Cade Tyrell

PHIL2300
30 April 2019
My Environmental Justice Issue: E-Waste

Can you remember what you’ve done with old technology? What happens to all
the outdated TV’s, smartphones, appliances, and computers we once used? You might
not know - they could still be in your home, at a recycling center, or thrown away with
regular trash. In America, we are replacing our electronics faster than ever to have the
next best thing. As a consequence of this growth, combined with rapid product
replacement cycles, planned obsolescence and lower costs, discarded electronic and
electrical equipment more well known as ‘e-waste’ is now one of the world’s most
rapidly growing waste problems.

The massive growth in the number of electronics produced has increased the
need for resources, such as precious metals, which are necessary for electronics to
work. Continued increasing demand has put a stress on the environment for mining
extraction. The rise in electronics consumption significantly increases the amount of
new materials required as time goes on due to consumer trends and inadequate
recycling. For example, There are dozens of of metals (copper, gold, platinum, silver
and tungsten, rare earths), minerals and compounds (plastics/ceramics) inside every
phone. To make a smartphone, manufacturers need a lot more material than you end
up with in your hand—200 times more (Elsevier Science Inc).

Consumption of the latest and greatest electronic technology has become much
more widespread with the internet, planned obsolescence, industry trends, etc, but
those of a high-income residing in developed countries often contribute most to
sustaining the market. Thus, those in well-off communities have the newest gadgets
and are always on top of the latest and greatest technological comforts. But where does
all of their old stuff go? Certainly not in their clean cities. It either is disposed of
improperly into the environment or shipped to disenfranchised people in
underdeveloped nations - this is clearly an environmental justice issue!
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019
Recycling has become commonplace in the way we dispose of garbage in the
US. One limitation is that its infrastructure cannot support an influx of e-waste through
the same collection. Consumers and businesses are left to figure out their own solutions
to dispose of e-waste. In fact, 20-50 million tons of e-waste are generated yearly,
worldwide (Elsevier Science Inc). According to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, almost 2.4 million tons of electronics were disposed of in 2009, an increase of
more than 120 percent from 1999 (Shultz). Of this amount, 29% was recycled (2012
EPA findings).

Electronics that are not recycled go to the landfill or are incinerated (~70%).
Once in a landfill, toxic materials seep out into the environment and start contaminating
land, water, and the air (UN University par. 3).​ Much of the e-waste that was
“recycled” in the past has been sent to developing/poor countries.​ Although it is
legal to export discarded goods to poor countries if they can be reused or refurbished,
much is being sent to Africa or Asia under false pretences. Companies that recycle
e-waste will send large quantities of e-waste to these areas as a “donation” of “used
goods” when the electronics are actually non-functional (The Guardian). The primary
reason for this is to avoid the costs of legitimate recycling domestically.

Many developing countries that receive e-waste from wealthy countries lack the
technology, facilities, and resources needed to properly recycle and dispose of e-waste
(WHO). We send waste to lesser developed countries because the labor is cheaper and
there are fewer strict government regulations and environmental protections for
processing electronics in these areas. This is where this issue turns into environmental
racism. As Robert Bullard defined it as, “Any policy, practice, or directive that
differentially affects or disadvantages, whether intentional or unintended, groups or
communities based on race”. The result of our decisions to offload the e-waste onto low
income minorities in impoverished countries leads to “informal” recycling, taken up by
poor individuals and family businesses without any protection or education regarding
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019
the effect of toxic fumes released when disassembling, crushing, or burning electronics.
Informal workers oftentimes must melt plastics to separate them from metals and
“wash” cables in acid baths, dissolving the plastics and revealing precious metals.
These practices release toxic fumes. They are willing to work in these jobs because it is
the best money they can earn, and are so desperate to create a life for themselves &
their families that they will risk harm to themselves and the environment.

The most well-known case informal e-waste recycling is in the city of Guiyu,
China. Men, women, and children in small shops and homes across the open
countryside dismantle e-waste from the developed world, with the goal of reducing it to
its smallest components. The recyclers here are most often impoverished migrant
laborers and their children, so they take the risk of working with the e-waste because
they make more money this way (although it is very small, only a few US dollars per
day). Guiyu’s soil, water, air and people are paying a high price for their informal
techniques. Professor Huo Xia of the Shantou University Medical College tested 165
Guiyu children for concentrations of lead in their blood. Eighty two percent of the kids
had blood/lead levels of over 100, which is considered unsafe by international health
experts. The average reading for the group was 149. High levels of lead in young
children can impact IQ and the development of the central nervous system. The highest
concentrations of lead were found in the children of parents whose workshop dealt with
circuit boards. Processors of circuit boards usually have to melt it down in order to
recover metals, which releases toxins into the air.

The air in Guiyu used to be so bad that it would cause discomfort to breathe just
walking around town, with a strong stench of burning plastic, rubber and paint.
Research regarding the health effects are limited, with the World Health Organization as
the main contributor. Studies have shown changes in lung function, thyroid function,
hormone expression, birth weight, birth outcomes, childhood growth rates, mental
health, cognitive development, cytotoxicity, and genotoxicity. It is also possible that
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019
exposure to hazardous chemicals produced by e-waste recycling may have
carcinogenic effects and endocrine disrupting properties that could lead to lifelong
changes due to neurodevelopment anomalies, abnormal reproductive development,
intellectual impairment, and attention difficulties (WHO). In 2018, China is making an
effort to clean up the pollution in Guiyu. All the E-waste recycling has been moved to an
industrial park where it is isolated. China also began banning imports of specific types of
waste, implementing regulations on recyclers as well as controlling industrial locations.
Guiyu no longer processes e-waste from the US, only electronics from mainland China
as part of the new regulation. This has seen to be a major improvement in public &
environmental health, a win for environmental justice, although not as profitable for
workers as before (Reuters). The air is not half as bad as it was 5 years ago and the
rivers are no longer jet-black. China’s new regulation has pushed the US, Australia,
Japan, and EU to develop new recycling systems or throw all e-waste into landfills.

Proper recycling is essential to the success of reusing materials. Sometimes,

when e-waste is shipped to other lesser developed countries, health of the workers and
environment is not considered. Safe disposal is important because many electronics
contain metals and compounds that are harmful when exposed to humans and the
environment.​ If we continue producing electronics, there must be a way for them
to be disposed of that is safe for the future.​ Electronic devices are very complex and
often have hundreds of parts. A mobile phone, for example, contains about 500 to 1,000
components (GreenPeace). Many personal electronics contain toxic heavy metals such
as lead, mercury, nickel, chromium, cadmium and beryllium, as well as hazardous
chemicals, such as brominated flame retardants. Polluting PVC plastic is also frequently
used (GreenPeace). “Of particular concern is the exposure of children and pregnant
women to lead and mercury. These metals are highly toxic and can harm children and
developing fetuses even at low levels of exposure” (GreenPeace Toxic Tech Report).
Many of the metals, plastic, and glass used in electronics can be recovered through
safe recycling. Metals are especially important because they can be recycled over and
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019
over. Composition of plastics are changed when formed which limits the amount of
reusability it has after one more use.

E-waste is an issue that will continue to plague our society for many decades to
come. The boom in personal electronics has led to an increasing abundance of
electronics that are at the end of their “usable life”. Until recently, most of the e-waste in
the US was sent to countries like China. The restriction of sending e-waste to lesser
developed areas for recycling has promoted other solutions, such as better sourcing
and processing through urban mining. Consumers often are unaware of the risks that
e-waste bring into the environment when disposed of in a landfill or in unsafe recycling.
The number one motto for consumers to follow are the three R’s: Reduce (don’t buy
unnecessary products) Reuse (don’t throw away something because it’s broken, repair
it first or find another use for it) and Recycle (electronics are harmful to the environment:
land, water, and soil is impacted by e-waste in landfills - 3 resources humans depend on
for survival).

E-waste’s profound impact on the environment must not be ignored as we

continue buying new technology and work towards solutions for e-waste. Urban mining
is very successful in recovering precious material from e-waste, but consumers seem to
need a incentive to recycle their old electronics separately. ​I stress the need for
federal and state cooperation regarding e-waste, recycling, and organic matter
composting programs. ​Currently, individual states are left to choose if they even want
to recycle e-waste at all. Considering the detrimental effects e-waste has had on the
people and natural areas in countries we send it to, it is imperative to bring visibility
towards this issue in hopes that consumers see the benefits of recycling before it’s too
late. Negative impacts such as the depletion of a precious metal or e-waste toxins
present in the biotic community from improper disposal will be first to show up in
developed areas. The safety of human life is at stake here, and those hit first and worst
by our consumer driven western ideals do not deserve to have the burdens dumped on
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019
them. Careful planning and reduction of consumption can help alleviate stress on
resources & reduce humans’ impact on the ground we walk on, providing lasting
benefits for future generations. Corporate/Government action combined with public
education/participatory action is urgently needed!
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019
Works Cited

Ahmed, Syed Faraz. “The Global Cost of Electronic Waste.” ​The Atlantic​, The Atlantic
Monthly Group, 29 Sept. 2016,
www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/the-global-cost-of-electronic-wa
ste/502019/​.

“Electronic Waste.” ​World Health Organization,​ WHO, 15 Aug. 2017,

www.who.int/ceh/risks/ewaste/en/​.

“Electronic Waste.” ​Toxics Link | for a Toxics-Free World,​ Toxicslink.org, 2018,

www.toxicslink.org/?q=content/electronic-waste​.

Facts and Figures on E-Waste and Recycling.​ Electronics TakeBack Coalition, 25 June
2014,
www.electronicstakeback.com/wp-content/uploads/Facts_and_Figures_on_EWa
ste_and_Recycling.pdf​.

“Hazardous Chemicals in Electronic Devices.” ​Greenpeace International​,

www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/campaigns/toxics/science/chemicals-electronics/​.

Nield, David. “Our Smartphone Addiction Is Costing the Earth.” ​TechRadar,​ Future
Publishing Limited Quay House, 4 Aug. 2015,
www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/our-smart
phone-addiction-is-costing-the-earth-1299378​.

Perkins, Devin N, et al. “E-Waste: A Global Hazard.” ​Science Direct,​ Elsevier Academic
Press, 25 Nov. 2014,
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214999614003208​.

Pinto, Violet N. “E-Waste Hazard: The Impending Challenge.” ​US National Library of
Medicine National Institutes of Health Search,​ Medknow Publications, 12 Aug.
2008, Accessed 29 April. 2019. ​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2796756

Schultz, Jennifer. “ELECTRONIC WASTE RECYCLING.” ​National Conference of State

Legislatures​, NCSL, 14 Mar. 2018,
www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/e-waste-recycling-legi
slation.aspx​.
Cade Tyrell
PHIL2300
30 April 2019

Stanway, David. “China Trash Town's Cleanup Bolstered by Import Ban.” ​Reuters,​
Thomson Reuters, 24 Jan. 2018,
www.reuters.com/article/us-china-environment-waste-insight/china-trash-towns-cl
eanup-bolstered-by-import-ban-idUSKBN1FD043​.

Vidal, John. “Toxic E-Waste Dumped in Poor Nations, Says United Nations.” ​Our World
UNU,​ The Guardian, 16 Dec. 2013,
www.ourworld.unu.edu/en/toxic-e-waste-dumped-in-poor-nations-says-united-nat
ions​.

“What Is E-Waste?” ​CA.gov,​ California Department of Resources Recycling and

Recovery , 23 Oct. 2018,
https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Electronics/WhatisEwaste/

“What Is the Growth Rate of the Electronics Sector?” ​Investopedia.com​, Investopedia

LLC, 20 Sept. 2018,
www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052515/what-growth-rate-electronics-sector.
asp​.

Woollacott, Emma. “E-Waste Mining Could Be Big Business - and Good for the Planet.”
BBC News,​ BBC, 6 July 2018, ​www.bbc.com/news/business-44642176​.