Rev Environ Health 2016; aop
Federico Magalini*
Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications DOI 10.1515/reveh-2015-0035 Received October 9, 2015; accepted October 14, 2015
Abstract: Over the last decades the electronics industry and ICT Industry in particular has revolutionized the world: electrical and electronic products have become ubiquitous in today’s life around the planet. After use, those products are discarded, sometimes after re-use cycles in countries different from those where they were initially sold; becoming what is commonly called e-waste. Compared to other traditional waste streams, e-waste handling poses unique and complex challenges. e-Waste is usually regarded as a waste problem, which can cause environmental damage and severe human health consequences if not safely managed. e-Waste contains significant amounts of toxic and environmentally sensitive materials and is, thus, extremely hazardous to humans and the environment if not properly disposed of or recycled. On the other hand, e-waste is often seen as a potential source of income for individuals and entrepreneurs who aim to recover the valuable materials (metals in particular) contained in discarded equipment. Recently, for a growing number of people, in developing countries in particular, recycling and separation of e-waste has become their main source of income. In most cases, this is done informally, with no or hardly any health and safety standards, exposing workers and the surrounding neighborhoods to extensive health dangers as well as leading to substantial environmental pollution. Treatment processes of e-waste aim to remove the hazardous components and recover as much reusable material (e.g. metals, glass and plastics) as possible; achieving both objectives is most desired. The paper discuss societal implications of proper e-waste management and key elements to be considered in the policy design at country level. Keywords: e-waste; human health; policy; policy development.
*Corresponding author: Federico Magalini, Institute for Advanced Studies of Sustainability, United Nations University, Operating Unit SCYCLE, Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1, 53113 Bonn, Germany, E-mail: [email protected]
Global challenges for e-waste management Over the last decades the electronics industry and ICT Industry in particular has revolutionized the world: electrical and electronic products have become ubiquitous of today’s life around the planet. Electronic products are everywhere nowadays. Without these products, modern life would not be possible in developed and developing countries. These products are used in areas such as medicine, transportation, education, health, communication, security, environmental protection and culture. In many cases, functionalities enabled by these technologies are strongly connected with sustainable development and with some of the Millennium Development Goals. After use, those products are discarded, sometimes after re-use cycles in countries different from those where they were initially sold; becoming what is commonly called e-waste. The global quantity of e-waste generation in 2014 (1) was around 41.8 Mt. In 2014, approximately four billion people were covered by national e-waste legislation, though legislation is not necessarily effectively enforced. The global quantity of e-waste generated in 2014 is comprised of 1.0 Mt of lamps, 3.0 Mt of small IT, 6.3 Mt of screens and monitors, 7.0 Mt of temperature exchange equipment (cooling and freezing equipment), 11.8 Mt of large equipment, and 12.8 Mt of small equipment. The amount of e-waste is expected to grow to 49.8 Mt in 2018, with an annual growth rate of 4%–5%. Most of the e-waste was generated in Asia: 16 Mt in 2014. This was 3.7 kg for each inhabitant. The highest per inhabitant e-waste quantity [15.6 kilograms per inhabitant (kg/inh.)] was generated in Europe. The whole region (including Russia) generated 11.6 Mt. The lowest quantity of e-waste was generated in Oceania, and was 0.6 Mt. However, the per inhabitant amount was nearly as high as Europe’s (15.2 kg/inh.). The lowest amount of e-waste per inhabitant was generated in Africa, where only 1.7 kg/inh. was generated in 2014. The whole continent generated 1.9 Mt of e-waste. The Americas generated 11.7 Mt of e-waste (7.9 Mt for North America, 1.1 Mt for Central America, and 2.7 Mt for South America), which represented 12.2 kg/inh.
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
2 Magalini: Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications Compared to other traditional waste streams, e-waste handling poses unique and complex challenges, including: –– The heterogeneity of appliances, in terms of size, weight, function and material composition (most of these properties change over time), and subsequently, in environmental impact at end-of-life; –– The continuous introduction of new products and features (i.e. the introduction of tablets) along with a progressive reduction in average lifespans of products calling for continuous development of appropriate treatment technologies; –– The presence or phasing out of certain constituent elements or potentially hazardous substances in appliances, that require proper treatment; –– The relatively high use of certain precious metals and critical resources (e.g. gold, silver, ruthenium, indium, platinum group metals, rare earth elements) and the challenges in their recovery due to the “dissipated” nature of the low-concentration elements and the technological complexity involved in recovering them in recycling processes; –– The large and diverse group of actors involved in various end-of-life activities, such as collection, recycling and treatment, reuse, refurbishment, waste disposal and export of products and fractions. e-Waste is usually regarded as a waste problem, which can cause environmental damage and severe human health consequences if not safely managed. e-Waste contains significant amounts of toxic and environmentally sensitive materials and is, thus, extremely hazardous to humans and the environment if not properly disposed of or recycled. Informal processes for e-waste management lead to various source of exposure to a mixture of compounds of known toxicity such as lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium, PCBs and brominated flame retardants, persistent polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and unintentional contaminants such as dioxins and furans, among others. These compounds are not only a source of pollution but also a risk to human health if not properly managed. Effects of exposure are direct, affecting workers processing material without suitable protective equipment or using appropriate technology; but also indirect, as pollutants in air, water and soil might enter the food chain and affect wider populations. This is a particular concern when informal recycling takes place in proximity of urban settlements. Globally, several studies have demonstrated the presence of the high levels of the compounds described above on working adults, pregnant women and children (2).
On the other hand, e-waste is often seen as a potential source of income for individuals and entrepreneurs who aim to recover the valuable materials (metals in particular) contained in discarded equipment. Recently, for a growing number of people, in developing countries in particular, recycling and separation of e-waste has become their main source of income. In most cases, this is done informally, with no or hardly any health and safety standards, exposing workers and the surrounding neighborhoods to extensive health dangers as well as leading to substantial environmental pollution. Treatment processes of e-waste aim to remove the hazardous components and recover as much reusable material (e.g. metals, glass and plastics) as possible; achieving both objectives is most desired.
The societal need for effective recycling processes One common element crosscutting modern technological improvements is the massive use of key metals. Some high tech metals are indispensable for modern electronics: antimony, cobalt, lithium, tantalum, tungsten and moly bdenum are widely used in a range of electronic products. In many cases, the electronics industry annually uses relevant shares of primary production of those metals. Even if quantities used in a single product might be very small, the total number of products produced annually and the global scarcity of individual elements might pose future challenges. Securing reliable and undistorted access to such raw materials has become a critical challenge to ensure the production and supply of those products and functionalities to a growing number of people on the planet. One of the key elements to ensure future access to key metals is to enable effective materials recovery through the recycling chain. While collection, dismantling and pre-processing approaches can differ across different e-waste streams (i.e. CRT screens versus IT equipment or refrigerators versus lamps), end-processing technologies have been developed with a focus on material fractions; to a large extend regardless the originating e-waste stream. One of the key elements to be considered when looking at metrics to assess environmental performance of recycling chains is that recovery effectiveness can only be determined by tracking the three steps of collection plus sorting, pre-processing and end-processing.
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
Magalini: Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications 3
Especially in regions where recycling operations are not properly developed, informal recycling (pre-processing and end-processing) usually focuses on retrieving a few valuable elements like gold and copper (often with poor recycling yields), while most other metals are discarded and inevitably lost. In addition, the small quantities of some of these valuable metals present in a single product do not necessarily represent a trigger for effective recovery, especially when relevant quantities of individual fractions need to be concentrated beforehand. Proper e-waste management is a key to: –– Secure future access to key elements needed to supply a growing number of persons on the planet with products and functionalities; –– Preserve the environment and human health of workers (direct exposure) and society at large (indirect exposure); –– Call for effectiveness across recycling operations, from collection to final recovery or disposal of hazardous materials.
The key elements to be considered in policy development Three main elements need to be considered when developing e-waste management policies: –– e-Waste contains materials that are considered toxic, which are harmful to the environment and human health. Safe disposal and handling of e-waste can be very complicated and costly, a particular challenge in developing countries. –– e-Waste contains valuable and scarce materials and recovery of these materials as secondary resources can alleviate mining of virgin materials and is oftentimes much more efficient compared to mining. This is why business opportunities and “green jobs” can be created and enabled through e-waste recycling. –– In some cases the costs of proper collection and recycling of e-waste might exceed the revenues generated from the recovered materials. This is primarily due to the complexity of product design and difficulty of separating highly commingled materials. Figure 1 shows the interaction of economic and environmental dimensions into an eco-efficiency diagram, which enables the understanding of the different implications of end-of-life e-waste scenarios (3). On the Y-axis of the diagram we have the total revenues occurring during the
recycling process, taking into account the intrinsic material value of products plus the technical costs to allow such fractions to be accessed and sold on the market. The X-axis represents the environmental outcome of recycling activities (LCA scores using any indicator like the Eco-Indicator). Positive values on the Y-axis represent economic revenues, while positive values on the X-axis represent environmental gains; contrastingly, negative values on the Y-axis represent costs while negative values on the X-axis represent environmental burdens. These positive areas represent “specific” bests from a purely economic or environmental perspective. Positive values on the Y-axis could represent local bests for companies in the recycling or remanufacturing business, while X-axis positive values could represent local best regulators and policymakers targets. It is important to note that various policy instruments (such as financing mechanisms) and legislation (such as e-waste regulations) can enable moving from one quadrant to another. Different end-of-life scenarios/options for the same product (or component), could end up in different areas of the diagram: –– Quadrant red (the criminal): options/activities leading to profits but having negative environmental impacts. Examples include cable burning for recovering copper wire. Usually these options should be prevented by local regulations. –– Quadrant yellow (the millionaire): options leading to profits with positive environmental impacts. Examples include proper recycling of PCBs. These represent win-win situations and scenarios to be promoted. –– Quadrant blue (the fool): Options leading to economic losses and environmental burdens. Common sense should, generally speaking, avoid or prevent such alternatives. –– Quadrant green (the saint): Options leading to economic losses despite having a positive environmental impact. Those cases are usually not directly pursued by companies (as leading to losses) but can be encouraged by policymakers and regulators, as leading to environmental benefits. This could be the case of mandatory recycling programs, where the financing of activities leading to environmental improvements or benefits is required through Extended Producer Responsibility principles or other tools. Examples include proper recycling of light bulbs or CRTs. This is why a proper financing mechanism, tailored on the societal context of the country need to be defined first and enforced afterwards. Activities carried out along the
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
4 Magalini: Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications
Figure 1: Policy principles and operations.
recycling chain are in a few cases remunerated by the revenues generated, but in the majority of cases they are not. A proper financing scheme should be defined to make sure the e-waste generated in the country is properly treated and the societal benefits are maximized. Revenues generated by proper recovery of material might not suffice. Only a legislative and operative framework, properly tailored to local conditions and effectively enforced across a country, can help modern society, irrespective of the region of the world, turn the e-waste challenge into an opportunity.
References 1. Baldé CP, Wang F, Kuehr R, Huisman J. The global e-waste monitor – 2014. Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, 2015. 2. Perkins DN, Brune-Drisse MN, Nxele T, Sly PD. E-Waste: a global hazard. Annals of Global Health 2015;80(4):286-95. 3. Magalini F, Crock W, Kuehr R. EWA. Toolkit: practical guide to e-waste management system design. Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, 2013.
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
Federico Magalini*
Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications DOI 10.1515/reveh-2015-0035 Received October 9, 2015; accepted October 14, 2015
Abstract: Over the last decades the electronics industry and ICT Industry in particular has revolutionized the world: electrical and electronic products have become ubiquitous in today’s life around the planet. After use, those products are discarded, sometimes after re-use cycles in countries different from those where they were initially sold; becoming what is commonly called e-waste. Compared to other traditional waste streams, e-waste handling poses unique and complex challenges. e-Waste is usually regarded as a waste problem, which can cause environmental damage and severe human health consequences if not safely managed. e-Waste contains significant amounts of toxic and environmentally sensitive materials and is, thus, extremely hazardous to humans and the environment if not properly disposed of or recycled. On the other hand, e-waste is often seen as a potential source of income for individuals and entrepreneurs who aim to recover the valuable materials (metals in particular) contained in discarded equipment. Recently, for a growing number of people, in developing countries in particular, recycling and separation of e-waste has become their main source of income. In most cases, this is done informally, with no or hardly any health and safety standards, exposing workers and the surrounding neighborhoods to extensive health dangers as well as leading to substantial environmental pollution. Treatment processes of e-waste aim to remove the hazardous components and recover as much reusable material (e.g. metals, glass and plastics) as possible; achieving both objectives is most desired. The paper discuss societal implications of proper e-waste management and key elements to be considered in the policy design at country level. Keywords: e-waste; human health; policy; policy development.
*Corresponding author: Federico Magalini, Institute for Advanced Studies of Sustainability, United Nations University, Operating Unit SCYCLE, Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1, 53113 Bonn, Germany, E-mail: [email protected]
Global challenges for e-waste management Over the last decades the electronics industry and ICT Industry in particular has revolutionized the world: electrical and electronic products have become ubiquitous of today’s life around the planet. Electronic products are everywhere nowadays. Without these products, modern life would not be possible in developed and developing countries. These products are used in areas such as medicine, transportation, education, health, communication, security, environmental protection and culture. In many cases, functionalities enabled by these technologies are strongly connected with sustainable development and with some of the Millennium Development Goals. After use, those products are discarded, sometimes after re-use cycles in countries different from those where they were initially sold; becoming what is commonly called e-waste. The global quantity of e-waste generation in 2014 (1) was around 41.8 Mt. In 2014, approximately four billion people were covered by national e-waste legislation, though legislation is not necessarily effectively enforced. The global quantity of e-waste generated in 2014 is comprised of 1.0 Mt of lamps, 3.0 Mt of small IT, 6.3 Mt of screens and monitors, 7.0 Mt of temperature exchange equipment (cooling and freezing equipment), 11.8 Mt of large equipment, and 12.8 Mt of small equipment. The amount of e-waste is expected to grow to 49.8 Mt in 2018, with an annual growth rate of 4%–5%. Most of the e-waste was generated in Asia: 16 Mt in 2014. This was 3.7 kg for each inhabitant. The highest per inhabitant e-waste quantity [15.6 kilograms per inhabitant (kg/inh.)] was generated in Europe. The whole region (including Russia) generated 11.6 Mt. The lowest quantity of e-waste was generated in Oceania, and was 0.6 Mt. However, the per inhabitant amount was nearly as high as Europe’s (15.2 kg/inh.). The lowest amount of e-waste per inhabitant was generated in Africa, where only 1.7 kg/inh. was generated in 2014. The whole continent generated 1.9 Mt of e-waste. The Americas generated 11.7 Mt of e-waste (7.9 Mt for North America, 1.1 Mt for Central America, and 2.7 Mt for South America), which represented 12.2 kg/inh.
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
2 Magalini: Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications Compared to other traditional waste streams, e-waste handling poses unique and complex challenges, including: –– The heterogeneity of appliances, in terms of size, weight, function and material composition (most of these properties change over time), and subsequently, in environmental impact at end-of-life; –– The continuous introduction of new products and features (i.e. the introduction of tablets) along with a progressive reduction in average lifespans of products calling for continuous development of appropriate treatment technologies; –– The presence or phasing out of certain constituent elements or potentially hazardous substances in appliances, that require proper treatment; –– The relatively high use of certain precious metals and critical resources (e.g. gold, silver, ruthenium, indium, platinum group metals, rare earth elements) and the challenges in their recovery due to the “dissipated” nature of the low-concentration elements and the technological complexity involved in recovering them in recycling processes; –– The large and diverse group of actors involved in various end-of-life activities, such as collection, recycling and treatment, reuse, refurbishment, waste disposal and export of products and fractions. e-Waste is usually regarded as a waste problem, which can cause environmental damage and severe human health consequences if not safely managed. e-Waste contains significant amounts of toxic and environmentally sensitive materials and is, thus, extremely hazardous to humans and the environment if not properly disposed of or recycled. Informal processes for e-waste management lead to various source of exposure to a mixture of compounds of known toxicity such as lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium, PCBs and brominated flame retardants, persistent polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and unintentional contaminants such as dioxins and furans, among others. These compounds are not only a source of pollution but also a risk to human health if not properly managed. Effects of exposure are direct, affecting workers processing material without suitable protective equipment or using appropriate technology; but also indirect, as pollutants in air, water and soil might enter the food chain and affect wider populations. This is a particular concern when informal recycling takes place in proximity of urban settlements. Globally, several studies have demonstrated the presence of the high levels of the compounds described above on working adults, pregnant women and children (2).
On the other hand, e-waste is often seen as a potential source of income for individuals and entrepreneurs who aim to recover the valuable materials (metals in particular) contained in discarded equipment. Recently, for a growing number of people, in developing countries in particular, recycling and separation of e-waste has become their main source of income. In most cases, this is done informally, with no or hardly any health and safety standards, exposing workers and the surrounding neighborhoods to extensive health dangers as well as leading to substantial environmental pollution. Treatment processes of e-waste aim to remove the hazardous components and recover as much reusable material (e.g. metals, glass and plastics) as possible; achieving both objectives is most desired.
The societal need for effective recycling processes One common element crosscutting modern technological improvements is the massive use of key metals. Some high tech metals are indispensable for modern electronics: antimony, cobalt, lithium, tantalum, tungsten and moly bdenum are widely used in a range of electronic products. In many cases, the electronics industry annually uses relevant shares of primary production of those metals. Even if quantities used in a single product might be very small, the total number of products produced annually and the global scarcity of individual elements might pose future challenges. Securing reliable and undistorted access to such raw materials has become a critical challenge to ensure the production and supply of those products and functionalities to a growing number of people on the planet. One of the key elements to ensure future access to key metals is to enable effective materials recovery through the recycling chain. While collection, dismantling and pre-processing approaches can differ across different e-waste streams (i.e. CRT screens versus IT equipment or refrigerators versus lamps), end-processing technologies have been developed with a focus on material fractions; to a large extend regardless the originating e-waste stream. One of the key elements to be considered when looking at metrics to assess environmental performance of recycling chains is that recovery effectiveness can only be determined by tracking the three steps of collection plus sorting, pre-processing and end-processing.
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
Magalini: Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications 3
Especially in regions where recycling operations are not properly developed, informal recycling (pre-processing and end-processing) usually focuses on retrieving a few valuable elements like gold and copper (often with poor recycling yields), while most other metals are discarded and inevitably lost. In addition, the small quantities of some of these valuable metals present in a single product do not necessarily represent a trigger for effective recovery, especially when relevant quantities of individual fractions need to be concentrated beforehand. Proper e-waste management is a key to: –– Secure future access to key elements needed to supply a growing number of persons on the planet with products and functionalities; –– Preserve the environment and human health of workers (direct exposure) and society at large (indirect exposure); –– Call for effectiveness across recycling operations, from collection to final recovery or disposal of hazardous materials.
The key elements to be considered in policy development Three main elements need to be considered when developing e-waste management policies: –– e-Waste contains materials that are considered toxic, which are harmful to the environment and human health. Safe disposal and handling of e-waste can be very complicated and costly, a particular challenge in developing countries. –– e-Waste contains valuable and scarce materials and recovery of these materials as secondary resources can alleviate mining of virgin materials and is oftentimes much more efficient compared to mining. This is why business opportunities and “green jobs” can be created and enabled through e-waste recycling. –– In some cases the costs of proper collection and recycling of e-waste might exceed the revenues generated from the recovered materials. This is primarily due to the complexity of product design and difficulty of separating highly commingled materials. Figure 1 shows the interaction of economic and environmental dimensions into an eco-efficiency diagram, which enables the understanding of the different implications of end-of-life e-waste scenarios (3). On the Y-axis of the diagram we have the total revenues occurring during the
recycling process, taking into account the intrinsic material value of products plus the technical costs to allow such fractions to be accessed and sold on the market. The X-axis represents the environmental outcome of recycling activities (LCA scores using any indicator like the Eco-Indicator). Positive values on the Y-axis represent economic revenues, while positive values on the X-axis represent environmental gains; contrastingly, negative values on the Y-axis represent costs while negative values on the X-axis represent environmental burdens. These positive areas represent “specific” bests from a purely economic or environmental perspective. Positive values on the Y-axis could represent local bests for companies in the recycling or remanufacturing business, while X-axis positive values could represent local best regulators and policymakers targets. It is important to note that various policy instruments (such as financing mechanisms) and legislation (such as e-waste regulations) can enable moving from one quadrant to another. Different end-of-life scenarios/options for the same product (or component), could end up in different areas of the diagram: –– Quadrant red (the criminal): options/activities leading to profits but having negative environmental impacts. Examples include cable burning for recovering copper wire. Usually these options should be prevented by local regulations. –– Quadrant yellow (the millionaire): options leading to profits with positive environmental impacts. Examples include proper recycling of PCBs. These represent win-win situations and scenarios to be promoted. –– Quadrant blue (the fool): Options leading to economic losses and environmental burdens. Common sense should, generally speaking, avoid or prevent such alternatives. –– Quadrant green (the saint): Options leading to economic losses despite having a positive environmental impact. Those cases are usually not directly pursued by companies (as leading to losses) but can be encouraged by policymakers and regulators, as leading to environmental benefits. This could be the case of mandatory recycling programs, where the financing of activities leading to environmental improvements or benefits is required through Extended Producer Responsibility principles or other tools. Examples include proper recycling of light bulbs or CRTs. This is why a proper financing mechanism, tailored on the societal context of the country need to be defined first and enforced afterwards. Activities carried out along the
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
4 Magalini: Global challenges for e-waste management: the societal implications
Figure 1: Policy principles and operations.
recycling chain are in a few cases remunerated by the revenues generated, but in the majority of cases they are not. A proper financing scheme should be defined to make sure the e-waste generated in the country is properly treated and the societal benefits are maximized. Revenues generated by proper recovery of material might not suffice. Only a legislative and operative framework, properly tailored to local conditions and effectively enforced across a country, can help modern society, irrespective of the region of the world, turn the e-waste challenge into an opportunity.
References 1. Baldé CP, Wang F, Kuehr R, Huisman J. The global e-waste monitor – 2014. Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, 2015. 2. Perkins DN, Brune-Drisse MN, Nxele T, Sly PD. E-Waste: a global hazard. Annals of Global Health 2015;80(4):286-95. 3. Magalini F, Crock W, Kuehr R. EWA. Toolkit: practical guide to e-waste management system design. Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, 2013.
Brought to you by | The Flinders University Authenticated Download Date | 2/1/16 5:22 AM
