Dell’s E-Waste Export Policy in Line With Ban Sought By Green Groups

Dell isn’t opposed to a ban on the export of electronic waste to developing countries, the company said. It commented on the Obama administration’s efforts to draw up a national framework on how to deal with e-waste generated by federal agencies. That policy, along with Dell’s support for a proscription on the use of prison labor to process e-waste, aligns the company’s position with those of environmental groups such as the Basel Action Network and the Electronics TakeBack Coalition (ETBC). Industry-supported organizations such as R2 Solutions, which operates the EPA-endorsed R2 certification program for e-waste recyclers, are against a total ban on exports to developing countries.

Dell also would “not oppose” a landfill ban on the end-of-life IT products and a prohibition on the use of certain materials in IT products, “consistent with” the RoHS Directive, the company said. It’s against governments requiring companies to finance the recycling of products made by manufacturers that “no longer exist,” Dell said. Imposing recycling fees on new electronics to finance the recycling of “orphan waste” is “inefficient and unfair,” it said.

On exports, the R2 standard’s position is that “all workers and all environments be protected equally,” R2 Solutions said. “All reuse and recycling activities conducted with international partners must employ the same best practices as their U.S. counterparts, document and verify activities and be in step with all applicable national and international laws.” The federal government must make certification to the R2 standard “a requisite criteria” for federal agencies to choose an electronics recycler, it said.

The U.S. must “restrict” the export of any used electronics, “unless it can be verified by independent third parties and monitored that those electronics are either reused appropriately or recycled under conditions and to standards that would be approved in the U.S.,” the Washington State Department of Ecology said. “The cheap, but profitable export of whole electronics for sham reuse and/or crude ‘recycling’ needs to stop and, unlike the federal government, states cannot enact an export ban.” The U.S. must “encourage” growth in-country facilities for handling CRT glass recycling, the department said. With state e-waste program growing, the demand for such facilities “will not decline for a long time,” it said. The lack of such facilities in the U.S. is a “hurdle to managing our waste electronics in-country,” the department said.

The EPA should develop and enforce federal standards for electronics recycling that restrict the disposal of e-waste in landfills, said recycler Veolia Environmental Service. States now have their own standards that “vary drastically,” the company said. “One set of federal standards would improve the management of, and encourage the recycling of, used electronic equipment.” On used electronic exports, the company wanted the federal government to require “export notifications” similar to those for CRT monitors. That would ensure that the “receiving countries were aware of, and approved, the shipment of electronics equipment and that appropriate recycling procedures were in place in the receiving country,” Veolia said.

Electronics recycling programs are increasingly covering products using rechargeable batteries, such as laptops, game consoles and cameras, said Call2Recycle. Those batteries must be separately recycled, “not just shredded or melted down with the rest of the product,” it said. “Any framework for electronics product stewardship” must include guidance on “what materials should be harvested from an end-of-life product, and specifically require that rechargeable batteries that can be readily removed be segregated for separate processing,” the company said.

Environmental groups have voiced concern that the White House directive, to the task force working on the national e-waste framework, was to develop policies that ensure that hazardous e-waste collected for recycling is not exported to developing countries that “lack the capacity to manage the recovery and disposal of these products in ways that safeguard human health and the environment.” That gives the impression that “they are going to set the bar much lower than not exporting stuff,” said Barbara Kyle, ETBC’s national coordinator (GED March 10 p1). The White House should ensure that the federal e-waste policy should unequivocally state that “federal agencies will no longer allow their old products to be exported to developing nations,” the coalition wrote Nancy Sutley of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.