As I talked about in a previous post, consumer electronics are responsible for a lot of toxic chemicals ending up in garbage that may pollute groundwater or be looted by un-knowing peasants for valuable metals.
California is considering passing legislation that would "require consumer electronics sold in the state to be manufactured without toxins or other hazardous materials by 2008." Now that would be a big deal. California is, as the article says, "the world's sixth largest economy." They have clout.
This bill may not be passed, but if people have any sense it will be. It's an issue that needs to be addressed, and it's one that market forces will not solve. As a matter of fact, the "market" only exacerbates the problem. Legislation is necessary, and in this case the most effective method of providing a solution. California may be the first, but hopefully not the last.
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
How difficult/expensive do you think it would be manufacture electronics without toxins of any kind?
Honestly I can't say. I don't know if anyone has really done such a study. Usually toxic products are used precisely because they're cheaper, but generally speaking, most of the time there's some other chemical that can fill the role. I wouldn't imagine a switchover to "green" e-waste would be incredibly difficult, although it might be costly.
I think it should be pointed out that most of the problem is the lead found in CRT monitors or tvs.
This is from USA today "Dell Inc. and many other computer makers continue using a flame retardant related to PBDEs on circuit boards, and they use lead, mercury and other toxins in the central processing units and monitors. But Dell, along with Apple Computer Inc. and others, stopped using PBDEs in 2002."
Some researchers think the bromide dust they mention causes birth defects, and we know lead and mercury will.
A lot of computer manufacturers throw in free recycling already, and in general if it's not free it only costs $10 to $60. So I would imagine it's not going to cost an incredible amount to A) make products more recyclable and B) increase recycling programs we already have.
Then again, I could be wrong, but what does it matter? This is something we need to take care of. It's not fair for peasants in China to be poisoned because we made a choice to pay a little less for a computer.
Thanks. We'll keep blogging.
Post a Comment