Pin It

Above header

Poisonous TVs and Poison PCs and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)

US Report Titled – Poison PCs and Toxic TVs (Also Highly Relevant to Mobile Phone Recycling)

mobile-phone-and-tv-recycling 350x350Poison PCs and Toxic TVs, was a broken citation link in Wikipedia (Ref: 2 at the following url,, but we found that it is available on the “WayBack Machine”, by following this link.:
Vistors from Wikipedia should scroll down to “Poison PCs/Toxic TVs Executive Summary”, for their cited content, which is lower down on this page.
The following is an extract from the report:


  1. Executive Summary
  2. Overview
  3. Poisons in E-waste and their effects on us
  4. Disposing of computers is hazardous
  5. Exporting harm: The high tech trashing of developing nations
  6. How does the US respond to the challenge?
  7. Costs of E-waste
  8. What we propose
  9. Computer TackBack campaign platform
  10. Endnotesᅠ– “Gadgets to Garbage”ᅠChristian Science MonitorᅠJanuary 2, 2004″

The following quotation is the entire Executive Summary from the report:

“Electronic waste (E-waste) encompasses a broad and growing range of electronic devices ranging from personal computers and televisions, to handheld PDAs, VCRs, and cellular phones. Where once consumers purchased a stereo console or television set with the expectation that it would last for a decade or more, the increasingly rapid evolution of technology has effectively rendered everything disposable. Consumers no longer take a malfunctioning television, VCR or telephone to a repair shop. Replacement is often easier and cheaper than repair. And while these ever-improving gadgets – faster, smaller, and cheaper – provide many benefits, they also carry a legacy of waste. Electronic waste already constitutes from 2% to 5% of the US municipal solid waste stream and is growing rapidly. European studies estimate that the volume of electronic waste is rising by 3% to 5% per year – almost three times faster than the municipal waste stream. 1 According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in 1997 more than 3.2 million tons of E-waste ended up in US landfills.

In a report for the EPA, analysts warned that the amount of E-waste in US landfills would grow fourfold in the next few years. 2 Over the last several years, no product so epitomizes the problems posed by obsolete electronics as the personal computer. Televisions with cathode ray tubes present the same problems. Due to their growing waste volume, toxicity and management cost, both computers and televisions are the focus of this report. How US policy makers – at the national, state and local level – choose to address the problems posed by obsolete computers and televisions is likely to set the tone for the broader spectrum of E-waste. Our laws and regulations are beginning to slowly – and imperfectly – address these concerns. Today’s computer industry innovates very rapidly, bringing new technologies and .upgrades’ to market every couple of years. According to industry sales figures, US purchasers bought more than 45 million new computer systems in 2002.3 Currently over 50% of US households own a computer. 3 Should every consumer attempt to throw out their obsolete computer at once, the nation would face a “tsunami” of e-scrap, presenting a major budgetary and environmental crisis that, depending on policy decisions now, could unfairly burden state and local governments with the cost of handling this crisis. By 2006, some 163,420 computers and televisions will become obsolete in the US every day – weighing in at almost 3,513 tons. 5 These units have been used, reused, and stored – and will then be either recycled or tossed out with the trash and subsequently landfilled by trash collectors.

Consumers have, on average, 2 to 3 obsolete computers in their garages, closets or storage spaces. US government researchers estimated that three-quarters of all computers ever sold in the United States remain stockpiled, awaiting disposal. 6 The crisis continues to grow. Other studies estimate that the number of obsolete computers in the United States will soon be as high as 315 to 680 million units. 7, 8 Recycling rates for computers are low, and opportunities are challenging for most consumers – limited to occasional drop-off programs, or complex mail-back programs offered by a few manufacturers.

Options that do exist typically come with a price tag of $10 to $60 per unit, require waiting for infrequent one-day voluntary programs at remote locations. 9 One example: IBM sold more than 3 million computers in the United States in 2000, and was the first manufacturer to establish a payas-you-go system for recycling obsolete computers. Results were under-whelming. According to the company, less than 1,000 computers (0.03% of annual sales) were recycled during this period.

Toxic TVs and Poison PCs 3 The National Safety Council reported in 1999 that only 11% of discarded computers were recycled, compared with 28% of overall municipal solid waste. 10 Other estimates of computer recycling range from 5% to 15%, compared to a 42% rate for overall solid waste and a 70% rate for major appliances like refrigerators, washing machines, and dryers. 11 For large commercial customers, computer system distributors may negotiate for the collection and management of obsolete computer systems. While there remains limited information on where and if these computers and televisions are recycled, some studies tracking E-waste shipped overseas find that lax practices pose serious environmental and human health threats.”

Our Summary of the Report:

The Computer TakeBack Campaign supports the guiding principle called Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)ᅠfor post-consumer electronic devices waste. The goal of EPR is to make brand-name
distributors and producers financially responsible for their products when they become obsolete.
Our ultimate objectives are pollution prevention and waste avoidance through a hierarchy of practices,ᅠincluding source decrease, re-manufacturing, reuse and recycling.
Currently, the cost of gathering, managing and disposing of disposed of electronic devices. This includesᅠhousehold hazardous waste collection and hazardous waste site cleanup, and this would be borne by taxpayer-fundedᅠgovernment programs, mostly at the regional level.ᅠ
We support having manufacturers and distributorsᅠpresume responsibility for these costs, so that they can be internalized and shown in item costs.ᅠThis produces a powerful incentive for manufacturers of electronics to decrease such costs by designingᅠitems that are clean, safe, resilient, recyclable, repairable, upgradeable, and simple to dismantle andᅠrecycle.
Companies that innovate swiftly have a competitive advantage over companies that postpone. Many businessesᅠin countries throughout Europe and Asia are already implementing EPR programs in response
to public pressure and resulting government regulations.
To accomplish the vision of electronic devices EPR, we have embraced the following platform:

Take it back!

Financial and/or physical obligation

Manufacturers and suppliers of electronic equipment need to take physical and/or financial dutyᅠfor their items throughout the entire item life-cycle, including in particular take-back and
end-of-life management. This responsibility should include:
Reduced use of harmful products in production:
  • Collection, disassembly, reuse and recycling of disposed of computer system equipment to the greatest
  • degree practicable; and
  • Requirements that recycling is done in an environmentally sound manner.
  • Facilities development
  • EPR will cultivate development of reliable, ecologically sound and sustainable facilitiesᅠfor collection, reuse, re-manufacturing and recycling of electronic equipment.

Stop hazardous waste exports

The federal government should prohibit exports of hazardous materials from discarded electronic
waste equipment.

Recycling objectives

The electronics industry ought to meet aggressive recycling objectives and carry out techniques forᅠmonitoring and advertising success.

Make It Clean!

Adopt the Precautionary Principle, so that where there is a danger to health or the environment, a precautionary strategy needs takingᅠprecautionary action even before there is conclusive clinical proof that harm is happening. Theᅠfederal government must develop and execute rigorous protocols for testing chemicals andᅠmixes prior to they are introduced into the markets.

Phase out harmful products

The electronics industry ought to end using chemicals that are harmful to human health orᅠthe environment (including lead, mercury, cadmium, brominated flame retardants, chlorinatedᅠsolvents, and other harmful products).

Proper handling of harmful products

Manufacturers of electronic items need to safeguard employees, the general public and the environmentᅠfrom harmful materials up until much safer replacements are developed and used.

Adopt closed-loop recycling – otherwise known as a “circular economy”

The electronic devices industry need to develop products to be quickly fixed and updated to extendᅠtheir helpful life.

, ,

Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy