POLICY
ELECTRONIC WASTE POLICY IN THE U.S. AND BEYOND IS INADEQUATE IN 2021. READ BELOW TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE TOP ISSUES WITH E-WASTE POLICY
U.S. POLICY
The U.S. currently has no formal federal legislation regulating e-waste. This is partially due to the fact that the US has traditionally exported up to 40% of its e-waste to other countries. However, the waste landscape is changing quickly: China, a major waste importer, banned foreign waste shipments as of January 2018. As the US must begin processing more waste domestically, it is increasingly important that proper regulations are set in place. Many solutions propose federally regulated e-waste recycling procedures – 25 out of 50 states have independent e-waste recycling policies, but a federal policy has yet to come to fruition. Check out the U.S.
Check out the graphic below to learn more about states with e-waste policy.
BASEL CONVENTION
The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal is an international treaty adopted in 1989. Its main mission was to protect human health against the adverse effects of toxic electronic waste. The primary tenant of the treaty was to restrict movement of waste between countries in order to prevent unsafe waste management. This tenant targeted developed countries exporting e-waste to less developed countries with informal waste economies that put workers at risk. Despite having 53 signatories including major global powers like the U.S. and China, The Basel Convention unfortunately did not result in quantifiable reduction in trandboundary movement of e-waste.
PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE
The US’s growing e-waste problem is partially attributable to one manipulative tactic employed by big technology companies. In order to increase sales, companies like Apple, Samsung, and Microsoft engage “planned obsolescence” to encourage per capita turnover of cell phones, tablets, computers, increasing electronic consumption and waste in the process. Planned obsolescence can take form in many different ways, but it generally refers to a product that’s lifecycle has been intentionally shortened by the manufacturer. For example, a company might manufacture a phone’s battery so that it breaks down earlier, a new software update might rely extensively on a new kind of hardware, or the manufacturer might make repairing the product so difficult or expensive that it makes more sense to buy a new product altogether. In any case, the resulting spike in e-waste is a mounting threat to US safety, and the US should implement legislation that targets this practice.