Pakistan) and Accra (Ghana). In Guiyu, which is estimated to handle 70% of the world’s e-waste, there are around 7000 workshops employing more than 60,000 people. A study published in June (Yan Guo et al, 2009) found severe levels of contamination for lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic in sediment and surface water as a result of recycling operations. The extensive health effects on the workers and nearby residents are just starting to be studied.

The bottom line is that if we are going to use electronics, we all bear a responsibility to ensure that they do not impact the health of our environment or the health of others.

Take action

1. Consider whether you really need that new technology. Don’t buy items that you don’t have a true need for. Consider whether your home really needs the 20 electronic devices that a typical home has.
2. Buy brands of computers that are relatively “greener” to reduce the potential toxicity of your e-waste. The EPA has established a ranking system for total environmental impact of electronics called EPEAT – the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool to help consumers buy responsibly. Visit their website at www.epeat.net.
3. For equipment that is obsolete but still in working order, donate it. If it is too obsolete or broken and cannot be donated, make sure that it is properly recycled. Click here for a great list of options.  Another useful document is here — it gives lots of options for recycling along with a list of software to remove your personal information from your electronics before donating them.
4. Encourage your company, school or place of worship to be responsible with their e-waste. Let them know that it matters and why. For larger volumes of e-waste, contact an e-Steward. These companies have pledged to meet criteria based on international law and the e-Steward program will be independently audited starting in 2010.
5. Let your congressmen and senators know that you support legislation to limit the export of e-waste to developing countries.
6. Send this article to family and friends. Sixty-eight percent of US households have a stockpile of electronics waiting to be disposed of. They’ll appreciate the information.

Update on E-Waste Recycling

The Basel Action Network is launching a new program called E-Stewards to help consumers ensure that their e-waste is being properly disposed of. Consumers can look for companies that use the E-Stewards logo. The new program will compete with the R2 program, developed by manufacturers with the help of the EPA, which is less stringent in its standards of disposal.  For more details, read the New York Times article.