 | |
| |
TechnologyDaily Mobile
Elusive Quest For E-Recycling Consensus
by Randy Barrett
The idea of recycling electronic gear has finally piqued congressional interest, but manufacturers cannot agree on whether consumers or producers will pay for it.
The impasse means federal legislation on the matter likely will not be enacted anytime soon, industry executives and Capitol Hill staffers said, despite the fact that some 30 states are either considering or have passed their own recycling laws.
"Industry is all over the map on this," a frustrated Hill staffer said. "They need to grow up and come up with a solution."
Who Will Foot The Bill?
Americans discard 133,000 personal computers daily, according to the Gartner Group. Cathode-ray computer screens contain five to eight pounds of leaded glass each, and printed circuit boards include toxic such metals as nickel cadmium and mercury.
Computer and electronics manufacturers fall into two camps on the issue of recycling such products. The vast majority advocate requiring consumers to pay a fee at purchase that covers eventual disposal. This group, including Sony and Panasonic, strongly support a new California law mandating an advance recovery fee ranging from $6 to $10 per laptop or monitor.
The fee goes into a state fund that already has reached $15 million since the law took effect Jan. 1. California has created a network of 100 recycling vendors and will pay them out of the account.
"The California model is the one we think is right," said Marc-Anthony Signorino, director of technology policy at the tech group AeA. "We want to try to keep it as simple as possible."
AeA wants to see a "shared" federal recycling model that includes manufacturers, consumers and the government, but there is no consensus on the critical issue of who pays and how much. "We have members on both sides of the fence when it comes to who is responsible," Signorino said.
On the other side are Hewlett-Packard and Dell, companies that have built large, in-house recycling programs and offer free or low-cost take-back programs to their customers. After considerable pressure from environmental groups, Apple Computer also is now accepting old iPod music boxes for free and offering a 10 percent discount on new models to customers who recycle.
Advocates of such producer-responsibility schemes say a national fee model would not work because it is too inefficient and limits what companies can do to create their own recycling programs. "We think we know how to do it well," said David Isaac, HP's director of public policy. "A large group of companies sitting on the fence don't have a clue. Recycling is a cost of doing business, and we can manage that cost efficiently."
Last year, HP recycled more than 120 million pounds of hardware and printer cartridges in the United States, and the company has established a goal of recycling 1 billion cumulative pounds of hardware and printer supplies by 2007.
The Makings Of An E-Recycling Quilt
Retailers dislike the California blueprint because they fear losing sales to stores in neighboring states that do not require upfront fees. Some manufacturing industry officials said a national fee law would solve the problem by codifying one recycling requirement for all retailers.
The one point all electronics producers agree on is that a pre-emptive federal law is needed to avoid a patchwork of state rules. That quilt already is being made.
Starting Jan. 1, 2006, all Maine residents will have to recycle their old televisions and computer monitors in a system primarily paid for by municipalities and manufacturers. The statute advocates "a system of shared responsibility for the collection and recycling of covered electronic devices among manufacturers, consolidation facilities, municipalities and other parties" as being the most efficient and equitable.
Maryland's new recycling law also will take effect in January, and it requires manufacturers to pay $5,000 annually to the state to cover the program's cost. Many doubt the system will raise enough money to fund statewide electronics disposal.
Last month, a new congressional e-waste working group announced it would consider the recycling issue and try to broker an agreement between manufacturers, states and environmentalists. Its members include: Reps. Mary Bono and Randy (Duke) Cunningham, both California Republicans; Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y.; and Mike Thompson, D-Calif.
"E-waste is a national problem that needs a national solution," Slaughter said at the group's May 24 kickoff. "Since the year 2000, we've increased the number of electronics entering the waste stream by at least 10 million units. As we continue to dispose of more and more units each year, finding a national disposal approach becomes more and more critical."
Calculating The Fairest Share
Several e-recycling bills have been introduced in Congress. In March, Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore, and James Talent, R-Mo., introduced a measure, S. 510, that would create tax credits for producers and consumers. Manufacturers would receive an $8 credit per recycled unit, and consumers would get a $15 credit for taking their old computers to qualified recyclers.
Cunningham introduced a similar House bill, but it would cover more products, including cellular telephones, printers and computer keyboards, and the credits would be lower -- only $4 per item.
Industry officials generally like the tax-credit approach, but there remain concerns that such rebates will not cover the entire recycling bill.
Thompson has introduced a bill, H.R. 425, that is essentially a federal version of the California law. It would require a $10 recycling fee at purchase. The money would be collected and administered by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The first congressional hearings on e-recycling are expected later this month. Proponents are hopeful the extra attention will spur producers to settle their differences.
Most onlookers agree it will take more pressure in the form of expensive and onerous state initiatives to get industry unified on a national recycling solution. "When you sit down at the table, they expect you to eat," AeA's Signorino said. "But nobody wants to get stuck paying more than their fair share."
NEW FEATURE
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
