Thank you so much for the input! It is fascinating to see what is going on with regards to ewaste legislation, especially now that California is dealing with a lot of fraud charges and an apparent failure of their system. It seems that the EPA now recognizes both R2 and e-Stewards, but there are still larger complications between the two standards (as you are well-aware). I hope that in the near future, we will see more hard data about ewaste recycling and reuse feasibility. While this problem has been recently developing, it still remains very vague, as scientific data is so hard to find.

Aida

The organization WR3A (World Reuse, Repair and Recycling Association) has been seeking to develop universal “fair trade” standards for 4 years, which recognize the capacity of developing nations to reuse, repair, or recycle electronics. The organization is not an “apologist” for situations like aqua regia acid in Guiyu – in fact the organization was inspired by the desire for reform, which we credit BAN.org for bringing to the forefront.

Your point about a complete lack of data is right on target. There is a study by ASU of loads to Peru which showed a reuse rate of 85%, which is greater than the minimum predicted in my “Monkeys” blog post.

The WR3A data is on CRT computer monitors only – about 250,000 of which WR3A exported for reuse to Africa, South America, and Asia during the past 3 years. CRTs are good for study because they are A) regulated, B) toxic when disposed, C) not valuable as scrap, and D) in strong demand (LCDs have yet to reach a “$20 display unit”, which is critical to the highest internet acccess growth market – people in nations earning $3000 per capita GDP).

I have heard legitimate criticism that some factories restore CRTs with too short a life in “spray and pray” operations, but in meeting those factories, I also see their case which is that they meet demand with the best CRTs available, and if BAN e-Stewards and CA, OR, WA etc. would allow them to buy NEWER monitors, they would leave the older ones aside (WR3A does not support sales of 10+ year CRTs, which have a life of 15-25 years depending on usage prior to export).

In the “Monkeys Running the Environmental Zoo” and previous blogs, I have demonstrated the math and breakeven points to show A) that 30% bad units or “toxics along for the ride” is indeed a problem, and B) that BAN’s made up numbers are economically impossible to sustain.

Good work, I’m glad to see this blog developing. Maybe I can close mine down and become a contributor.

- Robin