<< back to table of contents

Get Involved: The Cost of Progress (by Mark Cavdar)

Not two decades ago, a personal computer in the average home was a novel commodity, a clear symbol of status and technological distinction. The computer was mostly merited on its ability to simplify computation in the work place, and even the most forward-thinking analyst couldn’t have predicted the computer’s integration and eventual assimilation of our cultural and social identities. 

Technology has made leaps and bounds in terms of progress over the past decade; the advent of mass production has driven the price of personal computers down to startling lows. Digital cameras are quickly replacing their traditional disposal film counterparts. The masses no longer flock to their local video stores to rent videos, but rather opt for the clearer picture quality of a DVD. Newer, sleeker and more functional models of computers, monitors, mobile phones, cameras and PDAs offer consumers more bells, whistles, gloss and functionality for their dollar. 

But with all this continual progress, what becomes of the older models, the now obsolete technological trailblazers of their day? Where do the Commodores of yore retire after their moment in the sun? The continuing technological progress that major developed nations are enjoying comes with a very dire set of consequences.

Unlike human beings, old computers and outdated pieces of electronic equipment do not simply pass on silently into the night. They require proper disposal, and are often salvaged and recycled for base materials. With more and more companies on the cusp of technological innovation also fighting the subsequent swell of their bottom line, this costly process is often outsourced to less developed nations. And why not? The evolution of the international market into a global economy permits companies to take advantage of cheaper labour in third-world and underdeveloped nations. Why should a company squander valuable domestic resources when such a cost-efficient and seemingly legal alternative is available at their disposal? 

The outdated and unused electronic equipment, capriciously dubbed e-waste by environmentalists and activists alike, is causing a huge problem. Last year, the United Kingdom disposed of nearly 1 million tons of e-waste. 23,000 tons of this outdated IT and electronic equipment was shipped out illegally, with China, India, West Africa and Pakistan receiving the brunt of this waste. 

The fact that companies are opting out of proper domestic handling of e-waste shouldn’t discount the necessity and beneficial nature of recycling. In your average desktop PC one will find valuable quantities of plastic, lead, silica, aluminum, iron, copper, nickel, zinc, tin and even miniscule traces of gold. Retired desktop PCs are a treasure trove of raw materials that simply need reprocessing. A legitimate industry is aching to be exploited with the sudden need for e-waste disposal. Sadly, the current methods many companies are employing in the disposal of their outdated IT and electronics is dumping by any other name.

What exactly makes the technology of today (and more at the forefront of this issue, the technology of yesterday) function? What is found within those desktop or handheld units that we so gamely exploit and take for granted? And can their contents really be that harmful for the environment? More importantly, what effects do they have on human beings – those unfortunate individuals who find work in the e-waste industry?

The sudden influx of e-waste poses both an environmental hazard and an occupational risk to those unfortunate workers charged with the task of disassembly. The town of Guiyu, some 200 miles northeast of Hong Kong, is an example of one of the first casualties of the improper recycling practices of e-waste. Not five years ago, Guiyu was a peacefully generic rice village nestled in the heartland of rural China. This was before the tons of e-waste started arriving in Guiyu. Serving as one of the larger hubs for e-waste processing, Guiyu is home to almost 100,000 migrant workers who break down and reprocess obsolete computers from all over the globe. Men, women and children all partake in the practice, which encompasses such hazardous processes that include the open burning of plastics and wires, the use of acid to extract gold, the melting of toxic circuit boards and the cracking and dumping of toxic lead-laden cathode ray tubes. 

While several beneficial components can be mined out of e-waste, traces of Beryllium, Cadmium, Barium, Mercury are found right alongside them, posing a serious health hazard to those whose job it is to reprocess e-waste. The water in Guiyu is polluted now, most likely on account of all the chemical fall-out the soil is forced to absorb. Without proper job training, these migrant labourers work closely with corrosive and ultimately harmful chemical elements. Their provided protection? Nothing more than dollar-store rubber gloves and boots. Unskilled and unnecessary, one can only imagine how long it would take to replace a worker who injures himself in the breaking down of our technological artifacts. 

Corporations are merely fuelling the rampant accumulation of e-waste. Exploiting loopholes in international trade policies, companies in the European Union have found legally sound means with which the dumping of their e-waste upon the third-world is completely acceptable. With the modern world of business rigorously implementing technological standards upon even the most obscure of businesses, companies are forced to stay on the cutting edge. Constant IT upgrades, a booming hardware industry and the constant evolution of technology are all pundits in the ever-growing heap of e-waste. As inherently unethical as it may seem, corporations have evaded the restraints of legislature, simply outsourcing all their old technological problems to an e-waste solution abroad. It is becoming an increasingly unreasonable request to make of corporations to develop a social conscience and consider more than simply reducing operating costs. It’s somewhat ironic that our technologies, originally developed with the intention of making life better, are now the source of so much harm.

The problem of e-waste will only worsen as technology continues to prosper. Every forward-moving step we take, we leave behind us a heap of outdated technology that will not simply disappear. It has to become the responsibilities of corporations to account for their progress. If the edge of technology is demanded as a precursor for doing business, then the proper disposal of outdated hardware should become one of the most predominant costs. Tighter legislation needs to be enacted that will force all hardware exports to be thoroughly tested and checked. It is unreasonable to ask corporations to calm down their consumption of technology; a more reasonable option is to ask corporations to become smart about it. Begin internal recycling drives; develop a program in underdeveloped regions that would put seemingly ancient technology to good use. Don’t simply dump! Even the oldest piece of IT was cutting edge at one point.

Sources

Pucket, Jim, et al. “Exporting Harm: Techno Trash to Asia.” California Resource Association. 25 February 2002. 1 October 2004. <http://www.crra.com/ewaste/ttrash2/ttrash2/>.

Vidal, John. “Poisonous detritus of the electronic revolution.” Guardian Unlimited. 21 September 2004. 1 October 2004. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/waste/story/0,12188,1309157,00.html>.

<< back to table of contents