The Sustainable Electronics Initiative (SEI), hosted by the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), a unit of the Institute of Natural Resources Sustainability on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, is a consortium dedicated to the development and implementation of a more sustainable system for designing, producing, remanufacturing, and recycling electronic devices. Members of the consortium include academia, non-profit organizations, government agencies, manufacturers, designers, refurbishers, and recyclers. Specific elements of the SEI include programs for research, education, data management, and technical assistance. SEI conducts collaborative research; facilitates networking and information exchange among participants; promotes technology diffusion via demonstration projects; and provides forums for the discussion of policy and legislation.

Americans own nearly three billion electronic products and continually purchase new ones to replace those deemed “obsolete,” even though about two-thirds of the devices are still in working order. To address this burgeoning e-waste problem, SEI will hold the Electronics & Sustainability: Design for Energy & the Environment symposium on February 23 – 24, 2010 at the I Hotel on the University of Illinois campus. Topics to be addressed will include environmental toxicology, life cycle analysis, product design, existing and proposed policy (local, state, national, and international), and more. Designers; electrical engineers; chemists; materials scientists; electronics manufacturers, recyclers, refurbishers, and remanufacturers; government representatives and policy makers; pollution prevention technical assistance providers; relevant non-profit organizations; and others are invited to take part in this symposium.

SEI invites industry and academic practitioners to submit abstracts of their recent research, projects, and design thinking for presentation, publications, or both. Proposals can be made for symposium participation in one or more of the following categories: a paper, presentation, panel discussion, or poster display.

For more information about the symposium and/or to access the call for papers, visit: www.sustainelectronics.illinois.edu or contact Wayne Duke, Conference Coordinator, Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, One Hazelwood Drive, Champaign, Illinois 61820-7465, 217-333-5793, fax: 217-333-8944.

For more information about the Sustainable Electronics Initiative (SEI), contact Dr. Tim Lindsey, Associate Director, Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, One Hazelwood Drive, Champaign, Illinois 61820-7465, 217-333-8955, fax: 217-333-8944.

William Bullock is the Director of the Design for Energy and Environment Laboratory (DEE Lab,) an Affiliated Faculty Member for the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC,) and he has been my professor of industrial design at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign for the past two years. I sat down with him recently to get an experienced designer’s perspective on e-waste.  After all, designers are a vital part of the creation of e-waste; they can have a lot to do with the perpetuation or prevention of waste just by the decisions they make early on in the manufacturing stage.

Recently, I have noticed that most designers came to an unspoken consensus about design, it can not be about simply making more things; resources are limited, waste is ever increasing and our environment is suffering.  Sustainability is no longer just a good idea, it is a necessity.  This change came in the middle of William’s career and instead of reluctantly complying like some of his colleagues did, he embraced the idea of socially conscious design wholeheartedly.

William acknowledges that industrial design can be part of the problem.  Industrial designers create attractive newer looking products in an effort to stimulate sales.  This can encourage consumers to unnecessarily throw away products in favor of buying newer looking, often more “aesthetically pleasing” ones.  William also believes that we have the capability, as designers, to change that. William said, “We need to not only to deal with waste but also figure out how to reuse, recycle, design things so that they can be easily upgraded instead of thrown away all together.” He wondered if it is possible to find a universal aesthetic so that objects do not get dated as easily.

The positive side to designing superfluous products is that it sustains our economy. I asked William if he thinks it has to be one or the other; environmental concerns over economical ones.   He admitted that  is a challenge. “We are gluttonous” William explained, “so we might not only have the problem of having people buy new, but how do we make it so that when the old things are thrown out they do not harm the environment?”

William McDonough, a designer that recently spoke at the University of Illinois, has a lot of ideas that address this problem. For instance, he proposed a pen that you can stomp into the ground when you are finished with it and it would have the right nutrients and seed impeded in the pen to make it grow into a flower.  Ideas like these that do not discourage consumption but are also great for the environment is a trend that needs to be further exploited.

Another solution that William Bullock is focused on is providing information to the public because he believes that people are more apt to the right thing once they have the right information.  That is why he is working hard to set up initiatives that teach all there is to know about sustainability in product design.

For more information on William’s educational efforts, see the description of the sustainability and e-waste issues course he taught on the SEI Current Projects page.  The course had a Sustainable E-Waste Design Competition associated with it.  I spoke about both in an earlier post.

It is no secret that the climate is not in the best shape right now, to say the least; polar bears are almost endangered, CO2 levels are 35% higher than preindustrial times, and waste is collecting at ever increasing rates. If you’re not already helping, I’m sure you have wondered at least once how you can aid in mitigating this problem. Hosting an e-waste collection event might not be the first thing that pops into your head, but might I suggest that you consider it. E-waste events can be incredibly beneficial to the environment because they can help keep toxic chemicals from going where they are not supposed to and they can also help your neighbors get rid of some old stuff and maybe even some guilt from holding onto that old stuff.
There are a couple aspects to an e-waste collection event that you should consider to help ensure success. The first thing to do, and probably one of the most important aspects of the event, is making a connection with a credible recycling company. Things to look for in a good recycling company are that they first try to reuse as much equipment as possible before they scrap it. Also make sure they can ensure the absolute safety and protection of information in computers they receive. The recycler should be able to give you some sort of written confirmation saying that every hard drive received at the event will be wiped or taken apart in some way. It is important that you find out exactly what the recycler does with the equipment they receive, so ask questions. Even if the recycler has the equipment to disassemble the electronics on site, they probably still have to ship certain things away (like CRTs) so be sure to ask where that equipment goes. As I have mentioned in a previous post, certified “e-stewards” are companies that have committed to being responsible according to the “e-steward” criteria, so that could be a good place to start when you need a recycler, but there are also a number of other responsible recyclers not on that list.

As for the rest of the event, there are a few other things to consider. One is making sure that the police and town know what you are up to so that you can get their advice on traffic control and ask them what kind of a presence they wish to contribute. Another is picking a location. Of course you want to have something central and easy to get to but also factor in that there might be a lot of traffic backup so make sure there is enough space so cars can line up. Churches, parks, or school parking lots are usually a good option. Also make sure you have a truck to move the equipment and enough volunteers to help you manage the equipment. I suggest at least ten volunteers.

Another thing to consider is advertisement. Radio announcements, posters, ads, or telling a friend to tell their friends are all great ways to get the word out about your event. I suggest that you start a couple weeks in advance but really buckle down the week leading up to the event and advertise as much as possible. The demand to get rid of the equipment is out there, you just have to make your cause known.

Hilary Nixon, of the University of California, Irvine, has been studying the best ways to conduct a recycling event. She has performed surveys all around the state of California to look at how much people would pay to responsibly get rid of their e-waste, how far they would travel, and their willingness to give away their e-waste in general. According to her and her colleague’s findings, 63% of the people surveyed were willing to drop off their e-waste. So as long as you advertise sufficiently you should not have too much trouble getting the traffic you need to make the event worthwhile.

In your advertising make it clear what you are accepting or not accepting. For instance, some recyclers do not have the equipment to manage certain electronics like batteries or refrigerators, so you need to let people know what to bring or not bring ahead of time. Also make it very clear where, what day, and from what hours you will be hosting the event and sometimes it helps to let people know what you are doing with the equipment.

At the actual event you will need most of your volunteers taking the electronics out of cars so that people can get in and out of the event as quickly as possible. At a collection event I was recently involved in we also had about 4 or 5 people taking items from people in cars and about 2 others talking to the people dropping off their equipment. We asked them a couple simple questions to learn more about the problem of e-waste, like how far they came, what they had, and the reason they were getting rid of it. You cannot require that people answer these questions, but any information you get can be very helpful to recyclers or others in the field of e-waste management. At that past event we also performed on site hard drive erasing. I felt that this was especially reassuring to the people donating and it was helpful to have that completed early on.

Finally, the last piece of advice I have to give is that I think the difference between just a smooth event and a hugely successful event is food. In my experience, happy volunteers that are not hungry make for happy events overall.

Good luck with your endeavors and feel free to comment with any differences of opinion, questions, or experiences you care to share.

• Electronics Firms Fight State Recycling Programs – WSJ.com

  Wall Street Journal article by Ryan Knutson, 7/2/09. Small electronics makers are struggling with — and fighting against — new state laws mandating they pay for electronic recycling programs for consumers. Five companies, including ViewSonic Corp., CTX Technology Inc. and ToteVision Inc., are threatening litigation against Washington state’s new electronic waste law, which requires manufacturers to fund recycling and collection services for old TVs, personal computers and monitors. The companies argue the law, which took effect this year, charges them too much and improperly includes out-of-state businesses. Meanwhile, the Consumer Electronics Association, a trade group representing 2,000 electronics companies, is negotiating with the New York City officials to change a city ordinance that would require electronics companies to pick up old gadgets door-to-door. The CEA says the ordinance, scheduled to take effect July 31, would cost the industry $200 million annually.

  tags: computers, legislation, e-waste, electronic waste, ETBC, ewaste, hazardous waste, icare, industry, manufacturing, p2, p2tagteam, policy, pollutionprevention, product stewardship, recycling, regulatory integration, takeback, technology, waste

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

7-3-09
by Amy Cade

This week’s topic for discussion is about the health impacts of electronic components/waste. I have decided to approach this topic in a roundabout way. Stay tuned for a comprehensive summary of articles that discuss the affects of lead and mercury when they are exposed through open burnings of electronic parts. But this week I would like to highlight websites that offer information to consumers about how to donate or responsibly recycle old electronics from the beginning.

Probably one of the most comprehensive websites about finding recyclers is the EPA’s page entitled, “Where can I Donate or Recycle My Old Computer and Other Electronic Products?” This provides an extensive list of recyclers and recycling programs by manufacturers.

The “e-Steward” program is a voluntary certification program that recyclers can apply for. If you donate your computer to a recycler that is e-Steward certified, you are guaranteed responsible recycling. One way the e-Steward program ensures this is by promising that your electronics will not be exported because exportation of waste can often result in the waste being handled or recycled in ways that are detrimental to the environment and human health.  A complete list of e-Stewards can be found on the Electronics TakeBack Coalition website or at http://www.e-stewards.org/local_estewards.html

Another site offering information on where to give your old electronics is the PCMAG.com Electronics Recycling Superguide. This offers a list of manufacturer recycling programs, as well as explanations and benefits of those programs.  (Note the manufacturer list begins here; use the links on the left side of the online article to access various portions of the alphabetical manufacturer list.)

Some programs are easier to use than others. In Illinois, for example, Panasonic’s collection program offers a large number of collection centers and will take back any type of brand.

Editor of Dealnews.com, Louis Ramirez, suggests the HP and Gateway programs are two of the best manufacturing trade-in programs for consumers because they tend to offer the most money back.

The PCMAG article  also offers a list of retailers that offer take-bake programs.

Finally, PCMAG.com includes a list of web-sites that offer cash for your electronics. Gazelle, for instance, offers free shipping of your item and will pay you $115 for your electronics on average.

I have also found databases that include recyclers which are not on the websites listed above. These databases are:

www.electronicsrecycling.org and

www.reconnectpartnership.com .

(Please note that this post is intended for information purposes only and is not meant to be construed as an endorsement of any electronic recycling website or any affiliated organization.)

I would like to invite readers to submit information on any recycling/donation resource not covered in this post in the “Comments” section below.

According to the U.S. EPA web site, “The Design for the Environment (DfE) Program works in partnership with a broad range of stakeholders to reduce risk to people and the environment by preventing pollution. DfE focuses on industries that combine the potential for chemical risk reduction and improvements in energy efficiency with a strong motivation to make lasting, positive changes. DfE convenes partners, including industry representatives and environmental groups, to develop goals and guide the work of the partnership. Partnership projects evaluate the human health and environmental considerations, performance, and cost of traditional and alternative technologies, materials, and processes. As incentives for participation and driving change, DfE offers unique technical tools, methodologies, and expertise.”

The DfE Program has produced several partnership projects related to electronics. Past projects include the Printed Wiring Board Partnership and the Computer Display Partnership. Current partnerships include the Lead-Free Solder Partnership, the Wire & Cable Partnership and the Flame Retardants in Printed Circuit Boards Partnership. Each project site includes general project information, project milestones, links to any publications produced and a list of the partners involved.

The comment period for the draft report, Partnership to Evaluate Flame Retardants in Printed Circuit Boards, has ended. This report contains a summary of the environmental and human health attributes of selected flame retardants used in printed circuit board; the Flame Retardants partnership is currently working on reviewing the comments it received. The draft version of that document (not for distribution or citation) can be accessed on the Flame Retardant in Printed Circuit Boards Partnership site.

All of the other partnerships mentioned above have final fact sheets and technical reports (including Life Cycle Analyses in some cases) available on the specific partnership page or on the main DfE Publications list.

For more information on the Design for Environment Program, visit the program web site.

E-Waste is more relevant an issue than ever in this country. The switch from analog to digital cable two weeks ago and Governor Rick Perry’s (Texas) veto of the extended producer responsibility bill (HB 821) one week ago made for a lot of recent discussion about what to do with those old television sets. Massachusetts, Georgia, Missouri, and Oklahoma, among others, reported on solutions to the problem of left-over TVs. Willie Cade of PC Rebuilders and Recyclers says in a report by NBC Chicago that Illinoisans should hold on to their old television sets until next year Jan. 1st, when the extended producer responsibility act for Illinois is enacted. Many are shocked and saddened that Texas won’t have that option due to Governor Perry’s veto. You can view the reasons for the veto according to the governor’s office at: http://governor.state.tx.us/news/veto/12608. The reason for the shock is that the extended produced responsibility is already very popular among many other states.  It can encourage manufacturers to design with the product’s end of life in mind so that they, the manufacturers, have financial incentive not to have to deal with as much waste down the road.  For more information and opinions on HB 821 turn to the Houston Chronical’s arcticle, “Tube TVs by the Ton”, and the reader comments.

For more info on this issue and other E-Waste topics head to my Diigo Page.

• WATCH: Governor vetoes TV recycling measure | News for Austin, Texas | KVUE.com | Local News

  KVUE News, Austin, TX, 6/23/09. Includes video with reporter Elise Hu. “Austin Democrat Kirk Watson says he’s stunned by a veto from Governor Rick Perry of a bill that would have encouraged people to recycle their old TVs instead of throwing them out. Watson’s measure would have called for manufacturers to take back their old sets. He says the manufacturers were OK with that, and that’s why he’s surprised Perry tossed it out. “

• tags: e-waste, ewaste, electronics, icare, p2, p2tagteam, legislation, consumer information, electronic waste, hazardous waste, product stewardship, recycling, regulatory integration, takeback, technology, televisions, waste, Texas

Comments associated with this news article are interesting; people are perplexed as to why legislation would be necessary to encourage recycling. This indicates an ignorance of the cost associated with electronics recycling.
Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

• LG, San Francisco BART Begin Mobile Phone Recycling

  Waste & Recycling News, 6/10/09 edition. “LGE MobileComm USA, a unit of LG Electronics Inc., is teaming up with San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit to provide mobile phone recycling. LG began outfitting six BART stations in San Francisco with cell phone collection receptacles to encourage commuters to recycle their phones, chargers and accessories. The sites will accept any manufacturer’s devices through July 6. Only 10% of the mobile phones sold in the United States are recycled, according to the company.”

  tags: cell phones, mobile phones, consumer information, recycling, icare, p2, p2tagteam, electronics, hazardous waste, pollution prevention, product stewardship, takeback, technology, waste, e-waste, electronic waste, environment, ewaste

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

• Sustainable Management of Electronic Waste (e-Waste)

  Design for environment cleaner production, extended producer responsibility, standards and labeling, product stewardship, recycling and remanufacturing are some of the practices adopted by various countries around the world to deal with the e-waste stream. An overview of these practices is presented and the manner in which they contribute to the sustainable management of e-waste is discussed.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

The text of this bill (SB-107) is available online.

• Wisconsin Senate Approves E-Waste Recycling Bill

  Associated Press via Forbes, 6/9/09. The Wisconsin Senate has approved (23-10) a bill that would require electronics manufacturers to arrange for recycling of their products.Under Wisconsin’s bill, dumping e-waste in landfills would be banned. Manufacturers would have to arrange to recycle 80 percent of the total weight of products they sold in the state in a given year. They also would have to pay up to $5,000 annually to register with state environmental officials.

  tags: e-waste, trade, p2, p2tagteam, pollution prevention, electronics, electronic waste, ewaste, regulatory integration, takeback, waste, product stewardship, legislation, policy, icare, hazardous waste, recycling

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Indiana recently became the latest state to pass e-waste legislation. See the Diigo bookmarks below for a relevant press release, as well as the text of the law.

• Enrolled Act, House Bill 1589 (Indiana)

  Indiana law signed 5/13/09. Manufacturers of video display devices, such as TVs, computer monitors and laptops, must recycle 60 percent by weight of their sales of those products. They are required to register with the state by April 2010 and must include a plan describing how they will meet their recycling targets. They can count the recycling of other electronics, such as printers, keyboards and VCRs, toward their recycling goals. Manufacturers must report their progress at the end of each program year for state review. In the third year, the state will impose penalties for noncompliance.

  tags: ewaste, electronics, icare, p2tagteam, product stewardship, regulatory integration, legislation

• Indiana Becomes Latest State to Pass E-Waste Law | GreenerComputing

  The Indiana e-waste law forces manufacturers to take responsibility for the collection and recycling of their products. Manufacturers of video display devices, such as TVs and computer monitors, must register with the state by April 2010. Greener Computing, 5/19/09.

  tags: ewaste, icare, electronics, p2tagteam, product stewardship, regulatory integration

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

• Owner Of EarthEcycle Speaks Out On Allegations Against Company – kdka.com

  Andy Sheehan of KDKA (Pittsburgh) interviews Jeff Nixon, owner of EarthECycle, an electronics recycling company that is the focus of recent expose by BAN and the Electronics TakeBack Coalition. Nixon denies any wrong doing and expresses his intent to conduct more e-waste fundraising events, such as the one examined in the BAN/ETBC report. (see http://www.ban.org/Library/PittsburghScam.pdf)

  tags: ban, basel, e-waste, electronic waste, ETBC, recycling, takeback, trade, waste, ewaste, environment, icare, p2, p2tagteam, product stewardship, policy, regulatory integration, hazardous waste, electronics

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

I get so frustrated when I read and participate in discussions where the term “product stewardship” is equated with “extended producer responsibility” which really means the product manufacturer should have to pay for product take back at the end of its life. (example: here)

Product Stewardship is a concept fleshed out by chemical manufacturers in developing the Responsible Care (R) program that raised the bar for companies to look at the life cycle management of the chemicals and products they manufacture and to work with parties in the entire chain of commerce to achieve safe management of chemicals. Product Stewardship is about looking at all the associated environmental (including energy use), health and safety (EHS) issues presented by the processes and chemicals used in creating, distributing, using, recovery and ultimate disposal of a product. It is about optimizing for the best risk management throughout the life cycle of a product.

Product Stewardship is a shared responsibility of everyone who benefits from the product. The manufacturer of a commercial product does not control everyone in the stream of commerce. Nor does he necessarily know what the most efficient and effective management techniques are for each player. What he can do is manage his own operations based on the best information on potential EHS risks he can acquire from suppliers, academia, government, distributors, users, treatment/disposal operators and his own research. He is then responsible for passing on adequate information upstream and downstream so that others can properly manage risks. He is also responsible for seeking and responding to new information. Finally, he is responsible for continually looking for the most optimum way to manage and reduce risks. Likewise, those who are involved at each stage of the life cycle of a product are responsible for managing risks from their activities, passing appropriate information to the next in the chain and continually improving their own risk management.

Those who focus on only the end of life management of a product are not supporting the best life cycle management approach. Frankly, they seldom give a hoot for the product and its benefits. Or if they do benefit as end users, they believe it should be the producer’s problem and cost, not theirs. Everyone says “not me” – a common theme in today’s society. It should be those fat cat capitalist chemical companies who should pay. But, oh, they are laying off people now too. Maybe not so fat anymore…. Maybe there’s a reason they squawk when their products and livelihoods are threatened. Maybe they are worried about finding a sustainable solution.

Unfortunately, there is no silver bullet to life cycle management. Each product and chain of commerce is unique in the problems, potential solutions and feasibility it presents.

Mandatory product take-back requirements may cause more problems than they cure – transportation and energy costs in collection and recovery operations, lack of customers for recycled materials, unnecessary exposures in recycling operations to name a few. But for some products – like high energy content, easily recycled aluminum cans – bins and curbside recycling is great. If you can’t find a steady supply of recycled raw material, what do you do to stay green?

Designing “green” products is a laudable goal and should be done where it makes life cycle sense. But at what cost in performance? If it goes down the drain (a cleaner) and it works fine for the purpose and biodegrades rapidly, great! If the “green” product takes twice as much to get a poorer result and will only biodegrade in a compost that few people will bother with, is it really “green”? Can we scale it up to meet our needs without causing more problems (see corn-based ethanol)?

How much should the government subsidize greener alternatives? Why should we believe a group of government bureaucrats can dictate a silver bullet?

Product stewardship is a way of thinking and making value-based decisions, not a prescription for specific activities. Product stewardship should be an ongoing process that seeks more sustainable solutions for customer needs. It relies on innovation and continuous consideration of new information on needs and environmental, health and safety impacts. It’s not something to be legislated. Don’t turn it into a checklist.

We should be teaching our children and ourselves how to think with a holistic systems viewpoint and work with others because we all have shared responsibility to find the best solutions we can and continually improve our ability to meet our needs without unintended consequences to ourselves and future generations.

Product Stewardship occurs when all those involved in the life cycle of a product take shared responsibility to reduce health and environmental impacts and gain the most value from a product.
Product Stewards continuously improve efforts at each stage of the life cycle to:

• use the LEAST material and energy
• use materials that can be MANAGED SAFELY by
• preventing losses and exposures
• reducing toxicity and safety hazards
• use processes that are EFFICIENT in materials transfer
• capture and REUSE and/or RECOVER material and energy
• preferably within the same product life cycle

Every loss of material or inefficient energy transfer represents a RISK:

• depletion of natural resources
• exposure to workers, users, the environment
• contribution to climate change and other ecosystem degradation

OPPORTUNITIES arise for each commercial player in the life cycle of a product to:

• save money
• by eliminating wasted materials and energy and the costs to manage waste purchases, storage, transportation, compliance, manpower and time
• increase loyalty and reputation
• employees, customers, shareholders and communities want to deal with product stewards who care about their health and environment
• supply chain partners who want to work with a product steward
• satisfy customers with new services and products
• by saving customer’s money by reducing their risks and costs
• by identifying new ways to satisfy needs with products that have good life cycle management
• make money

OPPORTUNITIES arise for customers, communities and the environment throughout the life cycle of a product because

• products are more SUSTAINABLE
• products better meet ALL STAKEHOLDER needs

On January 15th, the Electronic Manufacturers Recycling Management Company (MRM( will begin electronics recycling nationwide.

Founded by Panasonic Corporation of North America, Sharp Electronics Corp. and Toshiba America Consumer Products LLC. MRM will have at least one recycling station in every state, with 280 in all. Plans call for having at least 800 drop-off stations by 2011.

Any of those companies’ electronics can be dropped off and recycled for free.

David Thompson, MRM president, stated that the company is also committed to eliminating hazardous electronic waste exportation to third world countries, an escalating world health crisis.

Hewlett Packard has expanded their Consumer Buyback and Planet Partners Recycling Program. Now consumers can log onto HP’s website and find out the value of their used electronics.

Be it a computer, monitor, digital camera, personal digital assistant or smart-phone, simply go to their website and get a quote, then, if there’s some value, send the equipment to HP and receive cash back.

Simple and easy. And, if the equipment isn’t of value, consumers can still recycle it for free. That goes for recycling Compac as well.

Once again, HP’s product stewardship leads the way for other electronics giants to hopefully follow in their footsteps.