GreenTech Pastures

Heather Clancy

Mayors just say no to bearing the cost of e-waste disposal

By Heather Clancy | June 16, 2010, 9:42am PDT

Summary: When it comes to carting away electronics and other technology, cities believe that producers and consumers should pick up the tab

EZZ6CEUMS6S7

Close to half of U.S. states have passed some sort of law governing the disposal and handling of electronic waste, and that’s the way it should be, according to the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

The group has just adopted a resolution calling for state legislation to shift the cost of dealing with this problem away from taxpayers and local governments and onto producers, and people who buy the stuff. The resolution was modeled on policies drawn up by the Product Policy Institute and that is used extensively in California, New York, Massachusetts, Minnesota and Texas. It is based on the idea of Extended Producer Responsibility, or Product Stewardship. The idea is that the government and taxpayers shouldn’t be expected to pay for a problem that is caused by the act of commerce.

Here’s some perspective from the press release in a statement from Bill Sheehan, who is executive director of the Product Policy Institute: “Today, the U.S. Conference of Mayors planted their flag in the waste pile and said, ‘no more.’ They asked product manufacturers to take primary responsibility for their toxic and non-recyclable products. We’re proud of their leadership on this pressing issue.”

The organization represents cities with populations of 30,000 or more people.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “GreenTech Pastures”

Let the lobbying begin: Obama urges nation to accelerate clean energy programs

Why insects and solar panels don't mix

Topics

U.S., Responsibility, Heather Clancy

Heather Clancy is an award-winning business journalist with a passion for green technology and corporate sustainability issues.

Full Bio
Disclosure
Contact

Vendor HotSpot

Here to help you with your Document Management Needs

Read the DocuMentor blog now

Learn More »

Talkback Most Recent of 5 Talkback(s)

Follow via:: RSS; Email Alert

Hiding costs within prodcuts to hide true costs from users

This idea, like many other government ideas, is to hide the cost of the maintenance / followup laws and rules that government imposes on people so that the people do not actually see the cost since it is embedded into the product cost at time of purchase. If they put a separate line item onto every product at time of purchase "e-waste future disposal cost" and THEN charged the consumer this so that they know THEY are paying for the future disposal of it, people would complain (unless there was a way to get part of that back when disposed of properly). A business has no vote so the rules can be imposed easily. If every consumer was charged $50 e-waste fee for every $100 in cost for ANYTHING covered by e-waste rules, then could get refunded $35 when properly turned in and disposed of, people could then see the cost and the actual users would bear the cost and not the general public.
TAPhilo
16th Jun 2010
- Reply to
- Flag
yea, when we bought some stuff from dell, they forced a management fee.

that fee was supposedly for this reason. So we pay another state to clean up the crap i throw away in my state?

NO NO NO. Just another way for them to make money... that doesnt solve a problem properly.
Been_Done_Before
16th Jun 2010
- Reply to
- Flag
Another Leftie Green Fantasy

And just how is it that the government is paying for this now? I'm already not allowed to dump the stuff in the city land fill and company that does our garbage pick up won't take it. The only legal way I have of disposing of it is to take it to one of the local companies that specializes in that sort of thing and paying to get rid of it.

So if there is an up front charge on the purchase of the product, then I should not have to pay for disposal at the time I dispose of it because I already paid at purchase? Right? NO...Wrong! The government got the money at the time of purchase and by the time of disposal its already been spent on something else and I will end up paying twice.
cornpie
16th Jun 2010
- Reply to
- Flag
80% of what you turn is BURNED UP.....

Who and How things are paid for is not the worst part. But did you know only 20% of what you turn in is recycled? Thats right, just the metals. All the plastics, are burned up or sent to China to be used as fuel. What happens is your computers, monitors, printers, etc are shredded to mincemeat, and the metals removed. Then everything else is burned to CO2 the green house gas. This is done under the name of Smelting, but there is only 4 pounds of lead that is recovered from your average picture tube. The remaining glass goes to a slag pile. The circuit boards are smelted as well, and maybe 1% of that weight is recovered. All the rest becomes CO2. THE PLASTICS WHICH ACCOMPANY THIS MINCEMEAT are also burned up and not RECYCLED. So the term ?RECYCLED? needs to be evaluated, but manufacturers use it a lot, when its not really true.
Ron 801 973 4774 if you want your plastics recycled.
Ronald Kobler
16th Jun 2010
- Reply to
- Flag
RE: Mayors just say no to bearing the cost of e-waste disposal

All manufactured goods should have a disposal tax based on the estimated cost of disposal and recycling. Everything gets picked up by trash collectors and each dump is responsible for sorting all trash. This would encourage ALL manufactures to design easily recyclable goods and cut down on wasteful packaging. Centralize sorting is necessary, too many individuals are irresponsible when it comes to properly disposing of their trash so the public cannot be trusted to do what's right. People whine about having to sort their trash and then complain about the chemicals leeching into the ground water, mercury in the fish, tainted food sources etc.
Cerebral*Origami
17th Jun 2010
- Reply to
- Flag