Toxic e-Waste - What IS it?
Our modern world contains a large amount of trash. E-waste is part of this rather broad subject. As humans enjoy to occasionally buy new equipment, there is also an increasing stream of electrical and electronic waste. This reveals our human activity and its impact on our environment on Earth during the geological Age of Man, the Anthropocene. E-waste will probably remain on earth for thousands to millions of years on landfills and in the ocean, as it does not decompose. Therefore it will be the fossil of modern human life, representing the past, present and future. In this study, I will argue how e-waste is related to the Anthropocene.
Our world is significantly different than how the world was before the Industrial Revolution. Human activity are influencing the geological, hydro-logical and ecological processes on Earth so profound that we can speak of a new epoch, the Anthropocene (Steffen et al., 2011a). The term became popular by Crutzen in 2000 and refers to the geological period when rocks are formed and wherein the human influence is visible (Crutzen, 2002).The Anthropocene is the result of industrialization and economic development. In the Holocene, humans influenced the environment through the development of agriculture and domestication of animals. However, this was not on the same fundamental scale, speed and impact of contemporary human activity (Steffen et al., 2011b). Crutzen and Schwägerl argue that “the long-held barriers between nature and culture are breaking down. It is no longer us against nature. Instead it is we who decide what nature is and what it will be […]. In this new era, nature is us” (Crutzen and Schwägerl, 2011). Humans are the dominant force. An important principle which underlies the concept of the Anthropocene is that humanity has passed a tipping point, with potentially irreversible disruption of biophysical processes (Steffen et al., 2007).
According to Zalasiewicz et al. (2016), the weight of the technosphere indicates how we have reformed our planet, which is 30 billions tons. This comes down to about 50 kilograms per square meter. The technosphere “comprises our complex social structures together with the physical infrastructure and technological artefacts supporting energy, information and material flows that enable the system to work, including entities as diverse as power stations, transmission lines, roads and buildings, farms, plastics, tools, airplanes, ballpoint pens and transistors” (Zalasiewicz et al., 2016), and waste (Haff, 2014). The weight continues to increase rapidly, as materials are difficult to reuse, such as overcrowded landfills. This phenomenon could slow or even stop further development. When these objects end up in the ground, they will become techno fossils. In the future these will determine the age of geological strata and the effect of the Anthropocene (Zalasiewicz et al., 2016).
Technology is a complex phenomenon in society and the role of technology in environmental issues is ambiguous. Technology is often presented as the cause of many environmental problems: air pollution caused by exhaust fumes and industrial emissions, biodiversity discussion by pesticides and fertilizers, and climate changes through fossil fuels. Simultaneously technology is often proposed as a solution: we can contribute to a solution to the climate problem by driving electric cars and installing solar panels. But what about the trash of this technology?
E-waste is a collective term for all scrapped defective or obsolete electronic and electrical equipment, see artifact 1. It is the fastest growing waste stream in the world, due to the rapid technological innovations and the shorter life span of these electronic products (Mundada et al., 2004), such as laptops, mobile phones, lighting and refrigerators. Besides, “components of electrical and electronic equipment such as batteries, circuit boards, plastic casings, cathode-ray tubes, activated glass, and lead capacitors are also classified as e-waste” (Grant et al., 2013), see artifact 3. Sweden produces annually per capita 22.2 kilograms of electronic waste. Norway produces the most in the world with 28.3 kilos. In absolute quantities, the United States and China are the largest producers of e-waste, which together account for 32 percent of the world total. The total global amount of e-waste was 41.8 billion kilograms in 2014. Of this amount, only 6.5 billion kilograms get documented and recycled (Baldé et al., 2015).
A part comes into e-waste hubs such as China, Ghana, Nigeria, India, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam (Grant et al., 2013). Despite it is illegal, an unknown quantity of e-waste is exported to these developing countries. Recycling there, is irresponsible through techniques such as burning and dissolution in strong acids (Robinson, 2009), see artifact 2. This irresponsible recycling of e-waste causes serious environmental and health consequences. It exposes people to toxic heavy metals such as lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium. These substances accumulate in the air, soil, dust and water (Xu et al., 2015) and into our food chain. Exposure to e-waste toxicants can have many adverse health effects, especially with pregnant women and developing children, resulting in neurodevelopment (Chen et al, 2011; Grant et al, 2013.). Besides, there is an increased risk of a reduced lung function and sperm quality, mental deterioration and DNA damage (Grant et al., 2013; Xu et al., 2015).
Furthermore, the recycling methods are inefficient, as valuable metals perish. When recycling of e-waste is not done efficiently, new materials need to be extracted. Responsible recycling of e-waste causes no harm to the environment and fewer raw materials need to be extracted from nature due to reuse (Okwu and Onye, 2016). Therefore, e-waste is also directly correlated to social and environmental problems at the beginning of the electronic supply chain.
The Anthropocene offers a particular perspective on the relationship between humans and its environment on a global scale, where humans are the dominant force. E-waste is a good example of that, see artifact 1, 2 and 3. It is the fastest growing waste stream in the world, due to the rapid technological innovations and the shorter life span of these electronic products. E-waste increases the technosphere, due to difficulties of reusing materials. Most e-waste ends up on landfills or is recycled in a irresponsible and inefficient way, where toxicants affect people and environment. This is affecting us on a global scale, as we will find this back in our resources, such as water. Overall, it is a cycle, where the end of the electronic supply chain, e-waste, is also impacting social and environmental issues at the beginning of the electronic supply chain.
Furthermore, our human influence will be visible, determining the Anthropocene, as future generations will find techno fossils in the ground of Earth. Therefore, our consumerism needs to change. It is important to take control and greater management about our e-waste to prevent more health and environmental harm, and to consider our permanent footprint on Earth.
References:
Baldé, C.P., Wang, F., Kuehr, R., Huisman, J. (2015). The global e-waste monitor – 2014. United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, Bonn, Germany. Retrieved on 28 December 2016, from: http://i.unu.edu/media/ias.unu.edu-en/news/7916/Global-E-waste-Monitor-2014-small.pdf
Chen, A., Dietrich, K. N., Huo, X., & Ho, S. (2011). Developmental Neurotoxicants in E-Waste: An Emerging Health Concern. Environmental Health Perspectives, 119(4), 431–438. http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1002452
Crutzen, P. J. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415(6867), 23-23. doi:10.1038/415023a
Crutzen, P., & Schwägerl, C. (2011). Living in the Anthropocene: Toward a New Global Ethos. Yale Environment 360. Retrieved on 23 December 2016, from: http://e360.yale.edu/feature/living_in_the_anthropocene_toward_a_new_global_ethos/2363/
Grant, K., Goldizen, F. C., Sly, P. D., Brune, M., Neira, M., van den Berg, M., & Norman, R. E. (2013). Health consequences of exposure to e-waste: A systematic review. The Lancet. Global Health, 1(6), e350-e361. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70101-3
Haff, P. K. (2014). Technology as a geological phenomenon: Implications for human well-being. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 395(1), 301-309. doi:10.1144/SP395.4
Mundada, M. N., Kumar, S., & Shekdar, A. V. (2004). E-waste: A new challenge for waste management in india. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 61(3), 265-279. doi:10.1080/0020723042000176060
Okwu, P. I., & Onyeje, I. N. (2016). Extraction of valuable substances from E-waste. American Journal of Engineering Research, 3(1), 299-304.
Robinson, B. H. (2009). E-waste: An assessment of global production and environmental impacts. Science of the Total Environment, 408(2), 183-191. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.09.044
Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J., & McNeill, J. R. (2007). The anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature. Ambio, 36(8), 614-621. doi:10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[614:TAAHNO]2.0.CO;2
Steffen, W., Grinevald, J., Crutzen, P., McNeill, J., Stockholms universitet, & Stockholm Resilience Centre. (2011a). The anthropocene: Conceptual and historical perspectives. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 369(1938), 842-867. doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0327
Steffen, W., Persson, Å., Deutsch, L., Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Richardson, K., . . . Stockholm Resilience Centre. (2011b). The anthropocene: From global change to planetary stewardship. Ambio, 40(7), 739-761. doi:10.1007/s13280-011-0185-x
Xu, X., Zeng, X., Boezen, H. M., & Huo, X. (2015). E-waste environmental contamination and harm to public health in China. Frontiers in Medicine, 9(2), 220-228. DOI: 10.1007/s11684-015-0391-1
Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Waters, C. N., Barnosky, A. D., Palmesino, J., Ro nnskog, A. -., . . . Wolfe, A. P. (2016). Scale and diversity of the physical technosphere: A geological perspective. The Anthropocene Review, doi:10.1177/2053019616677743