How are we doing so far?

Since everyone has posted several blogs, I think we have already quoted some interesting subjects and ideas. Nevertheless, we will have to search a lot deeper, with graphs and facts to fund our conclusions. I also think that we should give the audience a sort of image of ourselves and compare it with the other countries and continents like Gilles already did. I'm sure that there are a lot of interesting numbers and other materials to sketch our ecologic ranking. In addition to this, we could try to explain why the best countries or companies are performing that well and why the worst are lagging behind. Furthermore we could give some advice and discuss the most important certificates a company or country can acquire. I'm curious about your thoughts, am I maybe forgetting some relevant topics?

Emiel Lippens

The ones that didn't get away

As I mentioned in my previous blog, some European companies still try to avoid the costs of treating their own e-waste, by shipping it off to developing countries. Following their biggest investigation ever, the UK's Environment Agency have now charged four companies and 11 people with illegal export (violations against the Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 2007 and the European Waste Shipment Regulations 2006).

 Let's hope that the verdict will send a clear message to the other "e-waste pirates" out there. This has now confirmed the seriousness of the allegations made earlier by Greenpeace. However, it's also a signal that the autorithies are on top of the problem. Now they only need to stay there.

Gilles Gerlo
(businessgreen)

Don't do anything by half

 A few times now, we've made the comparison between Europe and the U.S.A. The general idea is that Europe - especially the E.U. - is doing a lot more to prevent e-waste and are way ahead on the regulation.
Greenpeace however, are saying that the situation in Europe is less than ideal, with lots of hidden flows of e-waste. During their  Green Electronics Campaign, they've proven that some companies are shipping their used electronics to developing countries, under the guise of selling them as second-hand products. The waste is then actually sold to scrapyards.
So while the States still have a lot of ground to make up, they might start to think of a regulation that doesn't allow these kinds of loopholes.

Gilles Gerlo
(greenpeace.org)

What about Europe and Belgium?

With a view to our presentation and paper later this year, I thought it might be interesting to sketch shortly how Europe and in particular Belgium are handling with the growing problem of e-waste. Europe has waived the goal of collecting 4kgs of e-waste per person each year. The latest objective is to recycle at least 65% of all the electronic devices produced the last 3years. This is good news for the less developed countries, since they produce a lot less. In comparison to the rest of Europe, Belgium is not doing very well, we are now collecting an average of 8,2kgs each year, before 2014 that must increase with another 4kgs. (Envirodesk)

Emiel Lippens

Who Should pay?

Pike Research inquired the  people’s point of view on e-waste. They determined that three quarter of consumers found that recycling is the solution of our electronic disposal issue. The main question about recycling is: Who has to pay for it? Thirty-seven percent said it should be a free service but most producers did not accept recycling as their responsibility. I think that we have to split up the costs between the consumers, producers and the government. The government can give an allowance to the producers who make their process better. The authorities could also make a ranking and reward the best. The survey showed us that an average customer has 2.8 electronic product which he doesn’t use anymore. A remarkable and soothing statement is the stagnation of e-waste in 2015.

(news.cnet.com)

Tim Mannens

How can we stop the 'e-waste train'?

Laws differ from country to country. In the U.S.A. they differ from state to state (which confuses the consumers). As you can see in the graph above e-waste is becoming a bigger problem. It is a challenge to take measures that answer to the threats of e-waste these days and in the future.

E-waste recycling laws generally employ one of two types of programs:

• Producer take-back programs: Manufacturers are responsible for taking back discarded electronics. What doesn't mean to ship them. Programs like these are very popular in the European Union.
• Advance recovery fee: Consumers have to pay an amount of money when they buy the product, that money is used to recycle the product.

The situation in the U.S.A. ,however , stays poor. The regulations in the U.S.A. are insufficient.
Maybe an new international treaty could be a big move foreword. But such thing is difficult because it requires consensus between all the powerfull countries of the world.

(howstuffworks)
Stef De Visscher

E-waste prevention

In my opinion, e-waste prevention is more efficient than the regulation of e-waste recycling. First of all, you only have to buy the electronic appliances which you can use . Secondly, it is useful to have a long-winded description or idea of the product you want to buy but that is difficult to regulate. In addition, the only products that people must recycle are only the products that cannot longer be used. If a company sell and recycle the electronic appliance themselves, they will not have to use new resources for the new appliances and they will become cheaper. The government should stimulate the people to sell products with a sustainable design which means the use of renewable energy and materials or materials which are safer. But we must be careful that a country does not over regulate their industry so they will move away. The government has to find an equilibrium with the industrial sector.

earthconservation

wgbis

Tim Mannens