Recycling The First World, in the Third 609
simoncito writes "Ever wondered where that old useless printer ended up? BBC has a photo report about chinese villagers building ramshackle systems out of used and discarded first world computer parts. The effects on their surroundings are drastic - I never knew hardware was so poisonous." Worth a look if you aren't desensitized to suffering.
Anyone know the proper way to dispose of a monitor?
Proper way to dispose of a monitor (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this our responsibility? (Score:2, Insightful)
I've seen articles like this before, and it is definitely sobering to see the effects of the things we throw away on others. But is this really our fault? Once I throw a circuit board away--courtesy of a company that specializes in technology disposal or recycling, no less--is it really my responsibility to make sure that no one is stupid enough to light it on fire and inhale the heavy metals in it? If someone tried this in the U.S., they'd be looked upon as an idiot and possibly a social and environmental menace.
Clearly, what's going on in China shouldn't be happening. But give blame where blame is due--to the factory managers, who must be aware of the dangers of what they're hiring people to do. Don't try to pin this one on American consumers--for once, it's not our fault.
Re:old news (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem isn't the difference, it's the lack of difference. The problem's still around.
Expected response (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:boosheet. (Score:2, Insightful)
Hello and we think CHINA cares? (Score:4, Insightful)
These people would have lived CRAP lives regardless of the horrible evil of computer waste products there. It must not be too severe or the Chinese government would be fast to stop it. We all know they could do so if they wanted to. However it provides these people with some form of income and keeps them out of the hair of the rest of the country.
I have traveled the world and the things being condemned here amount to nothing in comparison to what others suffer through elsewhere. Hell I would gie money to the Christian Childrens Fund before thinking twice about if my toner cartridge was going to be salvaged in China. And while on TONER and its evils...SWEET N LOW is a cancerous agent too...as is BBQ's food.
Re:Taco, Google. Google, Taco. (Score:5, Insightful)
--z
Re:I am so glad ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Your view on human life really makes me ashamed of being a fellow countrymen of yours.
Plus you obviously don't realize the situation in China. I don't think you can just get up and leave China if you'd like. You don't wake up and say "I think I'm going to America to start a new life!"
But this issue has been brought up before on slashdot. "last time I looked China wasn't the 51st state" Then why should we have a right to dump our waste there. Not In My Back Yard! But to make it worse... when the kids play in the dump you think they deserve it.
Is it America's fault? I don't really know the _truth_, yet I don't see why I shouldn't care about my fellow man either way.
I feel bad some days. (Score:4, Insightful)
I feel bad about the fact that I generate trash with everything I do. I want to go completely paperless, because I don't like the idea of killing the rainforest for paper. I know that some cutting in forests is actually good for the forest, but few loggers do that.
Even if I didn't use paper, I still get things in the mail, I have packaging, etc...
My computers, my music equipment, my house, my car (esp my car), generate waste.
Even the food I eat, I consider waste. I want to be a vegitarian some days, just because of enviormental impact of hog farms, overfishing, etc... I would like to be in touch with the earth more- kinda of like how you think of indians (opps, native americans), of being.
You may ask, well why don't you. It's because I can't. I am in college. I live in Boston (well in 6 days I do). I can't plant myself a garden. I can't rid myself of paper. I can't use solar/wind/geothermal power in my apartment. I know that there are little things that I can do, and I do those, but it feels small in comparison. Well, at least I won't have my car in Boston, so the T should save some energy somewhere. Does anyone else feel bad about their impact on the enviorment? I am not an activist, just a concerned person. Even if something actually doesn't 'impact' something drastically, I still feel bad for that disruption.
Re:Proper way to dispose of a monitor (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem of waste electronics is already being addressed. CRTs are already less favored than LCDs. LCDs generate less waste because they contain less material, and do not use a giant leaded glass tube. They do not have high-voltage, high-current power supplies, and thus need less fireproofing. Further an LCD can be expected to last practically forever if the backlight can be replaced. That of course reduces waste tremendously.
Finally, there are movements afoot to phase out lead, mercuryt, cadmium, chromium, and other dangerous chemicals from electronics products. Lead-free soldering processes are already available, but not widely deployed. The EU has proposed to phase out these dangerous chemicals in electronics by January 2008. Other nations have similar proposals. Google for WEEE to find the EU proposal.
Why do you think MS just sends you another mouse? (Score:2, Insightful)
(everything in this post is from memory, which means it may not be 100% correct)
Don't be stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Now thats the dumbest thing I've heard in a while. How do you think those monitors got to china anyway? People improperly dumping them in the woods, and then the monitors get up and walk to china? C'mon!
These montors and other computer junk gets sent to china because its collected properly here in the US at our transfer stations and recycling facilities. This stuff is "recycled", just like scrap metals, plastics, and paper. "Recycling" means that its collected, and sold en mass to bigger companies willing to buy it. Then, those companies sell it to bigger companies, and so on. Apparently, the end of the chain is China, and I'm fine with that.
Its like we're shipping our computer crap over there and forcing it on them. Its bought by companies over there, and shipped. Those companies employ people to process the material. Its not my fault that they don't use respirators! For crying out loud... there's a reason why we're the #1 industrialized nation, and they're a "3rd world" nation, and its not because we've spend hundreds of years feeling guilty for other nations.
Re:USA's fault (Score:2, Insightful)
So? (Score:3, Insightful)
B) There hasn't been any form of 'you can't throw away your computer' legislation made.
C) What about the places that have been sending the waste to China. Why aren't they the bad guys? Just because I bought several computers over the year doesn't mean I'm evil. Hell, I've got every computer I've ever owned down to my Atari 800. I've either given one to another person, or sold it on eBay. The only stuff I've thrown away is a monitor or two, and the trash guys took them.
D) Don't see any evils of old TV articles anywhere. Last I checked a TV Screen and a Monitor screen don't differ a whole lot in basic construction. I'm sure there are a lot more TVs out there in dumps leaching dangerous crap into the ground. Just because the Chinese didn't think them worth recylcing and killing themselves must mean that it's OK to throw a TV away, just not a computer.
Hmph.
Ship Wrecking (Score:5, Insightful)
Alang is a small stretch of beach along the coast of India where a surprising number of ships are eventually scrapped. Instead of a dry dock, the ships are rammed full speed into the oily beach, then are picked over by workers for scrap. There are 35,000 men ripping apart the things with hammers and sledges. The welders use oxygen and cooking propane, the most skilled of them getting the choice assignment of ventilating fuel tanks to get rid of the fumes (yes, the welders ventilate the explosive fumes). The place is a filthy mess of pollution and there's an estimated fatality a day. By all estimates, it's basically Hell on Earth.
I read about this in an article in the Atlantic Monthly (Aug 2000). The piece detailed the horrible conditions, the economic motivation (wrecking a ship filled with toxic waste is an expensive proposition here in the West), and the efforts of enviromental groups to put a stop to it. But the real eye opener was the reaction of the Indians.
Many were pissed that the industrialized world wanted to stop the wrecking and considered such efforts hypocritical. They are not stupid and they know the risks they're facing. They are more than willing to take those risks for steady, reliable income. Many of them point to the pollution and conditions in Dehli that are worse than at Alang. They laugh at what concerns Greenpeace in their tidy offices in London and Holland.
Do I think it's wrong to ship toxic waste to these countries instead of taking care of it at home? Yes. Should I condemn people who are not really that much different from Americans during the Depression from trying to get by? No. These things are never black and white.
[/rant]
PS: I have heard that some regulation has come to Alang and other wrecking operations of late, so my Atlantic Monthly article is likely out of date. Apologies in advance. Also, I found two stories online about the issue: in Wired [wired.com] and The Baltimore Sun [sunspot.net]. I have not read them all the way through, though, and highly recommend the dead tree version of the Monthly piece if you can find it.
Are you a troll? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't tell if you're trolling or not but since I've seen a couple of comments here that seem to agree with your position, I feel the need to reply.
As for the enviornmental concerns, last time I looked China wasn't the 51st state. If their government can't control it then it's their problem not ours.
You're a little heartless, aren't you? "Hey, if it's not my fault, I don't wanna hear about it." These people are suffering. Doesn't that mean anything to you? And as far as the thought that environmental concerns outside of the US isn't our concern, what do you say about the chemicals that are being released into the atmosphere when they burn all that stuff? Toxins don't respect international boundaries.
Amazing how America can be portrayed as the bad guy all around the world.
I didn't see anything in the article specifically pointing the blame finger at the US. But it's worth noting that we are making this problem worse with our throw-away society. I would wager that the average American buys a new computer every 3-4 years. And they don't just buy a new processor and more memory, they buy a whole new friggin' computer! New keyboard, new motherboard, new monitor, new printer, etc. even though their old one is still functioning. If more people would simply buy what they need instead of being lazy and buying the package deal they get from Dell or Gateway, there wouldn't be so much hazardous computer trash to get rid of. Hell, even if you don't want to deal with the hastle of installing your own components into your old motherboard, just tell Dell or Gateway that you don't want the monitor. If they say "No, you have to buy the monitor as well!" you say "No, I dont. I'm leaving." No one is forcing you to add to the waste problem of the world.
Face facts, if you're stupid enough to inhale fumes from PC parts you're burning you should be dead. Those who don't die make money.
Did you read the article? These people have the equivalent of a few years of schooling at most. How many American elementary school kids do you think realize how much toxic stuff is in computers? These people don't have the education or knowledge to realize what they're doing. And even if they did, these people are desperate for a job. I'm sure that you, sitting at your computer munching away at a jelly donut or gulping down a SuperSize McDonald's meal don't fully realize how desperate one can be when you have a choice between a job that gives you headaches or watching your family starve to death.
If you don't like where you live ... move. It's like Sam Kinnison used to say, "You live in a freaking desert. Move."
Again, these people don't have any money. It takes money to start a new life. And where the hell do you suggest they go? Oh, that's right: this isn't your problem. As for the Kinnison quote, keep in mind that he was a comedian. You're not supposed to live your life in accordance with his routine.
I suspect America is "portrayed as the bad guy all around the world" because of awful human beings such as yourself who openly laugh at the less fortunate.
GMD
Re:Don't be stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, good point. While you're at it, why not gloat over the fact that your accident of birth in the United States (I'm guessing) instead of, say, Thailand means that you have the money and the power to purchase the virginity of a 13-year old in Bangkok?
Seriously though: think about it. Capital is no substitute for morality, and just because the "market will bear" your exploitation of other human beings doesn't mean you have the right.
-Renard
Re:TechTV. (Score:4, Insightful)
Who are we to look down on them? Ok, so China is building its economy by dismanteling computer parts in environmentaly hazerdous ways which are seriously messing with their children's health.
How do you think the US became the economic hegemon it was in the 1940s? It wasn't by recycling or giving a rats ass about child wellfare. It was by employing 8 year old imigrant children in factories for 12 hours a day, paying them slaves wages (or something close) and generaly making life hell for a bunch of people.
Of course now we've forgotton all that. Now we've gotten past our past and we want other States to industrialize and become economicly powerfull according to our ideals and environmental standards. The problem is those ideals and standards are a product of our economic superiority.
You can not expect States like China, India, Vietnam, most of South/Central America etc to pull themselves up by their bootstraps without resorting to the same general horrors that we did. I'm not saying its not possible, just that it's unrealistic.
Look at the photographs of the United States from the early 1900s and late 1800s. It wasn't a pretty place to live. We were a horrid nasty vile little cesspool and from that we have created a fairly impressive society.
So China is playing with fire. They will get burned, just like we did. They will kill their children, just like we did. And maybe someday they to can join the ranks of the post-industrial world. Until then we have to let them do what they can. No one told the US that it wasn't ok to commit our attrocities. Why are we any different?
Re:Proper way to dispose of a monitor... (Score:4, Insightful)
Good Will and other thrift stores won't take any more monitors. At least, the ones around here won't. They've already got too many.
It's kind of the same situation with recycling bottles and cans in California. I used to live in Oregon, where you can take your empty bottles and cans to any grocery store, any time day or night. Five cents for cans, ten cents for bottles.
Here in California, you have to take them to a designated recycling center, which is open about six hours a day on weekdays. And there's only one in the city I live in, all the way across town. And you can take a hundred cans back, and you won't get jack shit because the redemption value is so low in California. And they don't give you cash, either, they give you a certificate that you have to take to a nearby grocery store or something, stand in line there, and then they'll give you your 90 cents or whatever it is you've got.
I used to take my bottles and cans back out of a sense of duty. But I got sick of going down there on my lunch break (the only time I could go there when the recycling center is open) to find out that either
(A) The recycling center was closed for lunch, or closed on Tuesdays, or something like that.
or
(B) There was a long line of people returning bottles and cans, when it's my turn I get a certificate for 90 cents, which I then have to take to the grocery store next door and stand in line to claim.
I started throwing my bottles and cans away. I feel bad about it, but Jesus Christ it's like they went out of their way to make it invonvenient in this state. In some cities (San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, Sacramento) you can throw cans into the trash and rest assured that some homeless person will pick them out. But in the suburban white bread town I'm stuck in at the moment? No way. Those cans are going straight to the dump.
Same deal with monitors. They really ought to be recycled. So it'd be nice if it weren't such a pain in the ass to do so. I'd gladly support my tax dollars going toward recycling centers that took monitors and didn't completely suck. Or worked out a deal with grocery stores or someone else to handle it, like they do in Oregon.
Re:Don't be stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem here, as it always is, is poverty. The reason why people choose to work in horrible conditions is because they don't have a better alternative available, in their own estimation. Americans have a powerful tendency to project their own values and choices onto others without a realistic appraisal of the situation. For example, when we crack down on "third world" sweatshops (in itself a slightly racist term, IMHO), net effect is that all these children who were working in horrible conditions are fired. Of course we would prefer that the children be going to school, or just about anything more healthy for a child than working. But if nothing more attractive is available, these people migrate to a less desirable, and less visible means of supporting themselves.
In this country, we've decided that some things are not to be held open as options, no matter how horrible the alternative. I tend to say that what I see in this photo article should be stopped, but I do wonder if I'm not assuming options that would be available here are available there, when that's not necessarily true.
You're absolutely right (but so is he) (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately, there's a flip side of that which makes things even more tragic:
there's places in the world so desperately poor that stripping old, dangerous electronic equipment is actually a step up for them.
This is the heart of the problem, and why I can't condemn what happens in China (or the Indian ship-breakers). Our wealthy society discards these materials because they no longer have value to us. However, they have sufficient value as to advance the lives of some poor souls overseas, where their lives are so wretched as to make scrap-sifting a viable living.
Despite all the hazardous material that can lower life expectancy through exposure, a lot of these people are so poorly fed and cared for that it makes virtually no difference what sort of danger they face - they'll die young regardless. It's awful, but it's reality. And projecting our standards onto their lives won't help them, really - it'll just make us feel less guilty about the reality.
Western civilization went through a period like this - it was called the Industrial Revolution, and it lasted almost a century. Now it's happening elsewhere, and the people who are suffering now are doing so so that the generations that come after them may have a better chance of success. I'm not saying things are identical today, but the privileged life we Westerners live today (and especially we North Americans) was built on the backs of our ancestors who worked as essentially conscript labor and died young.
Think about it. I may be horrified by the life these people in China are living, but for many of them it's their only chance at a better life. That's not our fault. I'm not saying we should waste more to give them something to do. I'm just saying they are part of the system, and if for some reason we're all able to stop disposing of monitors someday they'll find another job that nobody else in the global economy wants to do. It may be a safer job. But then again, it may not.
Re:1.5 Kg lead per computer?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't be stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Nice.
Earth = Closed system.
More toxics in China (or wherever) means more toxics on Earth. You know, remember Earth? Its where you keep your stuff.
Linux is not blameless... (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the reasons I am so pro-Lycoris is that the distro takes that very stance. Why confuse the beginning Linux user with a myriad of apps, most of which are redundant, when you can provide the best email program, the best browser, the best Tetris clone game, etc. etc.? While I can question some of their choices, I can see where this approach is best for their target audience. And hey, the more expert users can ADD to the installed apps! What a concept!
Because it is a KDE-centric distro, Lycoris' ability to function on computers degrades with less powerful processors. The suggested minimum processor speed/type is a 300MHz Pentium II. I suspect that with a lot of the eyecandy turned off it should be fine on a 233MHz Pentium MMX or better.
This does nothing for older machines, though. What is needed is a lightweight graphical distro that can make low end Pentia and 486en useful. The recent issue of Linux Journal has an interesting article by Marcel Gagne [linuxjournal.com] suggesting the kind of apps that would work in such a lightweight distro.
I don't know the first thing about putting together a distribution, but I am looking to learn. I have been riding this particular hobbyhorse for years now but nobody's done anything about it. People are either compiling ultra-tight distros for bootdisks and whatnot or making monster distros for bleeding edge computers. No middle ground. It is this middle ground that can make the kind of machines hitting these landfills in China usable again.
There are kids in Pacoima and the South Bronx and the Southside of Chicago and Oaktown who could use these computers. The companies upgrading their boxen are throwing perfectly useful machines out or sending them to fly-by-night "Recyclers" who instead ship them to the 3rd world. When companies donate instead of recycling, MS gets on their case about licensing. The refurbishers get static from MS about licensing. The underpriveleged kids who need computers at home go without.
A good, lightweight Linux distro could change all this. It's time to create one.
Re:Paper doesn't come from rainforests!! (Score:3, Insightful)
You do have a point that a significant portion of the damage to the forests is done in order to get new agricultural land, but it's not cut down it's usually burned down illegaly by rogue farmers.
Don't go getting smug though, because 90% of that agricultural product (usually beef) then gets sold in the developed world as well. Not only that, but because most of the cleared land was burned down to graze cattle, the soil becomes unusable within a few years and they do it again.
Regardless of how the damage is done, the vast majority of it is financed for by money from the developed world.Yes, what you do here does mean you're responsible for acres of rainforests being depleted. Quit denying it and do something about it.